patrick.net

PeopleUnited says

This is Biden’s war.

I'm gonna disagree. I hate Biden as POTUS outside of a few things, but those likely would have happened anyway after covid and shortages. CHIPS Act for example.

Fact is this is Putin's war. NATO is of no threat to Russia. He put his own population at risk for a small swath of land that he thought would take a week. He's now getting more NATO countries at his border. Turkey is the hurdle but at some point Ukraine will be in the NATO alliance. Putin has cemented that regardless of how much territory they control after this.

Both countries are liars. I think the death toll on either side is massive after a year plus. I'd bet both side have lost 500k plus in combat deaths and results of supply chain and goods to keep people alive on the civilian side. Ukraine is losing female population forever. They're not coming back. Especially young Ukrainians. Russian women are sitting at home with a 70/30 ratio of women to men, most likely old as shit.

War isn't just shooting bullets and bombs. In modern society, even in Russia, I don't see women going to work in factories to support the war. There are different times and I don't think Putin thought out modern society and could just be a dictator. Biden's handlers know this and aren't going to see legit US troop over there. Meanwhile in Russia they're going to lose a young demographic. Many to the US probably.

Putin is destroying his country over what would only need to be a 12-20km corridor to Crimea so they don't have to rely on one way in and out with the bridge. This was totally solvable in the beginning. Something as simple as Ukraine charging a toll for each Russian vehicle would have been exponentially cheaper. Just standard ammo for rifles has probably hit $100m USD and that's probably low.

I don't know. As dumb as Biden is I'd give him a C+ or B-. And I don't like him. Russia would have never attacked if Ukraine could nuke them. This was a mistake of the 90's. Fact is Putin is a dictator. They're resource rich and NO ONE is threatening to attack them. This is Putin war. I think he's old, maybe dying and wants a legacy.

WookieMan says

"Fact is this is Putin's war."

No, you are ignoring the facts. This is Obama's war because...

• It was Obama who overthrew the democratically elected government of the Ukraine in 2014 and installed the current Nazi regime.

• And it was these Nazis who started killing Ukraine's Russian speakers for speaking Russian! <==== Read this again.

• Look: If you start shooting people you cannot blame them for shooting back. It is called self defence.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-already-with-up-354000-casualties-likely-drag-us-documents-2023-04-12/

Estimated total deaths including total deaths on both sides, which are likely overestimates of Russian deaths. Are still well under 100,000 one year into the “war”.

Putin built up military on the border of Ukraine for months. Telegraphing the exercise, daring anyone to intervene. When there was no intervention he likely assumed (wrongly) that military occupation could lead to a negotiated settlement. But when Ukraine signaled willingness to negotiate, Biden said no. That is why it is Biden’s war, he didn’t stop the military occupation, and then worse than that he refused to allow peace negotiations. Putin doesn’t deserve more land, but Biden is killing Ukrainians every day by preventing peace talks. Putin may want more land, and was willing to sacrifice to get it. But what does Ukraine have to gain by refusing to negotiate?

$ that’s what Ukraine’s corrupt government gets. War is good for their pockets. They are willing to continue the war because Biden keeps paying them to continue it. That makes this Biden’s war. Russia is not even at war, they are conducting a poorly executed special military operation. If Russia was at war with Ukraine, Kiev would look like Dresden after the Allied bombing, and Zelensky, puppet Ukraine government would have been dead or forced underground on day one.

The_Deplorable says

WookieMan says

"Fact is this is Putin's war."

No, you are ignoring the facts. This is Obama's war because...

• It was Obama who overthrew the democratically elected government of the Ukraine in 2014 and installed the current Nazi regime.

• And it was these Nazis who started killing Ukraine's Russian speakers for speaking Russian! <==== Read this again.

• Look: If you start shooting people you cannot blame them for shooting back. It is called self defence.

Agreed. Also blowing up NS2 pipeline was an act of terror/war by xiden, completely unprovoked. It's his war as well, 100%

If this were a real war, Russia would have ended it within the first two weeks. Kiev would have disappeared from the map and all of Ukraines infrastructure would have been destroyed.

Putin conducted a limited military operation in response to NATO's (i.e., the USA) ongoing expansion in the region in an attempt to strategically encircle Russia. The 'war' was inevitable after the USA/CIA coup of the Ukraine Government in 2014, whose leaders just so happened to be pro-Russian.

Keep this in mind; Zelensky attempted to enter into peace negotiations with Russia early on in the conflict. Biden and the warmongering NeoCons stepped in and ordered Zelensky to end all attempts to end the conflict.

IMO, Russia stands in the way of the psychopaths that are attempting to enslave the world under a despotic, totalitarian, communist government, often referred to as the Great Reset.

RayAmerica says

Russia stands in the way of the psychopaths that are attempting to enslave the world under a despotic, totalitarian, communist government, often referred to as the Great Reset.

The reset can't happen without destroying Russia?

GNL says

The reset can't happen without destroying Russia?

The Great Reset is all about creating a one world government and economic system. It is, by their own definition, global. If Russia, a fiercely independent nation, which has the largest and most advanced nuclear weapons arsenal, refuses to take part in this global government, I'd say they do stand in the way of the Great Reset.

RayAmerica says

GNL says

The reset can't happen without destroying Russia?

The Great Reset is all about creating a one world government and economic system. It is, by their own definition, global. If Russia, a fiercely independent nation, which has the largest and most advanced nuclear weapons arsenal, refuses to take part in this global government, I'd say they do stand in the way of the Great Reset.

That’s a good point. I’m just not sure that Russia is or would refuse. I think there is a better than 50% chance that Putin is friendly with the great reset globalists. There is infighting between different factions of the globalists. Just because they all agree to move toward a new world order doesn’t mean they aren’t jockeying for certain things, territories etc.. I’m not convinced that the UkRaine BS isn’t just a deliberate distraction, a psyop with real casualties to advance the new world order and Putin is simply playing his part as the “villain”, whereas to the Russians Biden is the villain.

That’s why I say both idiots are villains. And we are stuck with those two idiots sitting on the two largest nuclear arsenals. God help us.

The escalation continues. As Ukraine continues to suffer serious defeats, the infusion of NATO/US troops on the ground increases. Also, Biden at one time stated that he would not send Ukraine F-16s, now he's back tracked on that. Also, Biden spokesman recently declared that Crimea belongs to Ukraine, not Russia. Russia will NEVER give up Crimea, so the chances for serious negotiations are very slim. Where will it all end?

Terrible damage - The Russians are now extremely angry with US | Col. Douglas Macgregor (video interview)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brXkfD7e8DU

US Neocons Are Warmongering Around The World To Dominate The Globe | Jeffrey Sachs Speech in Vienna

In this video, watch Professor Jeffrey Sachs speak with Dr. Heinz Gärtner at the International Conference for Peace in Vienna (June 2023). Dr. Sachs' lays out clearly and succinctly how belligerent the foreign policy of the United States is and how a small group of elites keeps dragging the country's diplomacy to the brink of nuclear war—time and again.



Watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVMnfNCSGtQ

Biden Says Threat of Putin Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’

The president previously recognized the danger of nuclear war but has done nothing to ease tensions

President Biden warned Monday that the threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is “real.”

The president made the comments to donors during a trip to California. “When I was out here about two years ago saying I worried about the Colorado River drying up, everybody looked at me like I was crazy,” he said, according to Reuters.

“They looked at me like when I said I worry about Putin using tactical nuclear weapons. It’s real,” Biden added.

Biden has previously recognized that the policy of the US and NATO backing Ukraine against Russia risks nuclear war. In October 2022, he said the chances of “nuclear armageddon” were higher than at any point since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

But since warning of nuclear armageddon, Biden has done nothing to ease tensions with Russia and has escalated US involvement in the war, including by giving the green light for European countries to send US-made F-16s to Kyiv.

https://news.antiwar.com/2023/06/20/biden-says-threat-of-putin-using-tactical-nukes-is-real/

June 29, 2023 The American Thinker

Is Nuclear War Inevitable?
By Alexander G. Markovsky

During Napoleon's War of 1812, the Russian officers’ sabers were adorned an inscription, “Do not draw out without need. Do not put it back without glory!”

Whether Putin has drawn out his saber without the need may be debatable, but the geopolitical reality is that he will not put it back without glory, whatever the cost. Putin, who revived Russia, and rebuilt its economy from the ruins of the collapsed Soviet Union, cannot permit his odyssey to end in the country's dissolution.

On the other side of this Ukrainian confrontation is President Biden, who cannot afford the humiliation of another defeat after the disastrous retreat from Afghanistan. He also needs a victory at any cost.

If history is any guide, weak Russia, with its huge territory and abundant natural resources, will become prey for invaders. In the West, Europeans, driven by compulsion, are eager to retaliate for defeats and loss of territories, some centuries-old, others more recent. Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Finland have never accepted borders of the post-Second World War period.

Nor is the West the only threat facing Russia. In the East, Japan dreams of the return of the Sakhalin and Kuril islands. And Russia’s “sworn friend,” China, envisages living space for 1.5 billion Chinese and the acquisition of vast natural resources in the Russian Far East.

The imperative of winning puts no limitation on the modus operandi of the war. After 16 months of hostilities, though the war escalates in scope and intensity, NATO and its European allies maintain martial enthusiasm. Driven by the urge for expansion, NATO sees little risk in continuing fighting. Indeed, this time NATO engineered a perfect arrangement. It contracted the Ukrainian army as a mercenary. NATO directs and finances the war, provides strategic and tactical planning, intelligence, and supplies weapons and materiel while the Ukrainians do the fighting. Hence unlike the previous NATO misadventures, thousands of American and other NATO warriors are not coming home in zinc coffins.

America skillfully exploited Ukrainian leaders’ frantic ambition to make Ukraine a member of NATO, ostensibly to protect Ukraine from Russia. The supplicant exhibited a complete lack of judgment, failing to realize that membership in NATO and protection from Russia were mutually exclusive objectives. Consequently Ukraine finds itself in a peculiar situation; membership in NATO is not forthcoming, the country is getting destroyed, and as long as the Ukrainians are dying, the American and European publics are not overly concerned about the war.

At ease with the arrangement, at the recent gathering at G7, the leaders of the so-called advanced democracies committed to supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. Indeed, prolonging the conflict appears to be a new NATO strategy.

In his famed book, The Art of War, Sun Tzu concluded that “no country benefited from a prolonged war.” This wisdom may not apply to the current conflict. In previous world wars, the winner out-produced the loser. During the Second World War, Americans were losing, on average, six Sherman tanks for every German Tiger tank lost. But at the same time, American industry was manufacturing six Sherman tanks faster than Germans could produce one Tiger. Americans were producing more bombers than Germans were shooting down, which was true for almost every other type of military equipment.

Given that the combined GDP of NATO’s countries exceeds the Russians’ by twenty-fold, Russia cannot win a war of attrition against Europe and the United States in the long run. The folly of this strategy, nevertheless, is that if the economic assumptions prove correct, it will render nuclear confrontation almost inevitable. The recent rhetoric seems to suggest that NATO military planners accept this possibility, believing that Europe is safe under the American nuclear umbrella. Any attack on Europe would invite American nuclear retaliation. Therefore, even if Russians resolve to use a nuclear weapon, they will deploy it on Ukraine.

There is a lot of wishful thinking in this scenario. First, geography prevents Russians from using nuclear weapons in Ukraine because it is too close to Russia and Belarus to evade radioactive peril.

Second, Western leaders may rely too much on the credibility of the so-called massive retaliation doctrine designed to prevent the invasion of Europe by conventional Soviet forces during the Cold War era. The current scenario is entirely different. The danger is not from the Russian conventional forces but the Russian first-strike nuclear capabilities. The modern weapon is so colossally destructive that given the high density of the European population, one nuclear strike could easily wipe out a hundred million people and turn the continent into a desert. The issue is whether America put itself at risk of monumental destruction on behalf of already devastated Europe. At the heart of the problem is the inherent uncertainty of the nuclear guarantee.

The issue was first raised in January 1967 during a meeting between Henry Kissinger and Konrad Adenauer. Adenauer, then the first Chancellor of the Republic of Germany and a highly regarded politician, asked Kissinger, “Do you think that I still believe you will protect us unconditionally?”

Those who are old enough but do not suffer historical amnesia must remember that in the past, America, despite the rhetoric, abandoned Hungary when the Red Army ravaged Budapest in 1956, abandoned Germany when the Soviets built the Berlin Wall in 1961, and abandoned Czechoslovakia when the Red Army invaded the country in 1968. In all those instances, America stood by helplessly, watching the carnage, all full of bluster and no action.

Although it may sound cynical, America acted in its national interests when it decided that those countries were not worth the risk of nuclear destruction. So, what has changed now? The countries are the same, but the risk is even greater. What makes the Europeans think that the outcome would be different?

This leads us to another relevant issue raised by Adenauer “Are any leaders still able to conduct a genuine long-range policy? Is true leadership still possible today?”

Although the question was raised about 60 years ago, it has acute relevance today. The current crop of Western leaders is not made of the same stuff as Konrad Adenauer, Charles de Gaulle, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, or Donald Trump. They are not visionary; they are not even managerial types. Some of them are simply illiterate when it comes to history and geography. They cannot extrapolate from lessons of the past. Their obsession swept aside the previous safeguards, allowing for a constantly elevating level of conflict without regard for respective national interests and survival. They pushed Europe into the war that was neither necessary nor wise.

No one knows the limits of Russian endurance, but when Moscow starts losing the war, it will be forced to employ nuclear weapons. On the other hand, if Ukraine starts losing the war, some hardheads in Washington are already considering providing Ukraine with nukes as a deterrent. Either way, incompetent leaders are pushing the world toward unparalleled catastrophe.

Alexander G. Markovsky is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a conservative think tank that examines national security, energy, risk analysis, and other public policy issues. He is the author of Anatomy of a Bolshevik and Liberal Bolshevism: America Did Not Defeat Communism, She Adopted It. Mr. Markovsky is the owner and CEO of Litwin Management Services, LLC. He can be reached at alex.g.markovsky@gmail.com

RayAmerica says

America acted in its national interests when it decided that those countries were not worth the risk of nuclear destruction.

France and Britain have nukes as well.

This just keeps escalating with no end in sight and Ukraine has virtually no chance whatsoever to win.

Report: Joe Biden to Supply Ukraine with Controversial Cluster Bombs

President Joe Biden is expected to supply Ukraine with cluster bombs, which much of the world has vowed not to use due to their long-term effects on civilians.

A senior Biden administration official told the New York Times that the United States will provide Ukraine with cluster munitions after Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky pushed for America to provide the country with the controversial and widely-banned weapon.

Cluster munitions are a category of rockets, bombs, missiles, and artillery projectiles that break apart in the air and blanket a large area. The munitions often fail and can devastate civilians.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/07/06/report-joe-biden-to-supply-ukraine-with-controversial-cluster-bombs/

RayAmerica says

Report: Joe Biden to Supply Ukraine with Controversial Cluster Bombs

well they need to sell them to someone

RayAmerica says

Is Nuclear War Inevitable?

Of course not...there will be no nuclear war

komputodo says

RayAmerica says

Is Nuclear War Inevitable?

Of course not...there will be no nuclear war

The population has been threatened by this for decades. Nuclear war makes EVERYBODY have a worse life, there are no winners.

Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations. They will degrade you life though.

richwicks says

Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations.

Lets hope and pray this is all cold war era-style theater and grandstanding or posturing

.

ad says

richwicks says

Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations.

Lets hope and pray this is all cold war era-style theater and grandstanding or posturing

It's just continued insanity, stupidity, inanity, I believed we dispensed with in the 1990s.

I'm tired of the game of terror. I do not believe them.

If someone pops a few nukes, it will destroy the illusion that nukes will "end the world".

There has been a massive world-wide propaganda effort to get the world's populous to view a nuclear war as un-winnable because everyone would die. (My Favorite was the fictional tale of 'On the Beach').

Nope, the world does not end with a Global Thermonuclear War. Cities are just far too big and infrastructure far too massive for this to occur. It would take several hundreds of our most powerful nuclear warheads all working correctly to level a single city.

Misc says

If someone pops a few nukes, it will destroy the illusion that nukes will "end the world".

There has been a massive world-wide propaganda effort to get the world's populous to view a nuclear war as un-winnable because everyone would die. (My Favorite was the fictional tale of 'On the Beach').

Nope, the world does not end with a Global Thermonuclear War. Cities are just far too big and infrastructure far too massive for this to occur. It would take several hundreds of our most powerful nuclear warheads all working correctly to level a single city.

Yep, and tac nukes are even more of a nothingburger. Besides, to pop a nuke one needs to deliver it and recently even wonderful Soviet "hypersonic missiles" can't deliver shit being shot down by overhyped and fragile Western-supplied EAD.

Nukes are truly all or nothing weapons and only work when employed 100% (and then you die, because the response will be 100% too), so threatening nuke use to get something small is as useful as robbing people at gas station with a hand grenade.

realistically, if russia nukes… there won’t be response. i hope they don’t, it would kill a lot of people.

everyone can justify use of nukes, we did.

World War III is put on hold. Had Ukraine been allowed to join NATO, WW III would have begun in earnest, instead of the little, extremely unsuccessful proxy war that is being waged on Russia, while using Ukraine as fodder.

Recall the old saying; 'A picture is worth a thousand words.' The only thing missing in this photo is Zelensky wearing clown shoes.

Fine example of incrementalism:

Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War



https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/07/13/biden-authorizes-military-to-call-reservists-to-active-duty-to-support-ukraine-war/

Pentagon officials said no troops would be deployed for combat to Ukraine.

Right. They are called 'advisors' instead.

Trollhole says

Right. They are called 'advisors' instead.

Where have I heard that one before? Viet Nam maybe?

Maybe.

Millennials don't know shit about history, tho.

RayAmerica says

Fine example of incrementalism:

Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War

Congress needs to declare war. Or get the fuck out!

The escalation continues:

Russia warns U.S., NATO: We consider F-16 deal for Ukraine a nuclear threat
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/13/russia-says-f-16-deal-ukraine-amounts-nuclear-thre/

"Any deployment of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will be seen as a direct nuclear threat to Moscow because of their ability to carry atomic weapons," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday.

“We have informed the nuclear powers, the United States, Britain and France, that Russia cannot ignore the ability of these aircraft to carry nuclear weapons. No amount of assurances will help here,” Mr. Lavrov said.

“We will regard the very fact that the Ukrainian armed forces have such systems as a threat from the West in the nuclear sphere,” he said.

RayAmerica says

"Any deployment of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will be seen as a direct nuclear threat to Moscow because of their ability to carry atomic weapons," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday.

But the old MiGs the Ukranians had could carry nuclear weapons, too.

RayAmerica says

"Fine example of incrementalism: Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War"

Yesterday Biden told us that the USA run out of ammo and today he is calling "Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War?" So what are they going to use against the Russians? Rocks?

Then, around noon yesterday, Biden said there was “no possibility” that Russian President Vladimir Putin could win the war in Ukraine. Indeed, reassured Biden, Putin had “already lost.”

But then, a few hours after that, Biden issued an executive order mobilizing 3,000 additional U.S. reserve troops to Europe. "This [executive order] reaffirms the unwavering support and commitment to defend NATO's eastern flank in the wake of Russia's illegal and unprovoked war on Ukraine," said Army Lt. Gen. Douglas A. Sims II, Joint Staff Director of Operations.

But… why? Because, Sims said, "This new designation benefits troops and families with increases in authorities, entitlements, and access to the reserve component forces and personnel."

So, the US military is deploying more troops to Europe to… benefit troops and families? Not exactly. In fact, Biden’s order mobilized soldiers who had already completed their contract to serve and were on their way to becoming civilians.

As such, the deployment highlights that the situation is far more desperate than Biden was letting on. And indeed, later in the press release, the Pentagon confesses that “fighting is severe.”

https://public.substack.com/p/why-do-we-fight

Trollhole says

Then, around noon yesterday, Biden said there was “no possibility” that Russian President Vladimir Putin could win the war in Ukraine. Indeed, reassured Biden, Putin had “already lost.”

It's unbelievable. These stupid assholes seem to believe their own fucking propaganda.

Nahhh...that was just a straight out lie for the Useful Idiots from Biden Admin Left Foot that didn't know Pentagon Right Hand was going to simultaneously fuck all that up an hour or so later.

Occam's Razor meets Murphy's Law.

Now THIS is how they truly think, tho.

Trollhole says

The escalation continues. Where will it end?

Ukrainian Drone Attacks on Moscow Force Airport to Shut Down

(AP) — Russian authorities say three Ukrainian drones attacked Moscow in the early hours on Sunday, injuring one person and prompting a temporary closure for traffic of one of four airports around the Russian capital.

It was the fourth such attempt at a strike on the capital region this month and the third this week, fueling concerns about Moscow´s vulnerability to attacks as Russia’s war in Ukraine drags into its 18th month.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/07/30/ukrainian-drone-attacks-on-moscow-force-airport-to-shut-down/

Medvedev Says Russia Could Use Nuclear Weapon If Ukraine Offensive Wins

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/medvedev-says-russia-could-use-nuclear-weapon-if-ukraine-offensive-wins

Senior Russian national security official Dmitry Medvedev has issued a dire nuclear warning and threat aimed at Ukraine and its Western backers (though certainly not for the first time).

He said in a Sunday Telegram post that Russia could be forced to mount nuclear attack if Ukraine's counteroffensive succeeds. In effect it is to say that if Ukraine "wins", nukes would be deployed. This would happen in the scenario of "part of our land being taken away," he said.

"Just imagine that the offensive… in tandem with NATO, succeeded and ended up with part of our land being taken away. Then we would have to use nuclear weapons by virtue of the stipulations of the Russian Presidential Decree," the former president and now deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council asserted, which is being widely cited in Western press reports.

... He added in the Telegram statement, "Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends." Such threats are perhaps why Washington has remained hesitant on supplying Ukraine forces with longer-range missiles, also at a moment President Zelensky is actively vowing to 'return' the war to Russia.

RayAmerica says

"Medvedev Says Russia Could Use Nuclear Weapon If Ukraine Offensive Wins"
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/medvedev-says-russia-could-use-nuclear-weapon-if-ukraine-offensive-wins

Zero Hedge is not providing a link that verifies the above Medvedev quote! Nothing!

Instead, Zero Hedge says that this Medvedev assertion, "is being widely cited in Western press reports" and provides a link to CNN news.

In other words this is Propaganda and Fake News.

This is not fake news ...

As reported by the New York Post:

Ex-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev threatens ‘global nuclear fire’ over Ukraine counteroffensive: ‘No other option’
https://nypost.com/2023/07/31/kremlins-dmitry-medvedev-threatens-global-nuclear-fire/