Biden announced new sanctions on Russia a couple of hrs back.NRao wrote:^^^^^
Elensky was waiting for Biden the German meet was over. Would expect him to withdraw within a week.
Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Menon ji,
The same thought crossed my mind too, I didn't get around to fleshing it out, which you did superbly. A bunch of involved names despite name changes come from this very theatre and they seem to be running their own agenda along/inside the deep state agenda. Someone should analyse all these people's family trees and religious affiliations - some interesting things may emerge.
The same thought crossed my mind too, I didn't get around to fleshing it out, which you did superbly. A bunch of involved names despite name changes come from this very theatre and they seem to be running their own agenda along/inside the deep state agenda. Someone should analyse all these people's family trees and religious affiliations - some interesting things may emerge.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Not yetVayutuvan wrote:Biden announced new sanctions on Russia a couple of hrs back.NRao wrote:^^^^^
Elensky was waiting for Biden the German meet was over. Would expect him to withdraw within a week.
And, even if Biden does come up with more sanctions, no idea what impact that will have. Russia has decided on her course - and its foundation is based on distrust of the West. Putin, in his speech to the nation, said economic dev, building out of the military, etc. The West no longer appears as a friend, the West is clearly the enemy.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Thanks for feeding the addiction for rabbit holesJE Menon wrote:My pleasure...the CIA reading room is a good place to start :
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/ST ... S_0015.pdf
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
I did this some time agoCyrano wrote:Menon ji,
The same thought crossed my mind too, I didn't get around to fleshing it out, which you did superbly. A bunch of involved names despite name changes come from this very theatre and they seem to be running their own agenda along/inside the deep state agenda. Someone should analyse all these people's family trees and religious affiliations - some interesting things may emerge.
Victoria Nuland
BA (Russian literature, political science, and history)
Brown University
Born: New York, 1961
Sherwin B. Nuland (Father)
NYU
Yale School of Medicine
Brown University
Born: New York, 1930
Other bits:
• Changed name from Shepsel Ber Nudelman to Sherwin Bernard Nuland
• Born to Ukrainian Jewish parents (according to Wiki; but he describes differently in his book)
o Meyer Nudelman (a garment repairman) (1889-1958)
o Vitsche Lutsky (1893-1941)
Vitsche (Violet) Lutsky – daughter of Peshe; married Meyer Nudelman (original family name- Weinberg). Nudleman family name means “needleman”.
o In his book -- "Lost in America" is Nuland's own journey back to his childhood, a depiction of his father's journey through life in America as a Jewish immigrant from Russia, and a journey both inward and forward as he untangles his complex feelings for the man who, he writes, "remains a constant looming presence in everything I do, but an unresolved one."
Robert Kagan (Husband)
BA (History), Yale University
MPP, Harvard University
PhD, American University
Born: Athens Greece, 1958
Other bits:
• Father Donald Kagan (separate below)
• Lithuanian Jewish descent
• Republican (till 2016); unaffiliated (after 2016)
• 1997 - Founded Neocon think tank with William Kristol (Project for the New American Century)
o Promote American Global Leadership
o Of the twenty-five people who signed PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War. Academics such as Inderjeet Parmar, Phillip Hammond, and Donald E. Abelson have said PNAC's influence on the George W. Bush administration has been exaggerated. (From Wiki)
o John Bolton was one of the Directors of the think tank.
• 2006 – closed above think tank
• 2009 - created new one: “Foreign Policy Initiative” (co-founded with William Kristol), closed in 2017.
o Advocated for troop surge in Afghanistan War.
o Chris Griffin, a former legislative director of Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, was hired as executive director in early 2013. He replaced Jamie Fly, who served as director for the organization's first four years and left to become an adviser for Florida Senator Marco Rubio.
o Jamie Fly has been the CEO of Radio Free Europe from 2021.
Robert Kagan's brother is Frederick W. Kagan.
He is former West Point professor of military history; and now a resident fellow at American Enterprise Institute. PhD from Yale.
authored While America Sleeps: Self-Delusion, Military Weakness, and the Threat to Peace Today (2000). The book argued in favor of a large increase in military spending and warned of future threats, including from a potential revival of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. Frederick and Robert Kagan, who is a member of the Aspen Strategy Group, and their father, Donald, were all signatories to the Project for the New American Century manifesto, Rebuilding America's Defenses (2000).
[Note: the wiki entry for Frederick mentions Robert Kagan being member of the Aspen Strategy Group]
Robert Kagan's wife is Kimberly Kagan.
She is the Founder and President of Institute for the Study of War.
The Board of Directors for that is another reappearance of the same set of characters.
It currently publishes daily reports on Russia/Ukraine conflict.
"ISW currently operates as a nonprofit organization, supported in part by contributions from defense contractors including General Dynamics, DynCorp, and previously, Raytheon. "
The most interesting part is this: The entire family tree from both sides -- ends up in: Ukraine, Lithuania, and some bit Poland. and the emigration is around the time before WW2, and likely driven by fall of the Tsars and the rise of the communist party.
Imagine the hand in glove operation...
Nuland is within govt
ISW is outside govt and taking MIC money and likely State Dept or DoD money. Places/think tanks where both Kagan brothers are fellows amplify and make it sound like it is coming from multiple sources whereas it is nothing but family business
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
David Kagan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Kagan?wprov=sfti1
I have to find my old notes but it literally showed intellectual influence and convergence for these characters around Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Kagan?wprov=sfti1
I have to find my old notes but it literally showed intellectual influence and convergence for these characters around Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Yup, a network of East European emigres... they have "hijacked" the deep state system, initially with the latter's acquiescence and/or approval - but things have gone to crap as a lot of underlying assumptions have turned out to be either slightly wrong, or grossly wrong. The outcome will therefore be as I have suggested above.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Avid,
You have opened a can of worms.
You have opened a can of worms.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
NRao wrote:Avid,
You have opened a can of worms.
TBH this family and friends network resembles a pit of snakes
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Look up Anthony Blinken too while you are there.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
JEM, Now look at how Indian sub-continent Muslims(CAIR) have hijacked US govt policy towards India.
Now they are joined by Khalistani (Dhillon) and Communist sympathizers(Khsama Sawant).
And we an trace all this back to USD immigration visa policies.
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2016 ... ince-1953/
Wonder if there was a parallel program started in the same year(1953) to work on undermining India via the million mutineers?
Now they are joined by Khalistani (Dhillon) and Communist sympathizers(Khsama Sawant).
And we an trace all this back to USD immigration visa policies.
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2016 ... ince-1953/
Wonder if there was a parallel program started in the same year(1953) to work on undermining India via the million mutineers?
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Antony Blinkenramana wrote:Look up Anthony Blinken too while you are there.
* Father: Donald Blinken (former Ambassador to Hungary)
* Donald Blinken's his father was originally from Kyiv (now the capital of Ukraine).
* Donald Blinken's grandfather was Meir Blinkin who moved to the United States at age 25 in 1904.
* Meir Blinkin was born in 1879 in Pereiaslav (now in Ukraine) to Yankel Blenchen (Blinkin)
Added later:
Ramana-ji your request intrigued me. I suspect you knew this information.
JE Menon-ji was right on the money regarding the two cabals "Anglosphere" and "Easter European Emigres".
Last edited by Avid on 25 Feb 2023 01:59, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Moved to geopolitical fallout
Last edited by Avid on 26 Feb 2023 02:39, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Yes, an Anglosphere driven push to bring BJP/RSS/Modi down a notch is very clear. Going by all the happenings, it is also clear to me that the Anglosphere is moving in the direction of chaos being the preferred option on the Eurasian transcontinental landmass - i.e. to reduce the larger states eventually so they can pick up and pick on the pieces that result from the chaos. The moves against India can be seen very clearly within this framework.ramana wrote:JEM, Now look at how Indian sub-continent Muslims(CAIR) have hijacked US govt policy towards India.
Now they are joined by Khalistani (Dhillon) and Communist sympathizers(Khsama Sawant).
And we an trace all this back to USD immigration visa policies.
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2016 ... ince-1953/
Wonder if there was a parallel program started in the same year(1953) to work on undermining India via the million mutineers?
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
@Avid - yeah, it took me some time to actually see the wood for the trees, but the picture is now quite clear. I'll outline things in a sort of stream of thought post sometime later today.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Fu(k it, will do it now, so here goes (the narrative thrust will be interrupted by explanatory paragraphs, etc, so please bear with me - and it will be long):
After the collapse of the USSR, the world was immediately unipolar, but it is important to remember that the collapse was not the consequence of war - rather a consensus decision within the Soviet Union to end itself, so to speak - and Russia (in its identity an SSR) was one of the prime movers behind it. After some dithering, power moved into the hands of Yeltsin, who was propped up, and was eventually dancing to the tunes of, "the West" (I put this in quotes, because it needs explanation, later).
In that moment of unipolar exhuberance the West (led by the Anglosphere & continental Europe) moved in and began establishing their commercial activities, which were primarily extractive - and the Russians went through the most horrendous period in memory broadly from 1991 to 2000. Unsafe, poor and rudderless. There is plenty of literature on it, and I know it personally from a range of Russians as well as non-Russians as I was living in the Orthodox World, at that time. This was the period in which the oligarchs emerged, again with not little support from outside (not all, but very many) - if one does some profiling, there will great clarity. It was also the period, surprise surprise, in which NATO expanded quite considerably. Russia was at its weakest.
Meanwhile, during the same period, the Anglosphere (US/UK/Canada/Aus/NZ - five eyes and all the rest of it) had slowly begun to concretize its worldview for the unipolar world. I believe the term "Anglosphere" was itself first used in the 1990s (this needs Zoobearing) but the concept of "intercitizenship" between English speaking colonies was first used in late 19th century. Naturally, the primary pole by far would be the US. But its natural allies - native English speaking, familially inter-connected beyond extractability, collectively the largest economic bloc in the world with USD30 trillion plus GDP, culturally uniform with really only dialectic differences - would provide the common interest & mindset enabling this five-tiered unipolar hierarchy (US>UK>Canada>Australia>NZ) to sustain itself for the foreseeable future.
The Anglosphere's key feature was that they harken back to the British Empire, which has infused in a lot of them their world view. But apart from the historical linkages there is also the mindset commonality I mentioned above. This emerges from the fact that these are all "island" states of a sort. The US/Canada separated from the Eurasian continent by the Atlantic/Pacific oceans, Britain by the English Channel & Australia/NZ. None of these have the experience of a land-based attack. They can only be attacked by air or sea, which is a huge advantage (the associated disadvantage being they can also not attack via land, and I might come to this later).
This island mentality, combined with the British historic memory of Great Britain and her conquered colonies, her Empire, is shared by the native English speakers in some sense, and certainly among the Anglo-Saxon elites across the Anglosphere. In effect, after WWII, this empire was merely transferred to cousin (the US), albeit not entirely willingly, and quite naturally after a little tussle, not much. And the US proceeded to become what it has, the biggest superpower the world has ever seen. This lived reality of the elites of the Anglosphere, and of much of their Anglo-Saxon population - the reality of distance, of great power and of the imposition of will on the rest of the world - has given them a sense over time of both immunity and impunity. And, as one may expect, Hubris has accompanied them closely.
What we are seeing today playing out on the Eurasian landmass is the consequence of this situation, with attendant particularities which I will try to point out. One is the unusual role of the emigre East European (heavily Jewish) community in the current state of affairs, and why it is so. It is undeniable that many of the people in the Neocon (formerly "Vulcan" IIRC) group that is spearheading the NATO war against Russia are of East European origin, and very many of them are of Jewish extraction.
In my opinion, this is a consequence among other things of the outcome of WW2. The Allied war effort saved the Jewish people from extinction (even if that was not the primary intention) and many escaped the Stalinist reality from East Europe in the immediate aftermath, etc. Also the Jewish state of Israel was created after millennial absence. And since, the Anglosphere has been a primary guarantor of its existence. Consequently and naturally, many if not most Jewish people have both a sense of gratitude and obligation which has played out over the last three quarters of a century or so.
However, what has happened is that for domestic political reasons in the US - primarily, but I don't think only - many of the East European emigres coagulated within the national security conclave of the US, and they harboured a great deal of illwill towards Russia, and indifference towards the continental Western Europeans for historic reasons.
This sense of gratitude/obligation towards the Anglosphere, combined with illwill towards Russia/indifference towards Europe is one of the reasons why we see the strange collusion between the North American Jewry and the Ukrainian Nazis. We need to go a little further back towards the end of WWII, when it became immediately evident that the next war would be between the US and the USSR. Immediately, the Anglosphere repurposed their Nazi captives (the Gehlen gang of Galicia moved to Germany's intelligence & their Ukrainian network continued activites redirected towards the USSR). Funded by the OSS/CIA, this continued up until the collapse of the USSR, and then went dormant through much of the 1990s (this is a bit hazy, but I think the structure was revived in the late 1990s), which coincidentally is when Yeltsin handed over power to the new kid in town, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.
By this time, the mainly Jewish neocons were well entrenched, and the Ukrainian Nazis were just a tool to be used against the Russians. Their ideology was not relevant to the job at hand. What was relevant was their willingness to go to any length to challenge the Russians - and this is what bound them together, a common visceral hatred of Russia. This works the other way too, i.e. on the Ukrainian side. Hence the Jewish billionaire Kolomoisky leads to the puppet Zelensky (also Jewish).
Bear in mind, this is just a re-tooling of "The Bear Trap" applied in Afghanistan, when a similar bunch of driven crazies - the Afghan mujahedin - were successfully used to kick Russia out of Afghanistan (although if one were to define pyrrhic victory - this would be the go to example). The key point here is that the guiding mind for both was the same man, Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Polish emigre to the US. What the neocons do not realise is that they, too, are just tools of the Anglosphere, and their utility may have run out. We will come to that.
Coming back to the central narrative, Zbig in 1997 wrote the Grand Chessboard, his interpretation of the game that the Anglosphere had always been playing since the time of the British Empire which has been recrafted and retooled but not repurposed. As with the British since the time of Halford Mackinder's "Heartland Theory" (which is basically the Eurasian Landmass Theory), the objective is to keep the Eurasian Landmass as weak and fractious (chaotic) as possible to be ruled by the Island state of Britain, and today of course the island state conglomerate which is what I'm referring to as the Anglosphere.
Sometime, late in the 1990s therefore, the objective of the Anglosphere became chaos on the Eurasian Landmass, something accelerated by the 9/11/2001 attacks in the US. (An aside, because of the sense of immunity/impunity - any direct attack on the Island is seen as something extraordinary requiring extraordinary response. Think for example of the way in which the UK considers the Battle of Britain & V2 rockets to be). What has begun in late 2001 in Afghanistan has not stopped, working its way through Iraq, the Balkans, Syria, Libya, but the prize is Russia. And Zbig was clear that Ukraine should be used as a battering ram against it.
That is what is happening now, the battering of Russia by proxy, a combination of hubris by the Anglosphere and incompetence by neocon tools whose visceral hatred and ambition got the better of them. It is important in this context to acknowledge a few things.
1. This is not a conspiracy, but a negative development of superpower interest shaped by Anglosphere identity and strategic intent. In principle, one cannot hold that against any superpower. Whether or not it has the right to do what it does is not the issue. The issue is whether it has the capacity to do so in a way that leaves it with a net power advantage at the end of whatever project it takes up. That is the mistake, an inevitable one though not one that is timebound, which has been made here. It may be a terminal one, but it does not have to be.
2. When I refer to the Anglosphere, I am referring to the guiding elites - a combination of governmental, commercial and military - set the path the bloc moves upon. The large majority of the body public is not aware of this, may not be supportive of it, and often are not capable of grasping their own situation in full. In fact, the largest part of the narrative control that the Anglosphere exercises is to shape the perceptions of their own people towards the path they have decided upon (and even that decision is not unanimous within the elites).
The consequence, however, of the Anglosphere strategic intent and the incompetence of the neocon tools of (substantially) Eastern European content is that through a great misreading of the situation, we are now at the cusp of a thermonuclear extinction event. Much closer than we might initially appreciate. And if there isn't one, then the entire environment can only devolve to one where the Anglosphere ends up with a net power disadvantage, with all the structures they have built (NATO) and shaped (EU) in its service becoming more fractious, less coherent and increasingly fragile.
On the positive side, if there is one, to me there appears to be some sense among the Anglosphere elites of what has happened and will likely happen if things continue as they are. There seems to be some move towards re-stabilising things. The growing reportage on Nordstream explosion responsibility (initiated by the superb scoop by Seymour Hersh, also Jewish) is an indicator. In my view, the Hersh report is itself a first shot across the bows by the uber elites to signal to the neocons that the time is up. I will not be in the least surprised if, in the final outcome, the scapegoats for the mess that the Anglosphere finds itself in will be the neocons and their associates. They will likely be identified and excreted from the system. And the Anglosphere will live on, slightly bloodied, but unbowed, and having to pick up the pieces of this hubris-inflicted setback literally from the seafloor.
(As an aside: one tragic outcome of all this, in my view (both personal and otherwise), is that the Jewish people will face a lot of the heat for the Ukraine fiasco. They will be vilified by the Ukrainians, only a slight twist in their national narrative is required, by the Americans to a great extent, and undoubtedly by the Europeans. Through, strictly speaking, no fault of their own. The neocons were, as it were, merely following orders, just a bit more enthusiastically than they should have. It also appears to me that Israel has seen this coming way back. This is the reason why they were all over the place trying to negotiate an end to things. The long interview Naftali Bennet gave to the vlogger in Israel some weeks ago, to me, showed some of the quiet desperation and to some extent heartbreak on the issue. They are our friends, we should wish them well and help in any manner we can).
In short, the place where we are at is a consequence not of evil intent, but the natural course of power play, strategic ambition, greed and of course gross incompetence at several levels. The Anglosphere looked in the mirror and it saw the fantasy that it had created for others to believe in, but it believed it too.
END
Added later: excuse the messy English folks, I just wrote it in one shot stream of consciousness sort of way. Even though the grammar and idiom may be off in places, I think you all get the gist of it - if you take the trouble to read it, that is.
After the collapse of the USSR, the world was immediately unipolar, but it is important to remember that the collapse was not the consequence of war - rather a consensus decision within the Soviet Union to end itself, so to speak - and Russia (in its identity an SSR) was one of the prime movers behind it. After some dithering, power moved into the hands of Yeltsin, who was propped up, and was eventually dancing to the tunes of, "the West" (I put this in quotes, because it needs explanation, later).
In that moment of unipolar exhuberance the West (led by the Anglosphere & continental Europe) moved in and began establishing their commercial activities, which were primarily extractive - and the Russians went through the most horrendous period in memory broadly from 1991 to 2000. Unsafe, poor and rudderless. There is plenty of literature on it, and I know it personally from a range of Russians as well as non-Russians as I was living in the Orthodox World, at that time. This was the period in which the oligarchs emerged, again with not little support from outside (not all, but very many) - if one does some profiling, there will great clarity. It was also the period, surprise surprise, in which NATO expanded quite considerably. Russia was at its weakest.
Meanwhile, during the same period, the Anglosphere (US/UK/Canada/Aus/NZ - five eyes and all the rest of it) had slowly begun to concretize its worldview for the unipolar world. I believe the term "Anglosphere" was itself first used in the 1990s (this needs Zoobearing) but the concept of "intercitizenship" between English speaking colonies was first used in late 19th century. Naturally, the primary pole by far would be the US. But its natural allies - native English speaking, familially inter-connected beyond extractability, collectively the largest economic bloc in the world with USD30 trillion plus GDP, culturally uniform with really only dialectic differences - would provide the common interest & mindset enabling this five-tiered unipolar hierarchy (US>UK>Canada>Australia>NZ) to sustain itself for the foreseeable future.
The Anglosphere's key feature was that they harken back to the British Empire, which has infused in a lot of them their world view. But apart from the historical linkages there is also the mindset commonality I mentioned above. This emerges from the fact that these are all "island" states of a sort. The US/Canada separated from the Eurasian continent by the Atlantic/Pacific oceans, Britain by the English Channel & Australia/NZ. None of these have the experience of a land-based attack. They can only be attacked by air or sea, which is a huge advantage (the associated disadvantage being they can also not attack via land, and I might come to this later).
This island mentality, combined with the British historic memory of Great Britain and her conquered colonies, her Empire, is shared by the native English speakers in some sense, and certainly among the Anglo-Saxon elites across the Anglosphere. In effect, after WWII, this empire was merely transferred to cousin (the US), albeit not entirely willingly, and quite naturally after a little tussle, not much. And the US proceeded to become what it has, the biggest superpower the world has ever seen. This lived reality of the elites of the Anglosphere, and of much of their Anglo-Saxon population - the reality of distance, of great power and of the imposition of will on the rest of the world - has given them a sense over time of both immunity and impunity. And, as one may expect, Hubris has accompanied them closely.
What we are seeing today playing out on the Eurasian landmass is the consequence of this situation, with attendant particularities which I will try to point out. One is the unusual role of the emigre East European (heavily Jewish) community in the current state of affairs, and why it is so. It is undeniable that many of the people in the Neocon (formerly "Vulcan" IIRC) group that is spearheading the NATO war against Russia are of East European origin, and very many of them are of Jewish extraction.
In my opinion, this is a consequence among other things of the outcome of WW2. The Allied war effort saved the Jewish people from extinction (even if that was not the primary intention) and many escaped the Stalinist reality from East Europe in the immediate aftermath, etc. Also the Jewish state of Israel was created after millennial absence. And since, the Anglosphere has been a primary guarantor of its existence. Consequently and naturally, many if not most Jewish people have both a sense of gratitude and obligation which has played out over the last three quarters of a century or so.
However, what has happened is that for domestic political reasons in the US - primarily, but I don't think only - many of the East European emigres coagulated within the national security conclave of the US, and they harboured a great deal of illwill towards Russia, and indifference towards the continental Western Europeans for historic reasons.
This sense of gratitude/obligation towards the Anglosphere, combined with illwill towards Russia/indifference towards Europe is one of the reasons why we see the strange collusion between the North American Jewry and the Ukrainian Nazis. We need to go a little further back towards the end of WWII, when it became immediately evident that the next war would be between the US and the USSR. Immediately, the Anglosphere repurposed their Nazi captives (the Gehlen gang of Galicia moved to Germany's intelligence & their Ukrainian network continued activites redirected towards the USSR). Funded by the OSS/CIA, this continued up until the collapse of the USSR, and then went dormant through much of the 1990s (this is a bit hazy, but I think the structure was revived in the late 1990s), which coincidentally is when Yeltsin handed over power to the new kid in town, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.
By this time, the mainly Jewish neocons were well entrenched, and the Ukrainian Nazis were just a tool to be used against the Russians. Their ideology was not relevant to the job at hand. What was relevant was their willingness to go to any length to challenge the Russians - and this is what bound them together, a common visceral hatred of Russia. This works the other way too, i.e. on the Ukrainian side. Hence the Jewish billionaire Kolomoisky leads to the puppet Zelensky (also Jewish).
Bear in mind, this is just a re-tooling of "The Bear Trap" applied in Afghanistan, when a similar bunch of driven crazies - the Afghan mujahedin - were successfully used to kick Russia out of Afghanistan (although if one were to define pyrrhic victory - this would be the go to example). The key point here is that the guiding mind for both was the same man, Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Polish emigre to the US. What the neocons do not realise is that they, too, are just tools of the Anglosphere, and their utility may have run out. We will come to that.
Coming back to the central narrative, Zbig in 1997 wrote the Grand Chessboard, his interpretation of the game that the Anglosphere had always been playing since the time of the British Empire which has been recrafted and retooled but not repurposed. As with the British since the time of Halford Mackinder's "Heartland Theory" (which is basically the Eurasian Landmass Theory), the objective is to keep the Eurasian Landmass as weak and fractious (chaotic) as possible to be ruled by the Island state of Britain, and today of course the island state conglomerate which is what I'm referring to as the Anglosphere.
Sometime, late in the 1990s therefore, the objective of the Anglosphere became chaos on the Eurasian Landmass, something accelerated by the 9/11/2001 attacks in the US. (An aside, because of the sense of immunity/impunity - any direct attack on the Island is seen as something extraordinary requiring extraordinary response. Think for example of the way in which the UK considers the Battle of Britain & V2 rockets to be). What has begun in late 2001 in Afghanistan has not stopped, working its way through Iraq, the Balkans, Syria, Libya, but the prize is Russia. And Zbig was clear that Ukraine should be used as a battering ram against it.
That is what is happening now, the battering of Russia by proxy, a combination of hubris by the Anglosphere and incompetence by neocon tools whose visceral hatred and ambition got the better of them. It is important in this context to acknowledge a few things.
1. This is not a conspiracy, but a negative development of superpower interest shaped by Anglosphere identity and strategic intent. In principle, one cannot hold that against any superpower. Whether or not it has the right to do what it does is not the issue. The issue is whether it has the capacity to do so in a way that leaves it with a net power advantage at the end of whatever project it takes up. That is the mistake, an inevitable one though not one that is timebound, which has been made here. It may be a terminal one, but it does not have to be.
2. When I refer to the Anglosphere, I am referring to the guiding elites - a combination of governmental, commercial and military - set the path the bloc moves upon. The large majority of the body public is not aware of this, may not be supportive of it, and often are not capable of grasping their own situation in full. In fact, the largest part of the narrative control that the Anglosphere exercises is to shape the perceptions of their own people towards the path they have decided upon (and even that decision is not unanimous within the elites).
The consequence, however, of the Anglosphere strategic intent and the incompetence of the neocon tools of (substantially) Eastern European content is that through a great misreading of the situation, we are now at the cusp of a thermonuclear extinction event. Much closer than we might initially appreciate. And if there isn't one, then the entire environment can only devolve to one where the Anglosphere ends up with a net power disadvantage, with all the structures they have built (NATO) and shaped (EU) in its service becoming more fractious, less coherent and increasingly fragile.
On the positive side, if there is one, to me there appears to be some sense among the Anglosphere elites of what has happened and will likely happen if things continue as they are. There seems to be some move towards re-stabilising things. The growing reportage on Nordstream explosion responsibility (initiated by the superb scoop by Seymour Hersh, also Jewish) is an indicator. In my view, the Hersh report is itself a first shot across the bows by the uber elites to signal to the neocons that the time is up. I will not be in the least surprised if, in the final outcome, the scapegoats for the mess that the Anglosphere finds itself in will be the neocons and their associates. They will likely be identified and excreted from the system. And the Anglosphere will live on, slightly bloodied, but unbowed, and having to pick up the pieces of this hubris-inflicted setback literally from the seafloor.
(As an aside: one tragic outcome of all this, in my view (both personal and otherwise), is that the Jewish people will face a lot of the heat for the Ukraine fiasco. They will be vilified by the Ukrainians, only a slight twist in their national narrative is required, by the Americans to a great extent, and undoubtedly by the Europeans. Through, strictly speaking, no fault of their own. The neocons were, as it were, merely following orders, just a bit more enthusiastically than they should have. It also appears to me that Israel has seen this coming way back. This is the reason why they were all over the place trying to negotiate an end to things. The long interview Naftali Bennet gave to the vlogger in Israel some weeks ago, to me, showed some of the quiet desperation and to some extent heartbreak on the issue. They are our friends, we should wish them well and help in any manner we can).
In short, the place where we are at is a consequence not of evil intent, but the natural course of power play, strategic ambition, greed and of course gross incompetence at several levels. The Anglosphere looked in the mirror and it saw the fantasy that it had created for others to believe in, but it believed it too.
END
Added later: excuse the messy English folks, I just wrote it in one shot stream of consciousness sort of way. Even though the grammar and idiom may be off in places, I think you all get the gist of it - if you take the trouble to read it, that is.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Excellent perspective Menon ji !
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
JE M-ji:
Thank you for that detailed post! Much appreciate the intriguing and informative perspective.
Many more rabbit holes for me to explore, and to reconstitute my view with a new perspective into a consistent and coherent picture.
Thank you for that detailed post! Much appreciate the intriguing and informative perspective.
Many more rabbit holes for me to explore, and to reconstitute my view with a new perspective into a consistent and coherent picture.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Last few posts will be better for the other geostrategic russian-Ukrainin thread we have. Some of thes eposts are useful but are not war tactics but geostrategic in nature. Maybe Mods should move them there for coherence.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
JEM-ji excellent write up that should be archived…
My only quibble is that you may be putting too much stock into Seymour Hersh’s article. It is an expose no doubt that goes against the established narrative but I don’t think it’s an inflection point yet. There is still lots more money to be made for the West out of this war and the Nuland types definitely think that there is room to operate and keep the pot boiling before the nuclear threshold is reached. Note that despite all the publicity regarding tanks being provided, the actual numbers are low: enough probably for one thrust in an area…. So they are being careful.
Agree completely on thr main focus of your article of course, but I don’t think we are near an inflection point. There is still room for this to go Anglospheees way with a neutered Russia at the end in which case the consequences for Nuland types won’t apply.
JMT
My only quibble is that you may be putting too much stock into Seymour Hersh’s article. It is an expose no doubt that goes against the established narrative but I don’t think it’s an inflection point yet. There is still lots more money to be made for the West out of this war and the Nuland types definitely think that there is room to operate and keep the pot boiling before the nuclear threshold is reached. Note that despite all the publicity regarding tanks being provided, the actual numbers are low: enough probably for one thrust in an area…. So they are being careful.
Agree completely on thr main focus of your article of course, but I don’t think we are near an inflection point. There is still room for this to go Anglospheees way with a neutered Russia at the end in which case the consequences for Nuland types won’t apply.
JMT
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
JEM sir why Jews are not indebted to Russians for defeating Nazis, is a Q that crops up again n again
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
cheena peace plan which has got Z interested but not Nato has upto Kiev in dmz
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Not a homogeneous entity. My experience is the a subset of eastern European Jews tend to be fervently anti-russia . Many of them are refuseniks ie folks refused emigration during the Soviet era . Some of them had ancestors sent to prison camps. The czarist Russia too wasn't very kind to the Jews . Putin actually got along well with the chief rabbi of Moscow and has had fairly normal relation with Israel . The el al Moscow -tel Aviv route remains fairly busy .IndraD wrote:JEM sir why Jews are not indebted to Russians for defeating Nazis, is a Q that crops up again n again
Also the neocons are often self serving politicians who ll try to use their ethno religious identity as a pivot for political gains .the vile creature Kissinger once said to Nixon. "It Wouldn't Be U.S. Concern if U.S.S.R Sent Jews to Gas Chambers'.
They've often had a lot of cognitive dissonance as well with respect to jewry . The antisemite Soros is a prime example .
Kissinger also openly said if he was not a Jew he would have been anti semite .
https://www.google.com/amp/s/forward.co ... e/%3famp=1
Other thing I've seen is that Soviet emigre to Israel often refused to learn Hebrew . The old timers vote en bloc . The Israelis let them in because many of them were highly intelligent scientists, professors etc . And for them it was mainly a matter of better opportunity. Even today the Russian Jews have a very distinct identity. Fairly complex situation overall.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Stalin was viciously anti Semitic. Russia had a long history of Anti Semitism (Ukraine was worse). Many of the early communist leaders were Jewish because they thought they would be treated as the equals of Russians under communism, but none were close to Stalin (Trotsky, who should have been Lenin's successor, was killed on Stalin's orders). It was believed he was planning to get rid of the Russian Jews, at the time of his death.IndraD wrote:JEM sir why Jews are not indebted to Russians for defeating Nazis, is a Q that crops up again n again
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
^ Trotsky was Jewish . Wonder if that played a role in getting the axe on his head . I wonder how SU would have panned out if Trotsky rather than Stalin ran it .
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
tanks GKakkad & Deans sir!
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
IndraD
Deans and Gakakkad has answered your question, and I have nothing to add to that.
Deans and Gakakkad has answered your question, and I have nothing to add to that.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Tanaji,
Please note that I'm not calling it an inflection point, simply a shot across the bows. I believe Stephen Myers has now written an article in Newsweek also, quite a despondent one on the situation in Ukraine.
I don't think it's an inflection point either. More like an infection point. The anti-narrative virus will prove to be infectious I suspect.
Please note that I'm not calling it an inflection point, simply a shot across the bows. I believe Stephen Myers has now written an article in Newsweek also, quite a despondent one on the situation in Ukraine.
I don't think it's an inflection point either. More like an infection point. The anti-narrative virus will prove to be infectious I suspect.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Move to geopolitical fallout
Last edited by Avid on 26 Feb 2023 02:40, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
This is a retarded plan by the Chinese, at best.IndraD wrote:
cheena peace plan which has got Z interested but not Nato has upto Kiev in dmz
Why would Moscow pull back troops from hard fought territories?
Coming here, I read that Moscow is substituting troops for artillery. That cannot be true, the Russians have over 300k troops in the vicinity who are waiting to pounce on the Ukrainians when the oppurtunity is right. I would vouch for the fact that the Bakhmut grinder is sucking up all the Ukrainian resolve apart from troops. We all know the Russians know this - along with the Ukrainians.
What is it to us, Pakistanis are sending their arms to Ukrainians, arms that they cannot replace. I am loving this.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
indeed, many thanks!JE Menon wrote:IndraD
Deans and Gakakkad has answered your question, and I have nothing to add to that.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
The amerikis have, by strategy and design, pre positioned large stocks of war stores in areas close to (often in other friendly countries nearby) where they anticipate that they might need the same and so they shorten their logistics and supply lines by doing this, while the long and luxurious ameriki supply chain kicks in with a time lag because of distance and length of supply chain issues by hauling in some really heavy battle stores that cannot be flown in fast enough, and in the required quantities by their strategic heavy lifters.Maria wrote:This is a retarded plan by the Chinese, at best.IndraD wrote:
cheena peace plan which has got Z interested but not Nato has upto Kiev in dmz
Why would Moscow pull back troops from hard fought territories?
Coming here, I read that Moscow is substituting troops for artillery. That cannot be true, the Russians have over 300k troops in the vicinity who are waiting to pounce on the Ukrainians when the oppurtunity is right. I would vouch for the fact that the Bakhmut grinder is sucking up all the Ukrainian resolve apart from troops. We all know the Russians know this - along with the Ukrainians.
What is it to us, Pakistanis are sending their arms to Ukrainians, arms that they cannot replace. I am loving this.
This is to shorten their reaction times to full on battle capacity, in case any trouble breaks out in areas of primary geopolitical interest to the US, like critical parts of the middle east, or even eyeraan for that matter.
Admittedly, Israel is already a very big repository of such war stores
It's possible that poxistan may be one of those stashes where the ameriki war stores have been prepositioned.
due to grave shortages, like munitions for instance, the amerikis have already selectively started to strip some of their offshore repositories of war stores to feed the hungry ukrainian monster..
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
1) I have been hearing the likes of Scott Ritter say that the Wagner Group is taking a beating, but since the Ukrainians are taking a bigger beating the Russians are making progress by the inches. Bottom line: Russians are (beginning?) to hurt
2) Chinese position paper:
The Chinese decision to enter the fray (announced at the Munich Security Conference 2023, by none other than the newly minted Politburo member Wang Li), to me, says that the Russians are feeling the heat.
China, on this occasion, decided to publish a Position Paper. IMO, a rambling document set as points!!!!! The following point will make every Indian - China is doing exactly what China does not want others to do!!
And, to insulate China from any such counterarguments, China now claims to be part of the "Eurasia Continent." China now as a member of Eurasia ("all parties") has to have a say in the Ukrainian matter and thus needs to be consulted on every future security measure within that continent!!!!
4) Within the US establishment, there is unanimity on opposing China (except for Wall Street and therefore the Dept of Treasury. However, one will not find a weaker Sec of Treasy - Yellen). I fully expect the US to take on China in some shape or form AND the US DoD will fully support that decision. US DoD has been rearing to go for at least 10 years. Wall Street will have to accept the multi-billion USD losses in investments in China - for the greater good
US shortages of ammo, etc are for the European theater - not global. And, if and when the US wants they do have surge capability.
NATO has always depended on the US for a few things - lift is one major component.
2) Chinese position paper:
The Chinese decision to enter the fray (announced at the Munich Security Conference 2023, by none other than the newly minted Politburo member Wang Li), to me, says that the Russians are feeling the heat.
China, on this occasion, decided to publish a Position Paper. IMO, a rambling document set as points!!!!! The following point will make every Indian - China is doing exactly what China does not want others to do!!
And, to insulate China from any such counterarguments, China now claims to be part of the "Eurasia Continent." China now as a member of Eurasia ("all parties") has to have a say in the Ukrainian matter and thus needs to be consulted on every future security measure within that continent!!!!
3) In the US there are a few that say that it was a mistake to attack Russia first. It should have been China, then perhaps Russia. IMO, that is right2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs. The legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly. There is no simple solution to a complex issue. All parties should, following the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security and bearing in mind the long-term peace and stability of the world, help forge a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. All parties should oppose the pursuit of one’s own security at the cost of others’ security, prevent bloc confrontation, and work together for peace and stability on the Eurasian Continent.
4) Within the US establishment, there is unanimity on opposing China (except for Wall Street and therefore the Dept of Treasury. However, one will not find a weaker Sec of Treasy - Yellen). I fully expect the US to take on China in some shape or form AND the US DoD will fully support that decision. US DoD has been rearing to go for at least 10 years. Wall Street will have to accept the multi-billion USD losses in investments in China - for the greater good
US shortages of ammo, etc are for the European theater - not global. And, if and when the US wants they do have surge capability.
NATO has always depended on the US for a few things - lift is one major component.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
That is a wonderful summary of the situation, thank you!JE Menon wrote:Fu(k it, will do it now, so here goes (the narrative thrust will be interrupted by explanatory paragraphs, etc, so please bear with me - and it will be long)
Haha, other than the Korean person (Kim?), all the other oligarchs were Jewish. Which means that Jews are considerable powers in 4 quadrants of this war - pro-Putin Russians, anti-Putin Russians, pro-Z Ukranians, and pro-Z Americans. And the Israelis know this isn't going to end well, so they are sitting it out.JE Menon wrote:This was the period in which the oligarchs emerged, again with not little support from outside (not all, but very many) - if one does some profiling, there will great clarity.
Sir, if you added references to the claims in your write-up, this would be a scholarly article. I request you to please invest some time and do it for the record.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Chabad House is a Russian Jewish House.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Folks am going to capture the Lessons learned in another thread so it is not lost. Thanks.
Let us explore this in another thread.
Am going to ask questions and use Socratic Method!
Let us explore this in another thread.
Am going to ask questions and use Socratic Method!
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Yensoy, I will try to do it... Meanwhile, as Ramana has said, move all discussion to other appropriate threads, and feel free to ask and I will respond as and when possible, and if I can actually say something that may be useful.