West's duplicitous double standards: Russia War

[phsmith1616]

By regime changes I mean the existing leaders are going to be thrown under a bus.

*****

Hopefully this includes the current Canadian prime minister ... literally if possible. Allahu Ackbar!

oh god please! Is there a sign up sheet for driving the bus?

[Budge]

A subscriber sent this but forgot to include the link. If this is true, then those countries that are not energy independent and are pushing for a harder stance will suffer brutally this winter. There are probably going to be many regime changes in the West. By regime changes I mean the existing leaders are going to be thrown under a bus.

Re: Medvedev. I did read the info you got but, for the life of me can't remember where, but here's a paragraph from Andrei Martyanov's blog:

"Janet Yellen, though, thinks that she can come up with the plan to "limit Russia's profits", while simultaneously maintaining the flow of Russia oil to the markets (in Russian). This, of course, brings us to the issue of mental adequacy of people who pretend to run the US, but then again--somebody did vote for Joe Biden. I spoke about it in my today's video, but it does explain Dmitry Medvedev's characterization of Western elites as "bastards" and "degenerates". For now, the combined West should pray that Medvedev is not a President and what is being disclosed about this guy in the last couple of years changes his image completely and this is not in, as some try to insist, his "preparation" as a successor of Putin. Putin has many more good years. No, what begins to emerge about Medvedev is that he is a real hawk. He also has a very good memory. So, make your own conclusions, but then again--there is a reason Putin has him as both close friend and a very close political ally for many years."

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/

[adr]

I have a friend who has a friend who is personally acquainted with Medvedev, and his opinion is the same - very stringent, hard tempered man.

[Budge]

I have a friend who has a friend who is personally acquainted with Medvedev, and his opinion is the same - very stringent, hard tempered man.

This is the staggering thing about the West's thinking/propaganda, they think they can go toe-to-toe. US neocons are pussies compared to what Russian neocons will do.

[Budge]

By Dmitry Medvedev

1- A number of global supply chains will collapse and a major logistical crisis could arise, including the collapse of foreign airlines that will be banned from flying over Russian airspace.

2- The energy crisis will deepen in countries that have imposed sanctions on Russian energy supplies, fossil fuel prices will continue to rise, and the development of the digital economy in the world will slow down.

3- There will be an international food crisis, leading to famine in some countries.

4 – A monetary and financial crisis is possible in some countries or groups of countries, combined with undermining of the stability of some national currencies, runaway inflation and the destruction of the legal system protecting private property.

5 – New regional military conflicts will arise where the situation has not been resolved peacefully for many years or where the important interests of major international players are ignored.

6 – Terrorists, who believe that the Western authorities’ attention is now distracted by the confrontation with Russia, will become more active.

7 – New epidemics will break out, caused by a lack of international cooperation on health and epidemiological issues or caused by the proven use of biological weapons.

8 – International institutions, which have not proved their effectiveness in resolving the situation in Ukraine, such as the Council of Europe, will lose their importance.

9 – New international alliances will be formed, based on Anglo-Saxon criteria that are pragmatic rather than ideological.

10 – As a result, a new security architecture is being created which recognises:
(a) the weakness of Western concepts of international relations such as “rules-based order” and other meaningless Western rubbish;
(b) the collapse of the idea of an America-centric world;
(c) the existence of internationally respected interests of those countries in sharp conflict with the Western world.

A subscriber sent this but forgot to include the link. If this is true, then those countries that are not energy independent and are pushing for a harder stance will suffer brutally this winter. There are probably going to be many regime changes in the West. By regime changes I mean the existing leaders are going to be thrown under a bus.

Here's the link:

https://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z- ... -hundreds/

Latter half of the post.

[SOL]

I have a friend who has a friend who is personally acquainted with Medvedev, and his opinion is the same - very stringent, hard tempered man.

Well, he continues to let loose, and from what I am seeing from the Russians I know their attitudes are becoming tougher and tougher. It will be dangerous if they change tactics from defensive to offensive outside of the Ukrainian Conflict.

"I hate them. They are bastards and degenerates. They want death for us, for Russia. And, as long as I live, I will do everything to make them disappear." This most recent – quite terse – message from Dmitri Medvedev via the social network Telegram, on Tuesday, June 7, has the merit of clarity, even it is not entirely clear to whom "they" refers, and against whom the former Russian prime minister directs such fierce hatred. The Ukrainians? Unlikely, as the Russian public discourse persists in presenting the neighboring country as a friendly victim, in a way, of a misunderstanding. The West? More likely, as this discourse has become a constant for the current number two in the Russian Security Council, whose virulence is proportional to the "liberal" image he has been presenting until now.

Medvedev's Telegram feed, launched only in March (for years, Russian authorities tried to block the messaging service before finally giving up), is full of such jabs against the "odious, criminal and immoral" West and warnings that "Russia has enough power to put all those enemies unleashed against our country in their place." His references to a nuclear confrontation are frequent and the head of the Security Council, an institution that has grown in importance due to the conflict in Ukraine, is also calling for the restoration of the death penalty.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international ... 058_4.html

[Yodean]

I have a friend who has a friend who is personally acquainted with Medvedev, and his opinion is the same - very stringent, hard tempered man.

My 2c: if Medvedev were in charge, tactical nukes may have been deployed already. At the very least, in late February, Ukraine's power grid and central communication centers would have been bombed to kingdom cum, if he called the shots, instead of Vlad.

I hope Putin's health holds up. Whoever takes over from Putin is going to be far worse, as far as the West is concerned.

[SOL]

want to focus on one of the key themes in Andrei Martyanov’s essential book, Losing Military Supremacy–the weapon systems the United States is spending money to develop and deploy are obscenely expensive and completely vulnerable to Russia’s weapons created to defeat the American threat. Let me explain it this way. The United States has created the most expensive racing car in the world but the race it will run is over an off-road course littered with rocks, deep ruts and sandy mountains. In short, the vehicle will breakdown and not complete the race.

Here is Andrei’s summation of the problem:

Manipulation and PR are no substitute for actual victory which is defined universally as achieving the political objectives of the war, or in Clausewitz’s one liner—the ability to compel the enemy to do our will. The United States military’s balance sheet on that is simply not impressive, despite a mammoth military budget, immensely expensive weapons and a massive, well-oiled PR machine. All this is the result of the US military-industrial complex long ago becoming a jobs program for retired Pentagon generals and an embodiment of the neoconservative “view” on war—a view developed by people, most of whom never served a single day in uniform and do not possess even basic fundamental knowledge of the physical principles on which modern weapons operate and how technological dimensions reflect upon tactical, operational and strategic aspects of war (they are all tightly interconnected and do not exist separately). But talking up or blowing out of proportion, or grossly exaggerating US military capabilities does not require a serious academic and experiential foundation—today it is enough to have that desire and a good command of the English language to do so.

Excerpt From Losing Military Supremacy by Andrei Martyanov
I want to focus on three key weapon systems–Air Craft Carriers and Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles.

U.S. Air Craft Carriers played a critical role in defeating Japan in World War II, but are no longer effective if deployed in combat against China or Russia. The first problem is the cost. It is staggering:

The cost of the Navy’s next three carriers is on the rise, due in part for installation of equipment and electronics to handle the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighters. . . .

All in all, the cost of the Kennedy, now more than 80% complete at Newport News Shipbuilding, will rise by $531 million, or 4.7% from the estimate in last year’s justification document, to $11.93 billion, the Navy now says.

The cost of the third carrier in the Ford class, the Enterprise, will rise $84 million, to $12.41 billion, while the fourth carrier in the class, the Doris Miller, will see a $33 million increase to $12.48 billion. Both ships are under construction at Newport News.

The cost of Kennedy’s basic construction — the hull, structures and mechanical systems, is set to rise by $368 million.

Five of these air craft carriers account for 7.5% of the U.S. Defense budget. But here is the problem. These ships have no capability to defeat a Russian or Chinese hypersonic missile. Andrei discusses the implications:

The introduction into service in 2017 of the 3M22 Zircon hyper-sonic missile is already dramatically redefining naval warfare and makes even remote sea zones a “no-sail” zone for any US major surface combatant, especially aircraft carriers. Currently, and for the foreseeable future, no technology capable of intercepting such a missile exists or will exist. . . .the X-32 (Kh-32) cruise missile whose range is 1000 kilometers and has a speed in excess of Mach 4.2. This missile, apart from being able to attack anything on the ground, is capable, in fact was designed primarily for the purpose, of hitting anything moving on the surface of the sea. The missile, let alone a salvo of them, is incredibly difficult, if even possible at all, to intercept and as the above-mentioned demonstration showed, Iran most likely would have no problem with allowing these very TU-22M3s to operate from her airspace in the event of a worst case scenario. Launched anywhere from the Darab area, the hypothetical salvo would not only cover all of the Persian Gulf but will reliably close off the Gulf of Oman for any naval force. No ship, no Carrier Battle Group would be able to enter this area in the event of a conventional conflict with Russia in Syria—the strategic ramifications of this are enormous.”

Excerpt From Losing Military Supremacy by Andrei Martyanov
The cornerstone of America’s national defense is the nuclear triad–land based, sea launched and air launched nuclear missiles:

A compilation of platforms and weapons, the three legs of the U.S. nuclear triad serve as the backbone of America’s national security. The triad, along with assigned forces, provide 24/7 deterrence to prevent catastrophic actions from our adversaries and they stand ready, if necessary, to deliver a decisive response, anywhere, anytime.

Until recently the United States leaders and policy experts assumed that Mutual Assured Destruction would keep nuclear powers from killing each other. But what happens to that assumption/calculation when one side develops and deploys an advanced missile system that can shoot down the missiles launched from land, air and sea? Guess what? Russia’s S-500 air defense system does exactly that. Here is Andrei’s assessment:

the revolutionary S-500 air-defense system may completely close Russia and her allies’ airspace from any aerial or even ballistic threats. These developments alone completely devalue the astronomically expensive USAF front line combat aviation and its colossal investment into the very limited benefits of stealth, a euphemism primarily for “invisibility” in radio diapason, the mediocre F-35 being a prime example of the loss of common engineering, tactical and operational sense. Radiophotonics detection technologies will make all expenditures on stealth, without exception, simply a waste of money and resources.”

Excerpt From Losing Military Supremacy by Andrei Martyanov
What is the US strategy to counter this technology? You may think I am making this up, but a friend who is plugged into our defense plans explained it this way:

We will try to flood the Russian air space with so many missiles that some may get through.

Got it? We are not relying on technological superiority. We are hoping that some missiles get through.

Andrei’s objective in writing this book was to try to shake the American elites from their delusions about Russia and Russian technology and help them see the grave flaws in the U.S. defense systems that eat up so much of the gargantuan U.S. defense budget. Neither Andrei nor I want war between the United States and Russia. I know that Andrei will agree with me, it is still in the interests of both sides to find a way to live in this world together without threatening one another. But if conflict comes it is highly likely that the expensive veneer of perceived U.S. military might will be stripped away and the United States will find itself ill-equipped to fight a genuine first world power.

https://sonar21.com/the-u-s-dilemma-pri ... -not-work/

Larry is Ex CIA and he knows his stuff if even half of this is true its a game changer

[Yodean]

want to focus on one of the key themes in Andrei Martyanov’s essential book, Losing Military Supremacy–the weapon systems the United States is spending money to develop and deploy are obscenely expensive and completely vulnerable to Russia’s weapons created to defeat the American threat.

Larry is Ex CIA and he knows his stuff if even half of this is true its a game changer

Indeed, expensive weapon systems are often not very effective against simpler, cheaper systems that have stood the test of time.

However, expensive weapons make the DeepState a lot of $$$, as well as those involved with them.

The highest form of winning a war - any battle, really - is triumphing without firing a single shot. You crush your opponent, and your opponent barely knows what happened or who did it.

As a speculative, current example of a potential formulation of this nature:

Russia vs. Ukraine = Russia vs. USA proxy war.

U.S. leaders commanding Ukrainian troops. Russians die, Ukrainians die, but no American dies.

USA DeepState makes lots of money selling weapons. Western Europe, already weak, becomes even weaker - needs USA more than ever, so will have to bend over even more and kiss the feet of Uncle Sam. So from this perspective the Bald Eagle is winning. I am not talking about the average American, but the American DeepState and the PTBs.

China hasn't fired a single, kinetic shot in this Russia vs. USA proxy war. However, because of all the Western sanctions on the Angry Bear, Russia is forced to sell more of its valuable commodities, etc. to the CCP at fair to cheap prices.

So now, the Shadow Panda can accumulate all these commodities for herself, or sell them to the rest of the world at potentially great prices, including the West. China is winning without having to fire a single shot.

If the benefits are worth the costs, sometime in the future, the Shadow Panda can easily switch sides and stab Russia in the back - the Angry Bear is exposed and quite vulnerable on its eastern front.

[SOL]

want to focus on one of the key themes in Andrei Martyanov’s essential book, Losing Military Supremacy–the weapon systems the United States is spending money to develop and deploy are obscenely expensive and completely vulnerable to Russia’s weapons created to defeat the American threat.

Larry is Ex CIA and he knows his stuff if even half of this is true its a game changer

Indeed, expensive weapon systems are often not very effective against simpler, cheaper systems that have stood the test of time.

However, expensive weapons make the DeepState a lot of $$$, as well as those involved with them.

The highest form of winning a war - any battle, really - is triumphing without firing a single shot. You crush your opponent, and your opponent barely knows what happened or who did it.

As a speculative, current example of a potential formulation of this nature:

Russia vs. Ukraine = Russia vs. USA proxy war.

U.S. leaders commanding Ukrainian troops. Russians die, Ukrainians die, but no American dies.

USA DeepState makes lots of money selling weapons. Western Europe, already weak, becomes even weaker - needs USA more than ever, so will have to bend over even more and kiss the feet of Uncle Sam. So from this perspective the Bald Eagle is winning. I am not talking about the average American, but the American DeepState and the PTBs.

China hasn't fired a single, kinetic shot in this Russia vs. USA proxy war. However, because of all the Western sanctions on the Angry Bear, Russia is forced to sell more of its valuable commodities, etc. to the CCP at fair to cheap prices.

So now, the Shadow Panda can accumulate all these commodities for herself, or sell them to the rest of the world at potentially great prices, including the West. China is winning without having to fire a single shot.

If the benefits are worth the costs, sometime in the future, the Shadow Panda can easily switch sides and stab Russia in the back - the Angry Bear is exposed and quite vulnerable on its eastern front.

Currency markets are the key and in the currency markets the Rouble is king. They lowered rates again. In less than 2 months they went from 20 percent to 9.5 and the rouble strengthened. In terms of the east, a few of their missiles will take care of the problem if China decides to push. What is emerging is that China will stick with Russia for they will need Russia to make a move on Taiwan. China does not generally stab others in the back, despite all their talk, they tend to honour deals like the Russians. They need Russia just as much Russia might need them , they will stand back to back. On a separate note it appears that the markets are letting the US know that their moves so far are wrong and now that everyone thinks that all hell will break loose, a move by the Dow to test the 30K ranges which it was supposed to do in the 4th quarter is underway, this will pave the way for a strong leg up , after a bit more blood letting, then if nothing changes on the energy frontier, the ensuing strong rally could fizzle. While it is painful and downright disturbing in the short to intermediate timelines, the long term outlook is still bright. It is hard to see this when there is so much blood everywhere

[SOL]

https://youtu.be/8AwWhJ4JP_s

[Yodean]

While it is painful and downright disturbing in the short to intermediate timelines, the long term outlook is still bright. It is hard to see this when there is so much blood everywhere

For some reason IBM refuses to drop back into my buy zones. I had taken profits on a lot of my IBM shares previously. I still recall not that long ago all those comments about how IBM was "dead money," etc.

[Budge]

While it is painful and downright disturbing in the short to intermediate timelines, the long term outlook is still bright. It is hard to see this when there is so much blood everywhere

For some reason IBM refuses to drop back into my buy zones. I had taken profits on a lot of my IBM shares previously. I still recall not that long ago all those comments about how IBM was "dead money," etc.

129-132

[Budge]

https://youtu.be/8AwWhJ4JP_s

Kinzinger is on Foreign Affairs Cttee and has introduced H.J. Res 83. Already wrote my congress-critter about this insanity because sooner or later there will be a false flag event. But then my congress-critter voted for the $40bn.

Here's a far more relevant reaction from Martyanov (who knows of what he speaks):

"But it was not Kinzinger, who should be checked (together with his donors) into mental institution, and his sick initiative, it was the fact that the host asks MaGgregor at 8:00 minute mark. He asked if it is true that Russia has weapons which can obliterate something like France. I almost choked. The reason I had this reaction is because even well-wishing, good people in America, like this host, reside in a complete obliviousness to the fact that even at the height (or bottom depending on the point of view) of her national catastrophe in 1990s, Russia still could wipe not just France, but the whole United States and NATO in the "first" second strike. And I mean literally--wipe off the map.
A salvo of a single pr. 941 Akula (NATO Typhoon) SSBN without leaving even its base would unleash around 200 MIRVs at the US Eastern Sea Board and would wipe out all major (from Philadelphia, New York, Boston to Charlotte, Jacksonville, Miami--the list is too long to read) cities and military bases wrecking a chaos and losses of unimaginable scale in the first 30 minutes of the US attack of Russia. And that was just one of many Russian subs, not to mention other means of delivery, which would literally eliminate the US and NATO countries as nations and functional states. That was at the height of Russia's destitution of 1990s. It was then a common knowledge that Russian nuclear arsenal was functional. Why this knowledge evaporated is the main point--it is the matter of incessant US media propaganda and BS by its policy-makers who really took a beating of the third rate Arab military of Saddam in 1991 for a real war.

Today is 2022, Russia not only fully retained but perfected her strategic arsenal which makes US nuclear forces look like a backwater. Moreover, unlike it was the case in 1990s, the United States cannot fight Russia in her immediate geographic vicinity conventionally and hope not to sustain a defeat. As I am on record for many years, the US simply has no experience in modern times with the scale of losses and warfare it would experience if it decides to fight Russia. Russia is also fully capable to wreck havoc in the US proper without resorting to nuclear. These are the facts that neither Kinzinger nor the most of the US Congress know, not to speak of having a good grasp of it. None of them ever fought in defense of their motherland and have no clue about real consequences of a continental war with modern "peer". MacGregor does, but that is why he is not in the US Armed Forces anymore.

But it was this question of the host which struck me: both the United States and Russia have and had for the last 50 years enough firepower to turn the whole planet into a cinder rock--it was and remains the common knowledge. Another matter, a purely technological one, that the balance is shifting radically in Russia's favor both in nuclear and conventional technology and that creates challenges for the US it is incapable to meet precisely because the US Congress has zero understanding of modern military power and formation of the geopolitical balance. And, of course, as always they have no clue about Russia and what she is today. But that is a given in modern US politics."

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2022/0 ... eally.html

[hooligan]

^ i think this is all great intel. appreciate it being posted.

as someone who follows a decent amount of deep-deep military stuff. anti-grav , scalar , black projects , funding sink-holes , dark money

i'm always wondering . . . . what the Real power dynamics are . . . Who can authorize the use of those more advanced technologies . . . and what they mean in terms of international dynamics . . .