Why would Russia invade Ukraine because of NATO? Follow your own logic, Europe doesn't have the energy to expand. But it tried by pushing Russia to lower its energy prices. Or expecting Russia to pick up the slack from Europe's delusional "green energy" policies.
Also, following your own logic, Europe MUST gain access to energy, just like WWII. Where is that energy? Russia. Europe will try to negotiate with Asia to divide Russia up. To get a weak Russian government in place to do the bidding of Europe and Asia.
Putin has miscalculated. Europeans can get nasty-as-you-like. It's just a matter of time before U.S. natural gas becoming untenable. At that point Europe will have to go take Russia's oil/gas by force or suffer the fate you described.
I worry more about US using tactical nukes than Russia ;)
I don't see that the U.S. cared about Europe buying oil/gas from Russia. After all, it let Russia take Crimea, parts of the Donbas, etc. Also, when the invasion started Biden wrote Ukraine off. I'm no Biden fan, but his administration at least understood the history of Russia and Europe. If Europe wanted to give Ukraine to Russia it could. If it didn't, the cost would be buying US gas and the US would give Ukraine its stockpile of weapons (headed for scrapheap anyway).
Now Trump, aligned with Israel's interests at becoming the regional power of the Middle East, and it's close ties to Russian oil/gas (20% of Israelis are of Russian descent), he is trying to broker a deal that would give Russia Ukraine, Israel greater power in the ME and Iran a way out of the sanctions. On paper, the Trump administrations ideas can work.
On paper. As I wrote, when it's all gamed out Europe can either become a vassal to the U.S. and Russia or it can fight. I'm talking realpolitik here. I have no idea what they'll do.
I do know Russia and Israel will fight scorched Earth to achieve their goals. I know because they're already doing so.
If Washington hadn’t interfered, Russian gas would be flowing and over 1 million Ukrainians wouldn’t be dead. Europe’s leaders went along with it because they are Washington’s vassals.
Acknowledging that narrative would allow for trade and eventual detente with Russia. But first, the vassals have to be removed - at the ballot box.
Russia played a gambit. Based on what Putin was told I can understand why he though he could take Ukraine easily. But Putin and his regime is old. A bitch gone in the teeth. The government sclerotic. They had stockpiles of weapons from Soviet times and lots of cheap soldiers from the East. Now mostly exhausted. Point is, the war would be over it Russia had retreated after the first few months. I get it, you probably think Russia is strong and will win. We disagree. (though there will be no winners).
I don't believe anyone is going to do business with Putin. They'll wait until he's gone. Then we'll see. If his regime can reconstitute itself then I believe you will be right. If they can't, if Russia's government crumbles, then Europe and Asia will move in.
Absolutely right. Europe must fight to hell and together to remain independent and free. This is a new world where the weak and disarmed will be crushed or have to submit into servitude.
A nuclear deterrent? So has Europe, but not enough unity. A truly united Europe is their only realistic chance to escape enslavement either by fascist U.S. and Russia allied together. So, I couldn't disagree more with this piece here of pure Putin propaganda. Our freedom is priceless.
Charming simply charming Joe, the English language is such a beautiful rich language and yet you use the language of the gutter, what do you think that says about you, a clueless moron or educated and reasoning🤔
"Europe has abruptly lost its most important supplier of energy, Russia."
My goodness, how did that happen?
Might it have something to do with a bad actor instigating a war and sabotaging a pipeline?
Well, if there's no hope of reconciliation with your Russian neighbour, Canada is willing to supply Europe's energy needs. We'll need some of that investment to build a pipeline from Alberta to the east. You could also invest in factories in Ontario, and we'll ship you the finished product. Either way, Canada is open for business. The US doesn't need anything from us, so we need to find new customers. Please give us a call.
The article covers this in some ways. What Europe needs is a full energy profile. This includes diesel and coal, as well as LNG. Without a complete energy profile, it will not have the industrial economy to be able to afford what Canada can readily provide. European manufacturing is all but gone. Canada currently has no infrastructure to supply Europe anyway. What could Canada do at this point? It appears the current government wants to align itself with Europe rather than with the US. Strategically, why would a country want to lock itself onto a failing continent, when there is a willing partner right next door? It's madness.
In a rational world, Canada the US and Mexico would work closely together with the variety of resources is has. Europe and Russia would do the same. China and the Middle East would be another obvious energy alliance. Africa has just about everything it needs as it is a massive continent.
With trade comes trust. But, as energy is removed from the system, it starts to crumble. It's difficult to remain rational when everyone is scrambling for what remains.
My comment was intended to be tongue-in-cheek, yet Canada's relationship with the US has been damaged by Trump's antics. His administration is endangering our integrated economy. As long as we don't know what US policy will be, the logical response is to diversify who we trade with, and to make Canada more self-sufficient.
Europe is one outlet for trade and other agreements. China may be another. If taken seriously, this transition might take decades. On the other hand, the clown show south of the border may be over in 2 or 4 years.
Europe's re-militarization plan is far-fetched. I predict Europeans will put an end to it in subsequent elections. Trade and truce with Russia would be so much easier.
It’s sad and concerning Bob, but I’m afraid this is the direction humanity is heading in, for the majority in the global north myself included we’ve been able to sit in safety in our armchairs or lounge on our sofas and watch conflicts in far away places, whilst ordering the latest gizmo on borrowed fiat money, from far away countries a result of globalisation. But now energy sources and tech minerals are becoming harder to obtain, resulting in inflation, that creates tensions as we see a world that is no longer improving, instead slowly declining. Still we can bury our heads in the metaverse or follow some celebrity, anything but face up to a world collapsing around us. And so like it or not we’re on the way back to a 17th feudal peasant lifestyle, how many will survive on the way, now that’s the real conflict🤔
Hi HS, I was following along and agreed with you up until the end, where you wrote "Russians will not fool around should push come to shove, though. They would rather nuke a few European cities first, than let themselves dragged into yet another European war potentially lasting for decades, draining their resource base." Personally, I see Putin and the Russian oligarchy as completely subservient to the international financial layers above that of the nation state - this is why Putin went along with the COVID scam entirely (as did China), why he is busy implementing Agenda 2030 including biometrics and CBDC, why he is not fighting the Ukraine war like it is a real war (refusing to bomb the Dniper bridges, continuing to supply the Ukraine military with unlimited oil, not attacking key Ukrainian facilities or personnel, etc).
Do not expect that the useful idiot writting on this channel shares your views. He is enamoured with the clube of rome vision and buys into the climate change non sense. Anyone who is not able to see that:
1. Covid was a complete and uter scam.
2. All the"great" countries in the world implemented the same totalitarian destructive measures almost in sync.
is nothing more than a pathetic piece of brainwashed moronic future chipped slave, if he survives the injections.
But anyone that was able to come to the right conclusion during the plandemic understands perfectly now that all the governments around the world work in sync and that the fake wars are nothing more than a propaganda mean to keep the masses on fear.
I fully agree with you that Russia is not the threat that European leaders say it is to sell their ill-conceived rearmament policies to their population. It seems to me obvious for all the good reasons you gave.
But I'm still a bit surprised to find here this argument I believe to be quite simplistic which consists to divide the distance between the actuel front and some European capital to infer how many years it could take to the Russian army to get there. It's deceptive and pointless.
Since the summer of 2022, this war is much more a war of attrition than anything else. The Russian strategy is to destroy the Ukrainian army on the spot while preserving their own army as much as they can. So, at one point the Ukrainian army could well break. And run pretty much like the Syrian one did a few weeks ago, letting the Russian move much faster than they did so far.
And actually, the West's hopes were always (and still are, despite everything and as far as Europeans are concerned) the exact opposite : that the Russian army will end up breaking and retreat back as fast as it can.
And to take the logic a step further, perhaps this is exactly why Russia is not in such a hurry to negotiate. Russia might prefer a clear-cut military victory to a situation reminiscent of Germany in 1918, and a Ukraine where the idea persists that victory would have been possible if only the politicians hadn't betrayed...
We don't really know the number of soldiers lost on both sides. The people I find most reputable are those on the Judging Freedom channel, which includes high-profile academics, ex-military men, past advisors to Secretary of State Powell, ex-CIA staffers, high-profile economists, weapons inspectors and independent journalists. The best consensus on the numbers seems to be 1 million + Ukrainian soldiers dead and 300,000 + Russian soldiers dead. But again, we don't really know. The western lamestream media reports of more Russians killed than Ukrainians are obviously lies.
Right but they’re paid liars and all members of the intelligence community.
They’ve predicted nothing so successfully so far.
They claimed 2 million Ukrainian dead before the first year of fighting was done 🤡. They said it would be over within two weeks, then two months then two years.
The ratio is often given for something around 5 to 1 in favor of the Russians.
Mainly because most soldiers die from artillery, and the Russians have more. And also because the Ukrainians (supposedly) have less capacity to evacuate the wounded during the crucial first hour.
Beside the estimates circulating are often rather confusing, sometimes counting the dead and sometimes the soldiers out of action (dead, severely wounded, MIA, POW).
But in any case, Russia has a much bigger population.
I agree with you, Tris, except that Russia now allied to the U.S. with a similar fascist ideology is an existential threat to Europe, as the U.S. is to Canada. At least Europe has the nuclear power (Canada doesn't stand a chance). This new world is not the same at all; it is a world of territorial empires around zones of influence and China will also get it's share; the Europeans better understand that very quickly, for nobody else than Russia is interested. Putin's policy doesn't make any sense nor his aggressive propaganda, if you don't realize that.
I will not call it "fascist ideology" of course… But yes, Trump's America will rather enter with some form of cooperation with Russia rather than the pointless and counter-productive confrontation favored by the Biden's administration.
Now, the question for Europe is what can it do about that. And what can it get by following alone a confrontation policy that was always against its own interest.
But again, this is just part of the issue. As European leaders need this confrontation to impose their agenda on their recalcitrant populations and, ultimately, try to keep their position and advantages against all odds.
And the escalation it can lead to is the main danger...
It's only my rather untutored opinion but I sense your central premise is correct. Europe is on its own and holds little value for potential invaders. I do think Putin has a destabilisation strategy though which he prosecutes digitally but militarily is unlikely to launch further invasions.
I suspect on the European side there is a hope that if they can ride out the next 4 years there's a chance of business as usual returning. This would of course be a big mistake and lose much time in addressing the real issue which is how Europe is going to make itself relevant to Europe - never mind the rest of the world.
This article is totally biased towards Russia who is spending about 40 per cent of its budget on the military, US is spending about trillion on their military, China is spending hundreds of billions, all off them willing to use those weapons.
According to what logic does HS conclude that Europe should be unable to defend themselves - Russian?
Europe should arm themselves with all modern weapons including nuclear, so that blackmailers like Putin and Trump cannot blackmail them.
Europe? A democracy? Not for the last few decades it has not.
For Russia, it is always existential. They have always been the primary target for some reason. Of course they are excellent with their meagre military budget. Because of it, they have concentrated on defensive missile systems.
The logic you are looking for is... without ample energy and material resources close to your manufacturing, you cannot wage war. But with these things, you can continue to advance your warfare technology, and hope its enough to keep the barbarians out.
There are many resources around the world for Europe as they are for other countries. Democracy, yes, Europe is looking after their people better than any other country. They have the ruthless thugs on their border that threaten using nuclear weapons every time Ukraine gets some more powerful weapons as the Russians are patethically incompetent that they have to import North Koreans to fight their battles. Europe must be able to defend itself to keep cowardly bullies at bay.
The issue is not so much whether Europe should rearm but whether it could.
And if it can not rearm (or not rearm enough) to impose itself by force, what other policy it should follow. Probably a policy aimed at de-escalation rather than the opposite.
But unfortunately, it's not only about war in Ukraine. There are internal issues in Europe that push its leaders to see this war as an political opportunity for themself and a way to force a federal agenda on their population...
Beside, Europe will still look like a democracy. People will still be able (at least for the time being) to say they disagree with their leaders without fear to have the police break their door in the middle of the night. But that doesn't mean they can change them. See what happened in Romania for exemple...
As part of my bucket list, my wife and I are saving up for a trip to Europe(London, Paris, etc.)late
next year and I'm beginning to have my doubts that the trip would be worth it given the direction
the EU is heading in. A year and a half from now, god only knows what the state of affairs and the attitude towards US tourists will be. It is really sad that the EU is being controlled by fools.
Go to Hungary. We spent a week there in November and had a great time. Good food, cheap hotels, reliable transportation and the people are very nice. Some areas of Budapest can be dodgy, but the Jewish Quarter on the Buda side of the river is cheap and secure. Flights are cheap from many European cities and everyone speaks at least some English and they love Americans. A flight to Paris would be a good place to start. The Parisians have been complaining about - and rude to - the Americans since WWII, so it will likely be the same in the future as it is now. Keep your voice down and learn a couple of French phrases and you should do okay. I have been to London several times and unfortunately, it is a bit dodgy now. We know lots of Brit ex-pats here in France and they are just appalled at how rundown it has become, both in infrastructure and the social graces.
Russia is a vast and very underpopulated land, stretching through 12 time zones...Russia needs people, not land, and the major motive behind protecting the Crimea was protecting the Russian population there, which was being systematically murdered by the neonazis(Azov battalions)...I can't imagine why any country would want the Europeans, who are elderly...and certainly not the 3d world immigrants they have allowed in....
Russia also has a vast resource base, most of which has not been developed yet...That's why the large American oil companies have refused to abandon their Russian contacts and contracts...they have to be involved in developing those resources...That's why Trump is right to be focusing on the Arctic, but unfortunately doesn't have the technology to do anything about it yet, while Russia has nuclear icebreakers...
As to military spending being GDP...right, build a tank, it gets blown up a month later, or abandoned in Afghanistan....completely worthless...
The EU banks, including the City of London Rothschild group, are in serious financial trouble, having bet on a Ukraine win...That's why they want a war, with debts canceled...
It's true that Europe has its internal problems. It's also true that it would be best to de-escalate. However, this war in Ukraine has substantially united Europe as well as Trump. I don't see how Europe could de-escalate short of giving Ukraine to Putin
Agresor must de-escalate and they will not do it until Europe has the teeth to bite.
The four oblasts that Russia annexed, and now controls, will end up in Russian hands anyway. Let's see what happens with the spring offensive. My indicator town is Pokrovsk. It is a hub for Ukrainian supply chains. Once it is taken, it will be an easier path to the Dnipr.
Let me be a bit clearer. It does NOT matter whether Ukraine and Europe will accept Russia's occupation and assimilation of the four oblasts. It is a done deal.
There is so much misinformation that it is difficult to assess the situation. However, I am sure of one thing: we, the people, work and behave without using a fraction of our potential, and our behaviour is routine, which we can change as necessary.
Europe needs to release this additional energy and focus on helping Ukraine and increasing their collaboration; they will find that they have enough cognitive energy and material to give Ukraine sufficient weapons and ammunition.
Europe should also release 300 billion and use it for buying weapons.
The European Union has about 450 million people and an impressive economy. This scenario would take America and uncertainty out of the equation. This would also give Ukraine and Russia certainty that Ukraine will have enough armament to fight as long as it takes.
Russia’s economy will not be able to sustain this war for too long, and it also has internal problems with different nationalities. There is the possibility of major upheavals that will bring Russia to its knees, and Ukrainians would get all their lands back, including Crimea.
This scenario would bring defeat for Russia, and Europe would remove the threat permanently.
A well-thought out piece, BUT it is limited to the context of European states building weapons for their own use and storage. Of course this does not generate as much growth in the economy as selling them to every bellicose country in the world with a tinpot dictator who is tired of relying on machine guns mounted on Toyota pickups. Since soldiers are the ultimate consumers - destroying capital without leveraging a product or service throughout the economy - the Europeans would be shooting themselves in their collective feet IF they limit their arms buildup to their own armies. This is not likely to happen. Please note that Emanuelle Macron was elected President of France in 2017 and immediately started aping the Americans by: 1) instituting tax cuts for the rich and super-rich, 2) increasing arms production for export, and 3) using deficit spending to further grow the economy. In 2016, France was the fourth largest arms exporter in the world. By 2020, it had leapt into third place. Now, the latest numbers from Statista indicate it has replaced China as 2nd leading arms exporter in the world. [The US is #1 of course and has been for many years.] I am sure Germany and Poland would just LOVE to sell arms to African and Asian countries for their brushfire wars. And of course the Saudis will buy anything you can sell them that will go boom.
One of the reasons for the arms buildup in Europe is to justify waiving restrictions on deficit spending, as is blatantly the case in Germany. Keep in mind that France's deficit to GDP ratio is nearly as high as the US (in the 120-130% range). I live in France and people here whine all the time about prices and taxes - but they have it VERY GOOD! We just returned from a short trip to Rome and Sicily a couple of weeks ago and Italy is now more expensive than France in a lot of ways: food, restaurants, hotels, and transportation. If Italy made more mortars than rototillers in Milan, their economy would be doing better
Why would Russia invade Ukraine because of NATO? Follow your own logic, Europe doesn't have the energy to expand. But it tried by pushing Russia to lower its energy prices. Or expecting Russia to pick up the slack from Europe's delusional "green energy" policies.
Also, following your own logic, Europe MUST gain access to energy, just like WWII. Where is that energy? Russia. Europe will try to negotiate with Asia to divide Russia up. To get a weak Russian government in place to do the bidding of Europe and Asia.
Putin has miscalculated. Europeans can get nasty-as-you-like. It's just a matter of time before U.S. natural gas becoming untenable. At that point Europe will have to go take Russia's oil/gas by force or suffer the fate you described.
That's impossible. Russia has a nuclear deterrent.
It's a risk the Europeans will have to take.
It's certain death.
Not too long ago, Germany and other nations were happy buying Russian gas. But the US did not approve.
I worry more about US using tactical nukes than Russia ;)
I don't see that the U.S. cared about Europe buying oil/gas from Russia. After all, it let Russia take Crimea, parts of the Donbas, etc. Also, when the invasion started Biden wrote Ukraine off. I'm no Biden fan, but his administration at least understood the history of Russia and Europe. If Europe wanted to give Ukraine to Russia it could. If it didn't, the cost would be buying US gas and the US would give Ukraine its stockpile of weapons (headed for scrapheap anyway).
Now Trump, aligned with Israel's interests at becoming the regional power of the Middle East, and it's close ties to Russian oil/gas (20% of Israelis are of Russian descent), he is trying to broker a deal that would give Russia Ukraine, Israel greater power in the ME and Iran a way out of the sanctions. On paper, the Trump administrations ideas can work.
On paper. As I wrote, when it's all gamed out Europe can either become a vassal to the U.S. and Russia or it can fight. I'm talking realpolitik here. I have no idea what they'll do.
I do know Russia and Israel will fight scorched Earth to achieve their goals. I know because they're already doing so.
If Washington hadn’t interfered, Russian gas would be flowing and over 1 million Ukrainians wouldn’t be dead. Europe’s leaders went along with it because they are Washington’s vassals.
Acknowledging that narrative would allow for trade and eventual detente with Russia. But first, the vassals have to be removed - at the ballot box.
Russia played a gambit. Based on what Putin was told I can understand why he though he could take Ukraine easily. But Putin and his regime is old. A bitch gone in the teeth. The government sclerotic. They had stockpiles of weapons from Soviet times and lots of cheap soldiers from the East. Now mostly exhausted. Point is, the war would be over it Russia had retreated after the first few months. I get it, you probably think Russia is strong and will win. We disagree. (though there will be no winners).
I don't believe anyone is going to do business with Putin. They'll wait until he's gone. Then we'll see. If his regime can reconstitute itself then I believe you will be right. If they can't, if Russia's government crumbles, then Europe and Asia will move in.
Absolutely right. Europe must fight to hell and together to remain independent and free. This is a new world where the weak and disarmed will be crushed or have to submit into servitude.
Sad but true, take wars out of world history and you're left with a 7 page pamphlet ;)
A nuclear deterrent? So has Europe, but not enough unity. A truly united Europe is their only realistic chance to escape enslavement either by fascist U.S. and Russia allied together. So, I couldn't disagree more with this piece here of pure Putin propaganda. Our freedom is priceless.
Why dont you go and fight the russians yourself pathetic armchair general clown?
I wasn't making a political argument about Russia one way or the other.
Yes you did you fucking lying cunt. Sod off and go fight the rusks.
Who can accept that insults are appropriate here? This is what trolls do when they lose an argument.
Charming simply charming Joe, the English language is such a beautiful rich language and yet you use the language of the gutter, what do you think that says about you, a clueless moron or educated and reasoning🤔
The financiers in and aligned with the City of London need a big war to cover their bad bets on asset-stripping Russia, as they did in the 1990s.
That failed, and they are losing Ukrainian assets too. A lot of leveraged loans become problematic when that is admitted.
It is European/"western" finance which is existentially threatened.
The politicians are bought and blackmailed.
The people are the collateral for this "odious debt", which should be repudiated by citizens of these countries, not paid in blood.
"Europe has abruptly lost its most important supplier of energy, Russia."
My goodness, how did that happen?
Might it have something to do with a bad actor instigating a war and sabotaging a pipeline?
Well, if there's no hope of reconciliation with your Russian neighbour, Canada is willing to supply Europe's energy needs. We'll need some of that investment to build a pipeline from Alberta to the east. You could also invest in factories in Ontario, and we'll ship you the finished product. Either way, Canada is open for business. The US doesn't need anything from us, so we need to find new customers. Please give us a call.
The article covers this in some ways. What Europe needs is a full energy profile. This includes diesel and coal, as well as LNG. Without a complete energy profile, it will not have the industrial economy to be able to afford what Canada can readily provide. European manufacturing is all but gone. Canada currently has no infrastructure to supply Europe anyway. What could Canada do at this point? It appears the current government wants to align itself with Europe rather than with the US. Strategically, why would a country want to lock itself onto a failing continent, when there is a willing partner right next door? It's madness.
In a rational world, Canada the US and Mexico would work closely together with the variety of resources is has. Europe and Russia would do the same. China and the Middle East would be another obvious energy alliance. Africa has just about everything it needs as it is a massive continent.
With trade comes trust. But, as energy is removed from the system, it starts to crumble. It's difficult to remain rational when everyone is scrambling for what remains.
My comment was intended to be tongue-in-cheek, yet Canada's relationship with the US has been damaged by Trump's antics. His administration is endangering our integrated economy. As long as we don't know what US policy will be, the logical response is to diversify who we trade with, and to make Canada more self-sufficient.
Europe is one outlet for trade and other agreements. China may be another. If taken seriously, this transition might take decades. On the other hand, the clown show south of the border may be over in 2 or 4 years.
Europe's re-militarization plan is far-fetched. I predict Europeans will put an end to it in subsequent elections. Trade and truce with Russia would be so much easier.
It’s sad and concerning Bob, but I’m afraid this is the direction humanity is heading in, for the majority in the global north myself included we’ve been able to sit in safety in our armchairs or lounge on our sofas and watch conflicts in far away places, whilst ordering the latest gizmo on borrowed fiat money, from far away countries a result of globalisation. But now energy sources and tech minerals are becoming harder to obtain, resulting in inflation, that creates tensions as we see a world that is no longer improving, instead slowly declining. Still we can bury our heads in the metaverse or follow some celebrity, anything but face up to a world collapsing around us. And so like it or not we’re on the way back to a 17th feudal peasant lifestyle, how many will survive on the way, now that’s the real conflict🤔
Hi HS, I was following along and agreed with you up until the end, where you wrote "Russians will not fool around should push come to shove, though. They would rather nuke a few European cities first, than let themselves dragged into yet another European war potentially lasting for decades, draining their resource base." Personally, I see Putin and the Russian oligarchy as completely subservient to the international financial layers above that of the nation state - this is why Putin went along with the COVID scam entirely (as did China), why he is busy implementing Agenda 2030 including biometrics and CBDC, why he is not fighting the Ukraine war like it is a real war (refusing to bomb the Dniper bridges, continuing to supply the Ukraine military with unlimited oil, not attacking key Ukrainian facilities or personnel, etc).
I discuss these aspects here and here: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-global-world-order-is-centralized , https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-ukraine-war-did-not-take-place , and anyone who believes the Ukrainian war is being fought as a "real war" (even though the endless dead bodies are real) must have answers to Strelkov's razor-sharp list of questions about the nature of the war: https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/p/39-questions-about-the-war-in-ukraine
Fascinating! I think you go too far in the cabal running the world stuff, but most of what you write makes sense to me!
Do not expect that the useful idiot writting on this channel shares your views. He is enamoured with the clube of rome vision and buys into the climate change non sense. Anyone who is not able to see that:
1. Covid was a complete and uter scam.
2. All the"great" countries in the world implemented the same totalitarian destructive measures almost in sync.
is nothing more than a pathetic piece of brainwashed moronic future chipped slave, if he survives the injections.
But anyone that was able to come to the right conclusion during the plandemic understands perfectly now that all the governments around the world work in sync and that the fake wars are nothing more than a propaganda mean to keep the masses on fear.
This is beautifully truthful hyper acccurized commentary…something most people less than Rurik could never conceive…**Cheers*.
I fully agree with you that Russia is not the threat that European leaders say it is to sell their ill-conceived rearmament policies to their population. It seems to me obvious for all the good reasons you gave.
But I'm still a bit surprised to find here this argument I believe to be quite simplistic which consists to divide the distance between the actuel front and some European capital to infer how many years it could take to the Russian army to get there. It's deceptive and pointless.
Since the summer of 2022, this war is much more a war of attrition than anything else. The Russian strategy is to destroy the Ukrainian army on the spot while preserving their own army as much as they can. So, at one point the Ukrainian army could well break. And run pretty much like the Syrian one did a few weeks ago, letting the Russian move much faster than they did so far.
And actually, the West's hopes were always (and still are, despite everything and as far as Europeans are concerned) the exact opposite : that the Russian army will end up breaking and retreat back as fast as it can.
And to take the logic a step further, perhaps this is exactly why Russia is not in such a hurry to negotiate. Russia might prefer a clear-cut military victory to a situation reminiscent of Germany in 1918, and a Ukraine where the idea persists that victory would have been possible if only the politicians hadn't betrayed...
They want to ramp up the war racket again thats all. It is a great way to turn tax money into weapons contracts for oligarchs.
https://gavinmounsey.substack.com/p/lest-we-forget-war-is-a-racket
Right but Russia has lost more men.
We don't really know the number of soldiers lost on both sides. The people I find most reputable are those on the Judging Freedom channel, which includes high-profile academics, ex-military men, past advisors to Secretary of State Powell, ex-CIA staffers, high-profile economists, weapons inspectors and independent journalists. The best consensus on the numbers seems to be 1 million + Ukrainian soldiers dead and 300,000 + Russian soldiers dead. But again, we don't really know. The western lamestream media reports of more Russians killed than Ukrainians are obviously lies.
Right but they’re paid liars and all members of the intelligence community.
They’ve predicted nothing so successfully so far.
They claimed 2 million Ukrainian dead before the first year of fighting was done 🤡. They said it would be over within two weeks, then two months then two years.
The ratio is often given for something around 5 to 1 in favor of the Russians.
Mainly because most soldiers die from artillery, and the Russians have more. And also because the Ukrainians (supposedly) have less capacity to evacuate the wounded during the crucial first hour.
Beside the estimates circulating are often rather confusing, sometimes counting the dead and sometimes the soldiers out of action (dead, severely wounded, MIA, POW).
But in any case, Russia has a much bigger population.
I agree with you, Tris, except that Russia now allied to the U.S. with a similar fascist ideology is an existential threat to Europe, as the U.S. is to Canada. At least Europe has the nuclear power (Canada doesn't stand a chance). This new world is not the same at all; it is a world of territorial empires around zones of influence and China will also get it's share; the Europeans better understand that very quickly, for nobody else than Russia is interested. Putin's policy doesn't make any sense nor his aggressive propaganda, if you don't realize that.
I will not call it "fascist ideology" of course… But yes, Trump's America will rather enter with some form of cooperation with Russia rather than the pointless and counter-productive confrontation favored by the Biden's administration.
Now, the question for Europe is what can it do about that. And what can it get by following alone a confrontation policy that was always against its own interest.
But again, this is just part of the issue. As European leaders need this confrontation to impose their agenda on their recalcitrant populations and, ultimately, try to keep their position and advantages against all odds.
And the escalation it can lead to is the main danger...
If Trump and Putin are not fascists, who is?
Mussolini. And he is dead for more than 70 years.
It's only my rather untutored opinion but I sense your central premise is correct. Europe is on its own and holds little value for potential invaders. I do think Putin has a destabilisation strategy though which he prosecutes digitally but militarily is unlikely to launch further invasions.
I suspect on the European side there is a hope that if they can ride out the next 4 years there's a chance of business as usual returning. This would of course be a big mistake and lose much time in addressing the real issue which is how Europe is going to make itself relevant to Europe - never mind the rest of the world.
This article is totally biased towards Russia who is spending about 40 per cent of its budget on the military, US is spending about trillion on their military, China is spending hundreds of billions, all off them willing to use those weapons.
According to what logic does HS conclude that Europe should be unable to defend themselves - Russian?
Europe should arm themselves with all modern weapons including nuclear, so that blackmailers like Putin and Trump cannot blackmail them.
Europe is our only hope to live in democracy.
Europe? A democracy? Not for the last few decades it has not.
For Russia, it is always existential. They have always been the primary target for some reason. Of course they are excellent with their meagre military budget. Because of it, they have concentrated on defensive missile systems.
The logic you are looking for is... without ample energy and material resources close to your manufacturing, you cannot wage war. But with these things, you can continue to advance your warfare technology, and hope its enough to keep the barbarians out.
There are many resources around the world for Europe as they are for other countries. Democracy, yes, Europe is looking after their people better than any other country. They have the ruthless thugs on their border that threaten using nuclear weapons every time Ukraine gets some more powerful weapons as the Russians are patethically incompetent that they have to import North Koreans to fight their battles. Europe must be able to defend itself to keep cowardly bullies at bay.
The issue is not so much whether Europe should rearm but whether it could.
And if it can not rearm (or not rearm enough) to impose itself by force, what other policy it should follow. Probably a policy aimed at de-escalation rather than the opposite.
But unfortunately, it's not only about war in Ukraine. There are internal issues in Europe that push its leaders to see this war as an political opportunity for themself and a way to force a federal agenda on their population...
Beside, Europe will still look like a democracy. People will still be able (at least for the time being) to say they disagree with their leaders without fear to have the police break their door in the middle of the night. But that doesn't mean they can change them. See what happened in Romania for exemple...
Always enjoy your essays THS.
As part of my bucket list, my wife and I are saving up for a trip to Europe(London, Paris, etc.)late
next year and I'm beginning to have my doubts that the trip would be worth it given the direction
the EU is heading in. A year and a half from now, god only knows what the state of affairs and the attitude towards US tourists will be. It is really sad that the EU is being controlled by fools.
Go to Hungary. We spent a week there in November and had a great time. Good food, cheap hotels, reliable transportation and the people are very nice. Some areas of Budapest can be dodgy, but the Jewish Quarter on the Buda side of the river is cheap and secure. Flights are cheap from many European cities and everyone speaks at least some English and they love Americans. A flight to Paris would be a good place to start. The Parisians have been complaining about - and rude to - the Americans since WWII, so it will likely be the same in the future as it is now. Keep your voice down and learn a couple of French phrases and you should do okay. I have been to London several times and unfortunately, it is a bit dodgy now. We know lots of Brit ex-pats here in France and they are just appalled at how rundown it has become, both in infrastructure and the social graces.
Paris sucks
Russia is a vast and very underpopulated land, stretching through 12 time zones...Russia needs people, not land, and the major motive behind protecting the Crimea was protecting the Russian population there, which was being systematically murdered by the neonazis(Azov battalions)...I can't imagine why any country would want the Europeans, who are elderly...and certainly not the 3d world immigrants they have allowed in....
Russia also has a vast resource base, most of which has not been developed yet...That's why the large American oil companies have refused to abandon their Russian contacts and contracts...they have to be involved in developing those resources...That's why Trump is right to be focusing on the Arctic, but unfortunately doesn't have the technology to do anything about it yet, while Russia has nuclear icebreakers...
As to military spending being GDP...right, build a tank, it gets blown up a month later, or abandoned in Afghanistan....completely worthless...
The EU banks, including the City of London Rothschild group, are in serious financial trouble, having bet on a Ukraine win...That's why they want a war, with debts canceled...
Putin doesn’t care about Russians in Crimea or anywhere sadly
It's true that Europe has its internal problems. It's also true that it would be best to de-escalate. However, this war in Ukraine has substantially united Europe as well as Trump. I don't see how Europe could de-escalate short of giving Ukraine to Putin
Agresor must de-escalate and they will not do it until Europe has the teeth to bite.
The four oblasts that Russia annexed, and now controls, will end up in Russian hands anyway. Let's see what happens with the spring offensive. My indicator town is Pokrovsk. It is a hub for Ukrainian supply chains. Once it is taken, it will be an easier path to the Dnipr.
I don’t think that Ukraine and Europe will accept this. If they do Putin has won and it is going to be a bad news for the world.
Let me be a bit clearer. It does NOT matter whether Ukraine and Europe will accept Russia's occupation and assimilation of the four oblasts. It is a done deal.
I hope not
What do you suggest?
There is so much misinformation that it is difficult to assess the situation. However, I am sure of one thing: we, the people, work and behave without using a fraction of our potential, and our behaviour is routine, which we can change as necessary.
Europe needs to release this additional energy and focus on helping Ukraine and increasing their collaboration; they will find that they have enough cognitive energy and material to give Ukraine sufficient weapons and ammunition.
Europe should also release 300 billion and use it for buying weapons.
The European Union has about 450 million people and an impressive economy. This scenario would take America and uncertainty out of the equation. This would also give Ukraine and Russia certainty that Ukraine will have enough armament to fight as long as it takes.
Russia’s economy will not be able to sustain this war for too long, and it also has internal problems with different nationalities. There is the possibility of major upheavals that will bring Russia to its knees, and Ukrainians would get all their lands back, including Crimea.
This scenario would bring defeat for Russia, and Europe would remove the threat permanently.
A well-thought out piece, BUT it is limited to the context of European states building weapons for their own use and storage. Of course this does not generate as much growth in the economy as selling them to every bellicose country in the world with a tinpot dictator who is tired of relying on machine guns mounted on Toyota pickups. Since soldiers are the ultimate consumers - destroying capital without leveraging a product or service throughout the economy - the Europeans would be shooting themselves in their collective feet IF they limit their arms buildup to their own armies. This is not likely to happen. Please note that Emanuelle Macron was elected President of France in 2017 and immediately started aping the Americans by: 1) instituting tax cuts for the rich and super-rich, 2) increasing arms production for export, and 3) using deficit spending to further grow the economy. In 2016, France was the fourth largest arms exporter in the world. By 2020, it had leapt into third place. Now, the latest numbers from Statista indicate it has replaced China as 2nd leading arms exporter in the world. [The US is #1 of course and has been for many years.] I am sure Germany and Poland would just LOVE to sell arms to African and Asian countries for their brushfire wars. And of course the Saudis will buy anything you can sell them that will go boom.
One of the reasons for the arms buildup in Europe is to justify waiving restrictions on deficit spending, as is blatantly the case in Germany. Keep in mind that France's deficit to GDP ratio is nearly as high as the US (in the 120-130% range). I live in France and people here whine all the time about prices and taxes - but they have it VERY GOOD! We just returned from a short trip to Rome and Sicily a couple of weeks ago and Italy is now more expensive than France in a lot of ways: food, restaurants, hotels, and transportation. If Italy made more mortars than rototillers in Milan, their economy would be doing better
Europe has abruptly lost its most important supplier of energy, Russia.
Wrong:
Russia Reclaims Its Position as Europe’s Top Gas Supplier
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Russia-Reclaims-Its-Position-as-Europes-Top-Gas-Supplier.html
MSM Finally Confirms Ukraine War is Fake
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/msm-finally-confirms-ukraine-war
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/the-ukraine-war-is-fake
FYI - the re- militarization story is just another lie... it wont happen