Warnings from pro-military hardliners were ignored. Is it time to start listening?
Maybe, only one question should be asked: Why are hundreds of thousands of young men in Ukraine and Russia being viewed by ruling elites as "disposable collateral damage" to expedite a global economic restructuring known as multipolarism, that in the end will be neofeudalism for the remaining working-class.
Corruption in Russia: always even worse than you imagined, even when you think you know all about it
It should be mentioned that 40+ military schools were closed just before the war, that list was circulated on Telegram, and many Russians in the comments confirmed the truth of it. I want to say, as a Serbian patriot and a Russophile, that corruption is INTENTIONAL and that it goes from the top to the bottom, it is the way the globalists destroy the Russian army and economy, they set up their cadres to destroy everything. This today is just a continuation of Perestroika, when Gorbachev tore up the state and sold everything at the flea market. And I believe the war started according to the orders of the globalists, exactly when the narrative of the pandemic began to weaken, to fill the world media with news from the battlefield. God pity those people on both sides who die there, and honor to the murdered hero Mozgovoi, the former commander of Donbass, who was assassinated because he said that the war is an unnecessary slaughterhouse where the oligarchs of both sides make money. Once again, corruption is INTENTIONAL, it is a means of destroying Russia. The Russian government is treacherous and works for the globalists, Strelkov, that is, Girkin, knows what they are like, and can no longer remain silent.
It's quite something that even the actual Russian patriot outlets are questioning the sPEciAL MiLiTArY oPErAtiOn more than the Z-loving, English-speaking alt media. Unfortunately I feel many in the English alt media will be dismissing this as wESteRn bACkEd mEDiA or fAKe iNDePeNdEnT mEDiA, seeing as how they don't know of/don't care for Russian-speaking outlets and only follow English RT or Sergei Lavrov memos for news from Russia (because of course only state media can tell the truth now). Don't consider myself a patriot by any means but I for sure agree with some of the sentiments outlined- that those, both mainstream and alt/indie/new/online/whatever the pundits wanna call themselves, who capitalised and subsequently profited off of making bold, CAPITALISED, sensationalist news/headlines on the war should have to answer for their words.
From DD (TG): "Colonel-General Mikhail Mizintsev, Deputy Minister of Defense for Logistics, has been fired. He held this position from September 24, 2022, after Army General Bulgakov was fired."
I have been meaning to find this again - and did so: 65 minutes but if you even get 5,10 minutes in you may achieve some sort of synthetic ah-ha insight. Guy starts with the Russian word for lying (one of two): Vranyo - culture of lying - "constant, incessant lying at all levels of command" ... "to their command, to their men, to themselves"
The last Russian emperor was related by blood and by marriage (since, like a Jew, he married a cousin) to the UK's imperial regime which fostered the rise of Bolshevism in WW1, while Stalin happily hosted the puppets of Western corporate power Churchill and Roosevelt to coordinate WW2 and then signed off on the fabrication of the Rothschild Neocolony in British Palestine.
It's nothing new, just that the romantic way they tell stories of the "Great Patriotic War" and shit is meant to conceal the realities underlying the sacrifice of millions of Russian taxcattle. Today's WHO, "free trade", and UN-friendly Kremlin continues with the old traditions.
A nonsense article by someone who has no grasp of strategy and military operations.
1- The first priority is to avoid nuclear war.
2- Demilitarisation of Ukraine is proceeding as planned. In fact, NATO is also being demilitarised as their industrial capacity to replace weapons and ammunition is simply not there.
3- Denazification is proceeding at the rate of several hundred Nazis per day.
Don't forget that less than 15% of Russia's forces are committed in Ukraine. Russia has long borders.
𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐚𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐔𝐤𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞
trivia time...what do Zelenzky...Blinken and Nuland have in common...hint they're from the same ethnic tribe as Leon Trotsky...and this guy....https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html
For the record, I haven't pick a side, although you might say I have a 'leaning'.
Russia has poison shots and seemingly no rampant child mutilation surgeries.
America has poison shots, rampant child mutilation surgeries, and now bills trying to legalise pedophilia.
I know which side I would prefer to lose if I *had* to make a choice. But I'm more of a third option kind of guy: have them annihilate each other, or better yet, have the public rise up against their globalist paymasters and toss them into the fiery pits!
>"nothing has gone according to plan, and little (or nothing) has been done to fix this."
The line from the Dark Knight movie addresses this quite well: "peace has cost you your strength, victory has defeated you".
Bane taunts the Dark Knight, saying he has become complacent because he hasn't fought any real enemies before, and thus isn't prepared for when a real threat (like Bane) turns up.
Likewise, globalism is a flawed policy because it presumes all elements are cooperative (it presumes 'peace' and 'victory'); the moment an element becomes uncooperative it collapses. If China denies you raw metals, you can't import the resources needed to manufacture. If Saudi Arabia denies you oil, you can't burn fuel or make oil-based products. If the US denies you food, you can't eat. As soon as a vacuum occurs, so does competition.
No country is what you'd call 'sovereign' (or 'self-sufficient' or 'isolationist') because all of them became co-dependents upon the flawed policy of globalism. Russia could go into a war economy... but what could they domestically manufacture?
Domestic manufacture during WW2 in Britain required that the weapons be designed to the available resources, and not the other way around. Globalism presumes abundance of resources of any type, and so resources fit the design, not the design resources.
So when a globalist-dependent war machine goes to war with another globalist element, suddenly there's a problem because the resources aren't abundant. Thus you can't manufacture goods. Ironically, the US's biggest source of imported bullets was Russia. Imagine, your First Amendment protections contingent on importing bullets from a 'much hated enemy'. RAND Corporation really did not think through their war with Russia.
In-fact, no-one has thought through war in general.
Mr Riley, you may wish to focus on developments in Sudan as well. It is rumoured (unconfirmed) that US and Russia are having a little proxy there as well. It isn't clear to me what the strategic value of the African state is, and it is interesting as to why the 'spillover' is happening there. Getting WW2 'Africa campaign' vibes.
Is is possible that they're aren't listening in Moscow because... they don't wanna hear?! Thanks, Riley.
One last remark (via a quote from an ancient TV call-in news show):
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now, why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass stuff from our vehicles?
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want.
Why the neocons went to war is one thing. Having decided, they had to use what they had. WHAT they had was mostly shit per late-stage milindustrial corruption, but nonetheless, they only had what they had at that time.
My take is that Putin/advisers felt they had to act sooner than later. (I agree, fwiw) Corrupt army/materiel providers is as old as war itself. Early in the rise of a polity, the corruption is reactive not proactive. As the polity matures, the milindustrial complex that its wars have created becomes proactive in encouraging wars. The corruption gets worse as a result and soon, the empire learns that its armed forces aren't *really* armed.
Meanwhile, some upstart new empire (see: Russia Reborn -- the acronym not the movie) knocks out the old empire with new and better weapons that it was able to create because its corruption is still more reactively opportunistic not proactively so, which means that to stay in business it has to deliver decent materiel or be fired. That is where I see RR at this point.
Fuck military hardliners. Experts are experts, and we all know that an ex is a has-been, and a spurt is a drip under pressure.
As for Yevgeny Prigozhin: he's a loose cannon that has served its purpose and now must be defanged. We all remember that it is a PARAmilitary outfit, right? You know, one of these:
The disco-in-bellbottoms will continue until morale improves:
For Edvardo Riley Slavsquatch:
Szigeti was the Jimi Hendrix of 20th Century classical violin in that he pulled the wildest sounds from his violin and was the major Big Name Violinist pursuing what was then called 'modern classical music'.
Sadly, my ears are too old to hear those high notes with their almost sea-sickly vibrato. Same with this master performance with 20th Century Russia's other great Russian composer (I don't care much for Shostakovich although he certainly has his moments).
The slow movements are like open-heart surgery to repair a broken heart.
I see we've discovered that Russia is a nation composed of those weak weird creatures: humans. So of course it's messed up. Government, large human structures, are always messed up.
I highly doubt, however, that Russia will fail to achieve its primary SMO goals in Ukraine. Meanwhile, their armed forces will experience needed reform and should grow stronger from this massively murderous kerfuffle.
Russia's problem as I see it is the population decline thing. Digicurrencies, infinite vaccine campaigns... these will fade fairly rapidly. Both sit on blatantly rotten foundations. Meanwhile, the resources to provide a decent standard of living (including hope for the future) will still be much more abundant in Russia than any other major power. Coupled with Russia's obvious militech superiority on the MKL (Major Kinetic Level, my very own acronym), Russia still sits in the catbird seat.
Yes I can agree with that. Human inequality is a fact and that should be recognised.
But in the recognising I think it should not be distorted into some kind of presumed inequality: an inequality of a certain type.
Human inequality is in fact an unequal distribution of very many factors across the population so that we all become unique with our own particular assemblage of these distributions.
Too often it is assumed the inequality manifests in absurdly simplified and incorrect ways. For instance it is assumed there are 'the clever' and 'the stupid'. Or the 'deserving' and 'undeserving'. Or the 'weak' or 'the strong'. or most commonly 'the good' and 'the bad'. Making binary divisions of the population based on ethereal undefined unmeasured parameters assumed to be definitive of the whole.
Having made those absurd over simplifications and total misunderstanding of the nature of fact people they then go on to condemn the 'other' side of that binary division.
Fairly ludicrous and very, very dangerous.
There is often a basic assumption, a presumption, on the part of the 'unequalists' that leads to value judgements on the 'unequals' they find. And that is their own implicit understanding of desirable goals, directions, methods, attitudes, needs - even an implicit (point being: not spoken out loud nor even consciously understood to be there) presumption of what a human being should be.
So there is an assumption of godly knowledge:
They know what a human being should be.
They know how human society should be organised.
They know what directions human society should take.
They know how human beings should think.
And so on.
They are wrong, of course, in all of this.
It is not for them to adopt that attitude having seen the clear fact of human difference (which they interpret in value judgement terms: 'inequality').
Better for them to continue to investigate and not to adopt judgemental attitudes but rather attempt to find what would be most appropriate given these truths, don't you think?
Their prevailing attitudes being that what would be most appropriate would be for all the inequalities to be ironed out. i.e. they are at odds with reality. They hate it, despise it, will not accept it, seek to find some victims to punish because of how dissatisfied they are with reality.
Just that simple thing: Democracy.
Most of us who think about such things believe it to be the best system and therefore 'all should have it'.
But it is clear all do not want it. For better or worse. They simply will not participate in it.
Well why waste time and energy and lives disputing that fact? Better find other ways of social organisation that will perform the better.
I think that stands as an example that pertains to all the other areas, too.
Accept what we find and work with it in a benevolent manner. If at all possible.
My question is what do the PTB want to build in those bloodied fields?