Posted on 04/08/2022 6:54:52 PM PDT by ransomnote
Oh brother, way, way too much truth for the media/government conglomerate cheerleaders around here.
This Larry C. Johnson evidently agrees with Bernard, who thinks that Russia will take all of Ukraine’s coastline, due to its “majority ethnic Russian population.” Then Ukraine would be a landlocked country.
Now here the thing. Less than half of Ukraine’s coastline is majority ethnic Russian. So what is this Bernard guy talking about? And why would Johnson agree with him?
There’s video of Zelensky visiting AZOV et al and telling them not to bring and fire weapons at Donbas. The neo-nazis basically told him to f*** off and if he messed with him, they would gut him and drag his entrails through the streets. He started supporting AZOV after that.
He’s now fled to Poland and he’s hoping that the Russkies wipe all of AZOV in the Donbas out at Mariupol and then Zelensky can return without the neo-nazis there.
Ironically, if it hadn’t been us and the EU funding the neo-nazis in 2014, they would have never got this clout and strength that rivals the Ukrainian army.
I would note that the U.S. had a tougher time capturing this much territory in Iraq in 2003
probably need waders beyond this point.
I believe that the Azov maniacs will dispose of Zelensky long before Putin’s assassins get to him.
Except when the territory is pro-Russian, the Russian army has made little progress, but many enemies.
Ukraine has most of its ground forces.
Here is the same article from March 26th in another publication.
I think the article also appeared on FR around then. It looks like dailyexpose is just recycling old articles as click bait.
This website has detailed information about the Ukraine War daily:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QNrn01Q-5Q
Ironically, if it hadn’t been us and the EU funding the neo-nazis in 2014, they would have never got this clout and strength that rivals the Ukrainian army.
Your post deserves the Cheech and Chong award. Don't bogart that joint, it must be really strong.
Ping.
Ping.
As with any analysis some details may be open to question but the overall basic concepts seem sound to me, and it’s not something I would necessarily welcome either, but the bottom line seems to be, Putin can do whatever he wants to do within certain limits, and all we can do is impose sanctions (which he expected and seems to have planned around), and prolong the fighting by sending military aid. It may not have any real effect other than extending the time line for Putin to accomplish the de facto victory that will not be recognized in most of Europe or “the west” for as long as he and globalists are in power. The effective alternative would be for Putin to surrender to globalism and allow Russian sovereignty to be eroded away gradually over the next decade or two. Whether anyone in western governments likes it or not, he has decided to oppose that end result and believes Ukraine in its pre-Feb 24 form to be an existential threat.
The danger is of course that globalist western leaders will get their noses so far out of joint that they will goad Russia into a full conflict with NATO, which seems inevitably nuclear at some point. Otherwise NATO would probably have the means to push into Belarus and Russia with conventional forces and bring about regime change. When you consider the full cumulative effect of all NATO countries fighting full-out even with woke socialist attrition factored in, there would be an overwhelming superiority. Russia may be having its way with Ukraine (to some extent) but NATO in total would be fifty to a hundred times the strength of Ukraine, and already in a forward position in Poland and the Baltic states which could easily be reinforced to full strength within two weeks to a month. In fact, how do we know they aren’t being upgraded right now?
And Putin has the two-front problem to consider if his buddies in China ever decided to pick off eastern Siberia. And there are Asian pro-NATO powers that could get involved there too.
The Russians probably just wanted to surround Kyiv, to use it as a bargaining chip.
That has proved too difficult, so they are just trying to grab territory that has a high percentage of Russians, who can then hold it without too much army help.
I don’t see anything as bad as Fallujah here. It took the very best America had over a year to subdue Fallujah. At Fallujah, it was irregulars with no air, no support. Afghanistan and South Vietnam were much worse as far as gaining and controlling territory. Take off the blinders. Of course, if you’re going off into the never never land of western disinfo Russian losses, it’s not a serious conversation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah_during_the_Iraq_War
A lot has changed since then, all of which has proven Johnson wrong. Looking up on him, he isn't the most credible former expert who tarnished his reputation to seek a opinion.
This interview is a few weeks old. Johnson may want to update his outlook, Russia is hardly in the mop-up phase.
Any American who supports the Russian savages should be deported. To hell with all who do. You would have cheered the rape of Polish women in 1945.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.