Posted on 09/02/2024 3:11:55 PM PDT by ransomnote
Christoforou: Asks Mercouris, 'does the speed of the Russian advancement surprise you? We're hearing that Russians are advancing now without much resistance. Are those reports believable?'
Mercouris: believes the reports are true and said the Russian advances began accelerating in March. He is surprised at the unprecedented (in this war) speed of the advance in the past three weeks. 2:17
Cites a 'dissident' Ukrainian MP saying 'Ukraine is giving up one fortified position after another without a fight, looks like the entire Ukrainian army is just going through the motions in many places, some places are still vigorously fighting (Chasiv Yar, Siversk (s), Volchansk, Kharkiv) But southern Donbas, Toretsk, Pokrovsk looks like a rapid collapse.'
Mercouris says this is normal for attrition wars - start slow and stay for a long time, and then the collapse is sudden. In Ukraine, collapse is occuring rapidly in key locations, like central Donbas.
Both sides are responsible for accelerated Ukrainian collapse.
Russians launched Kharkiv in May, diverted Ukrainian troops from Donbas. It worked.
Ukrainians - bizarrely, the Ukrainians did the same thing to themselves. They launched the Kursk offensive, they diverted their own troops from Donbas, accelerating the Ukrainian collapse. Kursk was a massive failure, even Syrkyi concedes this. His days are numbered. There's a story that the Kursk offensive was sprung upon him - he almost resigned. Syrskyi will likely be next on Zelensky's list to be fired. Zelensky and Syrskyi will blame each other.Christoforou: Syrskyi will be the next to be fired. He will be easier than the last military head, who was popular, to be gotten rid of. Syrskyi is not liked by the population. He'll be the one blamed for the Kursk offensive.
Pokrovsk - is this going to be a difficult area to capture (like Avdevka, and Bakmut) or will it fall quickly? Poroshenko talked about the importance of Pokrovsk. Seems like Ukraine is starting to fortify Pokrovsk. Toretsk is like Pokrovsk in this respect - no long-term fortifications. Fortification seems to be coming kind of late. Bringing everything in that they can. Too little too late?Mercouris: Too little, far too late. There will be some kind of fight. Not only have they left it too late, but they lost their operational space. Russians are capturing the surrounding towns quickly. Pokrovsk will be isolated very fast. Troops sent to garrison Pokrovsk are nowhere near the kind of elite troops used to fight in Bakmut and Avdyevka (sp?). Those two cities had been fortified since 2014 and they are trying to fortify Pokrovsk on the fly. Cities of 20,000 and 17,000 people were taken by Russia in days. Pokrovsk has around 50,000 people - may take a couple of weeks perhaps. The Russians are positioned all around Pokrovsk; they are in position to target the roads and railway lines into Pokrosk so it will be difficult for Ukraine to supply their troops.
One of the main highways connecting Donbas to Pokrovsk, very good supply/reinforcement/shells/fuel etc. for Russians to use - securely under their control. So Mercouris thinks Russians will take Pokrovsk faster than they took Bakmut (which was February 2023 to May 2023) even though Zelensky is talking up their determination to make it difficult. Pokrovsk is less well defended
Christoforou: I think a lot of time taking Bakmut was just getting 'to' Bakmut, the area where you could actually storm.
Mercouris: Same with Avdevka, Mauripol etc. - by the time you reach the city, the city is for all practical purposes is lost. Russians take cities quickly once storming begins.
Christoforou: When Pokrovsk is captured, that is essentially the beginning of the end of the Ukraine's position in the Donbas. This is one of the main supply hubs, if not the main supply hub. 12:33
Donbas then begins a quick fall for the Zelensky regime and Ukraine. The only path to victory Zelensky is seeing - including the West, the CIA - they're telling Zelensky, 'Look, your only path, our only path to victory, is getting the long-range strikes into Russia.' That seems to be what most in the collective West are coming to the understanding that if Ukraine is going to get some sort of negotiations started, some sort of rumblings of regime change in Russia, if you're goning to do something, it's going to need the use of long-range missiles.
Christoforou says, while most people are coming to this understanding, he is not saying they agree with it, it's a long shot, but it's the only shot they have. Christoforou says that use of long range missiles becomes the collective West attacking Russia, and that's where you run into big problems.
Mercouris: Absolutely. Mercouris believes that if Pokrovsk falls, it's the beginning of the end of the battle of Donbas. If Donbas falls completely under Russian control, it's the beginning of the end of Ukraine in Eastern Ukraine; all of Eastern Ukraine, east of the Dnipo river, then becomes undefendable. Remainings areas in Donbas can't be held long, very difficult.
Eastern Ukraine - 40% of the country by territory, 60% of the GDP - has come under the control of Russia. 15:16 This is a decisive moment.Let's talk about long-range missiles. This is probably what they are going to do because there is absolutely nothing else. But it is a calculation born of desperation. The collapse is coming much faster than the Ukraine, than the AMericans expected. They were hoping to prevent the collapse happening before the NOvember election.
There is now real possibility that Pokrovsk could fall before the November election, with all the problems that will create. Probably an even bigger collapse across Donbas as well. So they're desperate, clutching at straws. The latest one they're coming up with are missile strikes deep into Russia to try to force the Russians to negotiate (Mercouris is laughing as he says this). 16:22
This is such a bad idea on so many levels. First of all, it is not going to achieve what they expect. Launching long-range missiles at Russians are folly - the RUssian public will see it as proof that the Americans/British/Western powers are attacking them. The Russians will conclude once and for all the West is their enemy.The use of long range missiles inside Russia will consolidate Russian opinion and lead to public demands, at the very least, that the war in Ukraine be prosecuted until the entirety of the Ukraine falls under Russian contro,l so there is not a milimeter of Ukraine territory from which these missiles can be launched. In strict military terms, it will achieve the opposite of what people in the West think it will.
Secondly - in terms of actual damage those missiles can do - just look at the size of Russia. The West has done it in other places- Vietnam, Germany in WWII. But launching a few missiles at targets close to the Russian border, because they can't reach deep enough, the Urals, even with Tomahawk long-range missiles, and they just don't have enough of them. The production rate for these things is very very small. You can't have the kind of bombing campaign done in previous Western wars, and all of those bombing campaigns fail, so why would it succeed now?Thirdly, the Russians have repeatedly shown they have the ability to shoot these missiles down. The West has been launching missiles in multiple locations in Crimea, Donbas - the Russians shoot down around 80% - 90% of them.
Lastly, the Russian reaction - they will see the West as an enemy, they've said they will start to take counter measures, return fire with their own missiles, they have many more of them, which are more far more powerful capabilities - that will make our own strategic military position in the world far more vulnerable than it has been up until now. Just imagine if the Houthis, for example, had Russian missiles (the ONYX, or the ZIRCON)? That's the scenario we (West) are bringing about.
So long-range missiles are an absolutely desperate, completely desperate move which can only be counter productive. The west will try to maintain some kind of control over these weapons launches - which will further confirm to the Russians the West is involved in missile attacks on Russia itself.
As the Ukraine hurtles toward collapse, the Western powers and Ukraine are increasingly tempted to begin reckless attacks, not just Russian military positions, but on civilian Russian infrastructure, nuclear power plants, Russian radar systems intended to protect Russia from American ballistic missiles.
Russia is supposedly well defended from such missile attacks - if one gets through but the nuclear power plant is unharmed, imagine the public reaction (Russian). If one actually strikes a nuclear plant and there is a nuclear fuel release, who is going to be blamed? The West, the Ukrainians. The Russian attitude will not change and the rest of the whole world will see the West is willing to engage in nuclear terrorism.
The use of long-range missiles by the Ukraine/West is a crazy idea that exposes how desperate in D.C. Brussels, Washingont, Berlin, London are becoming, as their Ukraine project collapses all around them.
Christoforou: Yes. They should negotiate. They should capitulate. But we already know they won't do that. After 3 years of this, they are still fixated on Putin, and fixated on removing him. It remains the end-goal of this entire war - regime change in Russia. 23:00 This is evident in the articles, even the article titles - they are fixated on removing this one man.
(ransomnote: Almost sounds like the persecution of Trump in the US)
Maybe the goal in the long-range missiles strikes into Russia, and providing targeting/surveillance/ etc. that they want to missiles to get through (whatever targets) and they know Putin is not in favor of escalation, he has been holding back. That would be the largest criticism of Putin is that he has been holding back, for reasons we've discussed (includes China), maybe they think attacking Russia effectively then we will amplify criticism because he will continue to hold back and go slow. Maybe the think the hardliners will remove Putin that way.
Mercouris: Agrees, getting rid of Putin is the over riding obsession. Any means possible, hardliners or others. Mercouris has been thinking about this obsession the West has with removing Putin and he wonders if they even want to directly target Putin with missiles in Moscow or wherever they think he is.
Mercouris mentions an episode of The Duran interviewing John Helman which he discussed at length Putin has been applying the brake -lots of public frustration on the part of citizens, many demands from citizens that Putin take his foot off the brake and allow faster resolution.
The Duran also did an interview with Dimitry Polianski, (sp)a very senior Russian diplomat, he's Deputy Ambassador for Russia at the UN. He vindicated The Duran (Mercuoris and CHristoforou), confirming that friends of Russia (probably China, Orban from Hungary, Modi of India) have been pressuring Russia and Ukraine to negotiate, and Russia was 'open' to negotiations, but then the Ukrainians launched the Kursk operation.
Polianski said all that pressure from Russia's friends was lifted as a result. Prior to Kursk, those friends of Russia had assumed the Ukraine was operating in good faith, but now the scales have fallen from their eyes, that Russia has been telling the truth, that these people (Ukrainians) are intransigent. No more for pressure on Russia to negotiate. Mercouris notes that Polianski made this statement in their interview with him. 29:17
Mercouris believes Polianski statement is true. Mercouris was reading the press from countries like China at the time, and the Chinese were furious. They had recently been visited by a Ukrainian diplomat and had believed his statements about seeking negotiations. The Kursk operation infuriated them. Modi had agreed to go to Kyiv to discuss potential peace negotiations; he found Zelensky talking all the old tunes. Modi was only there a few hours. He, too, is furious following the Kursk operation. These nations have since dropped their pressure on Putin to negotiate.
Why assume this massive escalation (missiles) by the West, which completely confirms what the Russians have said about the security threat that the Ukraine poses, and the hostility intentions of the West, why assume that this escalation will make those very angry countries less angry with the West, and more likely to apply pressure on the Russians to negotiate? 31:22
Far more likely, those nations will say, 'The Russians were right all along. We should have listened to Putin. He said issues re Ukraine were an existential threat. He is obviously right. Therefore, let's give Putin the green light, let him know we now undertand, he's been listening to us and applying the break. If he wants to, he can now lift the brake.
Christoforou: Do you think Putin will keep his foot on the brake until the November elections to see if Trump wins?
Mercouris: Possibly. It's just one possibility. Mercouris believes the Russian military has been moving according to its own timetable anyway. Very very fast now in Donbas. Is it practical for the Russian military to move any faster than they already are? Would they even want to hasten their plans? They're going to take Prokovsk, the big roadway provides rapid access, their army is getting bigger, they have their operation plan.
Military and Moscow's general staff are in constant communication. Certainly the November election is a factor - maybe looking at whether Trump is going to be elected. But the Russians aren't putting a lot of weight on the election. Why not collapse the Ukraine prior to the election, that would give the Democrats a harder time. Or deliver a disaster in Ukraine, then Trump can come in, 'Look, I'm not to blame. This has nothing to do with me. The Russians have won. Now let's try and come to terms.' Mercouris is not saying this is genuinely the Moscow thinking, but just speculation.
Christoforou: Trump has been saying he wants to have a diplomatic resolution to the conflict. 34:58 Russia may want to wait to see what happens in November for those Negotiations.
Mercouris: Absolutely, there are people in Moscow, per our interview with Helman, who want some kind of understanding with Americans. Putin himself has indicated that ultimately Russia and the United States do need to come to some kind of understanding. But now, recent events in past couple of weeks, people like Medevev, the military, public opinion, Lavrov, all are saying, 'we tried, tried, and tried. It's never worked. Let's just go on fighting and finish the war. After we win, then we can come to terms. Because any agreement we make with the West, unless its backed by force, isn't worth the paper it's written on.'
Mercouris believes Putin is increasingly tilting in that direction. Mercouris believes that if the West goes forward with long-range missiles inside Russia, that hardline group, which is already very powerful, far more powerful than it was in 2022, is going to become stronger still. Dipolmatic pressure will be taken away (other countries) and within Russia itself, any further restraint will have gone too if Ukraine/West employ missile strikes inside Russia. Missile strikes, intended to force negotiations, will have the opposite result. All efforts (sanctions, providing weapons), acheive the opposite of what the West intends. Escalation has completely failed in this way. In Washington and other places (Western allies) realize their failed efforts and continue to escalate.
Christoforou: I think the missile strikes are intended to create division between Putin (a moderate) and the hardliners. The strikes are meant to move the moderates against Putin; I think even if the West launches missile strikes inside Russia, Putin will take a moderate position; I think that's what they're (collective West) are betting on. They will fail, but that's what they are betting on.
Putin has to consider so many things: economic, BRICS, diplomatic, foreign relations; military aspects, internal forces (oligarchs) - the way he's been dealing with the war, given so many considerations, he has a lot to consider. The huge revelation in the past few weeks is that those friendly nations have been consulting with Putin, advocating that he keep the brakes on this conflict, for wahtever reasons they have. I am still not sure why it's so important, for, say, China and INdia to have the war go in a slower pace and to try diplomacy over military solutions to this conflict.
Mercouris: In terms of the attempt to create division between Putin and Hardliners, undoubtely exists, but missile strikes are more likely to turn Putin from a relative moderate, to a relative hardliner. 41:29 Launching missile strikes won't persuade Putin to apply the brake even more; it will cause him to take the brake off, and Russia's friends will now accept it, 'All this time Russia has been saying the West is a threat, the West was going to install missiles in the Ukraine to threaten Russia, and low and behold, that is exactly what has happened.' This is what the hardliners have always warned about. It would make Putin realize that negotiations with the West, and with Ukraine, are a hopeless idea.
In an article in Politico, those against long-range missile strikes in Russia say that if such missiles are used, they will be burning their bridges once and for all with the Russians. There will be no way back for us to have any sort of relations with the Russians, even the kind we had during the Cold War. Mercouris agrees with that perception.Russia's friends Turkey, India, China, why have they been a voice for moderation? The answer goes back to February 2022. From a global perspective, the entry of Russian forces into the Ukraine looked like a violation of international law. Went against territory of Ukraine, challenged Ukraine over its own territory. There are reasons why the Russians felt they had to do that, we've discussed them in many places, but as any lawyer will tell you, 'when you have to explain, you've already lost.' This was not strictly true in this case, countries were open to listening to Russia. No matter what Russians would say, China, INdia countries around the world which take territorial integrity, state sovereignty extremely seriously would try to maintain it in Ukraine as best as possible, by getting some kind of negotiated solution there.
What has happened, since Russia's Special Operation began in February 2022, is, instead of the West capitalizing on those international doubts about Russia's actions, has instead worked to confirm the Russian case for war. 46:20 Mercouris thinks this Summer, many countries thought the Ukrainians and Western powers were finally coming to their senses, and now they realize they were not, this has be been an absolutely crucial moment in the war.
Christoforou: Yes. Because it's all about regime change in Russia, this obsession.
Mercouris: Agrees.
ransomnote's COMMENTS: I believe the a key reason the West launched the Kursk incursion (knew it was going to happen, helped with military support, satellite info etc.) was first and foremost, to end all hope of negotiations. NATO/Biden's regime has refused to let the Ukraine negotiate, the Ukraine is exhausted and running out of troops/hardware and pressure from other nations was building to negotiate, so the West moved to end Putin's willingness to negotiate. The West doesn't want to negotiate - this is their big chance - they want justification for missile strikes and WWIII if necessary, whatever it takes to remove Putin.
I monitored listened to most of Alexander Mercouris' 9/1 video, Rus Assaults Vuhledar, 3 Ukr Brigs Risk Trap; West Panic; Sullivan Talk Yermak; No Missile Strikes in which he said that the Biden regime, having met with Zelensky's representative, declined to permit long range missiles strikes in Russia. He quoted a Russian military official saying he's never seen the Russians move as fast throughout the war as they are now - advancing and taking territory. Mercouris said everyone knows that Biden is on the beach, vacationing and expects him to do so until Jan 6, so Biden's officials are rushing around, trying to handle matters without him. Personally, I think Biden's foreign handlers are satisfied to deliver instructions to Biden's cabinet members and others.
Many FReepers seem unaware that our CIA helped overthrow Ukrainian leadership in preparation for NATO to weaponize the Ukraine and intentionally provoke Putin's national security concerns.
2 days after the CIA's overthrow of the Ukraine began, Putin annexed part of the Crimea. Ukraine's apologists always act there's no provocation, no reason at all, which provoked Russia to respond. If China overthrew Mexico and installed weapons and built an army there, the US would 'object', just as Russia objects to NATO's intentions to force regime change in Russia.
In 2010, the Ukraine's "parliament passed a law banning Ukraine from joining any military bloc, effectively banning it from entering NATO though maintaining opportunities for cooperation. According to a poll conducted by Pew Research Center the fall before, just over half of Ukrainians disapproved of NATO and the idea Ukraine might try to join, while just 28% approved." source
ransomnote: Given that the Ukraine moved to prevent NATO membership, the US CIA overthrew the Ukrainian government (start of that 'revolution' was February 18, 2014). With (CIA) help, NATO was now in control of the Ukraine, Russia responded by annexing part of Crimea Feb 20, 2014 – Mar 21, 2014.
Two monthls later in May, two more reagions of the Crimea voted for independence to escape NATO's overthrow of the Ukraine, at which point NATO/CIA controlled Western Ukraine began shelling Eastern Ukraine. Nobody likes to talk about Eastern Ukraine shelling western Ukraine; they prefer to repeatedly claim Russia acted without reason and will attack other nations at will once it wins the war in the Ukraine. Those people simply have no objection to the government of the Ukraine shelling its own citizens.
Trump would force negotiations and end the war - that will be his legacy.
Also, our CIA is not what it used to be. So the Maidan Uprising was going to happen with or without CIA's involvement.
thanks for transcript...well done
and very imformative
It looks like Ukraine will pay the largest part of the price.
Thinking we should round up Victoria Nueland, Joe Biden, George Soros, Larry Fink, Claus Schwab, Barak and Michelle Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Tony Blinken, Boris Johnson, Jake Sullivan, Mitch McConnell , Lindsey Graham, Mark Warners, Mitt Romney, Gen Mark Milley, Gen Lloyd Austin, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Emmanuel Macron, Justin Trudeau and the rest of crew of other WMDs that have been destroying the Ukraine and the rest of the world's economy since 2022.
We should then round up a bunch of old ballistic missiles that have exceeded their shelf lives and tie these two legged WMDs that have caused so much death and devastation to the nose cones of the missiles with blue and yellow striped Ukrainian flags.
We should then shoot them off at the Ukraine border in a generally eastward direction.
Do this and the war in Ukraine would end overnight. It would be the best money we ever spent.
Saving lives will only happen when Russia goes home. Are any of the Russian bots posting here also posting on Russian boards trying to get the Russians to go home and stop killing their soldiers at 1,000 a day??
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Zelensky's final act of desperation (MY NOTES on 47 minute RUMBLE Video) , MinorityRepublican wrote: Thank you for your post. I can see Russia's point of view. I do not agree with it. But we have to recognize that. Also, our CIA is not what it used to be. So the Maidan Uprising was going to happen with or without CIA's involvement.
You're welcome.
Also, our CIA is not what it used to be. So the Maidan Uprising was going to happen with or without CIA's involvement.
False. The Ukraine is a deep state crime hub. Election theft,organharvesting, a source of money laundering that keeps the DNC alive and in office.
I spent countless hours documenting the transcript of the resutls of crimes which Ukrainian investigators brought to the attention of the West. The transcripts are screen captures of text in English as the investigators gave their statements in their own language. The investigators implicate Biden and other US officials, and his son of course, in extensive crime committed in the Ukraine. Schumer, Pelosi, Schiff, Romney, Biden's son and brother, and others - enrich themselves through money laundering and influence peddling in the Ukraine. Recall Hunter Biden 'worked' for energy company there, as did others. This unearned income is graft, payola, the purchase of political influence, and Biden get's his 10%. This is just unacceptable to me.
The transcripts are in four parts near the end of this thread post:
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Zelensky's final act of desperation (MY NOTES on 47 minute RUMBLE Video) , rdcbn1 wrote: I agree that it is time to unleash long range missiles and target the interior of Russia with weapons of mass destruction to bring a quick end of the war in Ukraine. Thinking we should round up Victoria Nueland, Joe Biden, George Soros, Larry Fink, Claus Schwab, Barak and Michelle Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Tony Blinken, Boris Johnson, Jake Sullivan, Mitch McConnell , Lindsey Graham, Mark Warners, Mitt Romney, Gen Mark Milley, Gen Lloyd Austin, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Emmanuel Macron, Justin Trudeau and the rest of crew of other WMDs that have been destroying the Ukraine and the rest of the world's economy since 2022.
We should then round up a bunch of old ballistic missiles that have exceeded their shelf lives and tie these two legged WMDs that have caused so much death and devastation to the nose cones of the missiles with blue and yellow striped Ukrainian flags.
We should then shoot them off at the Ukraine border in a generally eastward direction.
Do this and the war in Ukraine would end overnight. It would be the best money we ever spent.
The video makers, Christoforou and Mercouris, make the point that such missiles will only make matters worse for the Ukraine, and for the world.
I agree with their view - missiles would do nothing. I believe NATO wants to start a war. When Britain talked about possibly allowing their missiles to be use, Russia's ambassador met with them and explained that Russia would then be justified in retaliating on British assets anywhere in the world. Ukraine has a few missiles, Russia has many. Long range missles are just NATO begging for war.
For those who don’t already know, Mercouris is a well known Russian propaganda asset. What he has to say is rarely correct, but a good look into what the Russian MOD wants you to think is true.
What about that burning oil refinery in suburban Moscow?
Maybe he roots for Russia because Biden is against Russia, and SOME OF US here don’t want to see Biden succeed.
It is not just Biden. It is the establishment. Lindsey Graham etc.
I am surprised you aren’t concerned about the Russian conscripts getting blown to pieces on a daily basis.
I presume you don’t wear a seatbelt in your car because all of the people you listed also support wearing seatbelts.
Excellent and thank you. I agree with your personal assessment. I think you are right on the money.
We’re not giving Russia 200+ billion dollars in US tax funds thus far, and Russia isn’t trying to start WWIII.
That's the Jane Fonda method of protesting. She introduced that idea to American politics during the Vietnam war.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Zelensky's final act of desperation (MY NOTES on 47 minute RUMBLE Video) , freeandfreezing wrote: No it doesn't. What about that burning oil refinery in suburban Moscow?
What about it? It doesn't change the course of the war. It's PR to 'prove' fighting is occuring. It likely negatively impacts India and the EU as they buy fuel from Russia.
Nobody is trying to start WWIII, except perhaps Russian and Iran. If those two countries weren't busy invading other countries, or in the case of Iran, supporting proxy groups doing the invading and attacking, the world would be much more peaceful.
Have you looked at the situation with the Russian oil industry?
He's too busy drooling like some slack jaw idiot over Russia's Smooth Brain Operation.
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.
