A former PLA soldier hired by Russians gives a reality check on Russia-Ukraine war

(Regards the article about Maiden)

No, I literally mean it’s a huge article and most people likely won’t want to read it, but should (if interested in this topic). Because this person did extensive research and this is a topic (Maiden) that has many facets it’s quite extensive.

Your life was to a great degree defined by a Cold War, just like the generation before you was defined by WWII, and generation before that the Great Depression and so on. But times change. Germany today is not the Germany of 1933 and those that hold onto some past idea of who the Germans are, are simply “stuck in time.” Russia isn’t the Soviet Union of 1965, the Cold War ended in 1991 and the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union are gone. And the US isn’t in the era of Ronald Reagan in 1984 either. The era of being militarily strong, but reserved in the use of force and using it for self defense, is long past.

(What defines who you are)

We don’t have a moral high ground. Our hands today are bloodied and we have shaken the hands of despots that murder our own citizens. We make deals with warlords and drug manufacturers when this benefits us. We operate using the same techniques as the Soviets in the Cold War: torture, kidnap, mass cesor, mass propagandize, lie, cheat, mass surveil, side step basic constitutional rights systemically (the Soviets had a Constitution)... We overthrow legit and democratic governments and install dictators when this benefits us (you realize that’s Mr Z today - no more elections in Ukraine). We make sure oppressive kingdoms are secure, like Saudi Arabia around which our entire Middle East strategy is based.

Why are we better than the Russians? Just because it’s us? Because we give pretty speeches about democracy, human rights, and sovereignty? Because we raise an LGBTQ flag on our government buildings? Or is it because we’re always the good guys in our movies, saving the orphans in a war zone?

This is no longer the Cold War. That ended 33 years ago. Almost all our military campaigns today have an economic or pure political motive and it is near impossible to articulate a serious (realistic) national security argument for us (please think about what I’m saying for a second). Since the Cold War ended, we have increased the tempo for our military to a rate of about 3.6 times that (missions/time) as compared to before the end of the Cold War.

—It’s not that the Russians have become so nice, open, free, and democratic... They moved a little bit in a more free and democratic direction.

—It’s that we have slid a whole lot in a direction to where we have become near indistinguishable from what we once refered to as the “evil empire.” We do all the same $hit today.

A person kidnapped and tortured by us doesn’t care that it was us and somehow think it was for a good cause. We are still @ssholes that kidnap and torture: https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/an-irreparably-damaged-life-cia-kidnapping-victim-khaled-el-masri-20-years-on-a-70c197a8-ae67-470b-91e1-413e148bea0a

If you behave a certain way, are motivated by certain ideals, it doesn’t matter what you call yourself, or the shapes on the flag, or how many nice speeches you give. We are the sum of our behaviors. We are ultimately defined through our actions.

If you’re into symbols vote for Biden: https://www.freep.com/gcdn/presto/2022/03/02/USAT/eb4f9c82-ec58-4a08-aa2e-420e2bb33e70-GTY_1376308923.jpg?width=660&height=440&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp (ashes forehead)

But if you think as a Catholic or Christian it’s wrong to support abortion, LGBTQIA, etc. then maybe the guy with the symbol on his forehead isn’t the right guy for you after all.

What really defines Biden, a speech, symbols, or his actions?

(trying to search for the truth)

The problem with doing research on topics, and I do this also, is that we tend to research and create arguments that are one giant validation error.

For example: https://youtu.be/Cj7qBp3TR8s?si=PBrZa7hd98YMcQZL This LTC is basically saying everything I say. I just found him BTW, so it’s not like I’m just regurgitating what he said to you. Do I accept his arguments because they are simply validating what I want to believe? Or is our common way of looking at things, which is hopefully logical, what leads us to the same conclusions?

We go out from a basic assumption and end up finding the facts, testimony, experts, even arguments which prove what we want to see. It’s no different with people we don’t want to like. We end up finding all sorts of things wrong about them. But is it real? Usually not.

The only way I know how to get around this is to treat these topics a little bit like an investigation or a trial. Attempt to remove all emotions/feelings. All these cliche phrases, cool guy talk, need to go. Use a timeline, look for inconsistencies (the truth normally rests in consitency), verify a fact is actually a fact (not a theory or assumption even if everyone believes it), eliminate all speculation, don’t confuse correlation with causality, look for motives, and look for who had the ability.

For example, an argument I have been attempting to pound into heads and made by the LTC in the YouTube video is that this argument of “if we don’t stop the Russians now they will keep going,” is utter nonsense. They do not have the ability to do that. So it’s just an argument that sounds good in support of a cause but has no realistic basis. How do I know for sure they can’t realistically do this? They don’t have the manpower and material to make that happen, they don’t have the population and industry, the logistics to make that happen. Russia would be attacking a force much bigger and more capable than they are if they “kept going.” It’s just fantasy.

Red6: "While combat power affects casualties, casualties are estimated using a separate tool we used to call a “casualty estimator” since there are other variables that go into estimating losses.
It takes many-many different variables into account both blue and red and will provide you an estimate of what to expect in KIA and WIA."

Sure, and all such tables are based on past historical experiences and will be just as valid as today's conditions match those of previous wars.
In Ukraine, even though we see First World War-like trenches and artillery duels, many other factors are very different from any past war, notably drones and real-time intelligence on enemy movements, among others.

So, I think whatever charts and tables were produced based on past wars to estimate battle casualties, those have been and are currently being updated with new algorithms based on experiences in Ukraine since 2022.

Red6: "The Russians have pretty much accomplished most of what they wanted.
(1) Prevent NATO accession by Ukraine. Political
(2) Seize the majority ethnic Russian areas in Eastern Ukraine. Military"

Really? Are you serious?

In fact, Vlad the Invader has accomplished the opposite of his stated goals, including:

Driving Finland and Sweden into NATO, something that neither Stalin, Khruschev nor Gorbachev ever dreamed of.
Reanimating a moribund NATO to near Cold War levels of serious purpose and unity.
Achieving Pres. Trump's goal of getting Europeans to contribute much more to their own defenses.
Uniting a coalition of at least 54 Western-style democracies to help in the defense of Ukraine.
Forging Ukrainians as a people and country in the fires of existential war.
Exiling Russia from the community of civilized nations and into the Axis of Evil Dictators' client status, like NoKo's nasty Little Kim, to the CCP China's Xi-snake.
Destroying whatever non-military capacities the Russian economy had before 2022, as Russia is currently on a near 100% mobilized war footing.
Beginning the destruction of Russia's energy infrastructure.
Failing in Vlad's original goals to seize Ukraine's capital and major cities in a matter of days or weeks.
Largely destroying Russia's Black Sea Fleet.
Making Crimea increasingly untenable for Russian occupation and indefensible against Ukrainian air and sea-born attacks.
Producing circa 500,000 Russian military casualties, plus tens of thousands of military vehicles, while inflicting just over 1/3 that number on Ukrainians, overall.
Driving at least one million Russians to flee Russia since the beginning of Vlad's "Special Military Operation" in Ukraine.
In 2024 so far, Russia has conquered perhaps another 50 square miles of Ukraine's territory at a cost of well over 1,000 Russian casualties per square mile.
Ukraine is roughly the size of Texas, 233,000 square miles.
Vlad the Invader is now guaranteeing Ukraine's eventual membership in both NATO and the European Union.

How Vlad's invasion will finally settle is anybody's guess right now, but I don't think it will be with nukes and I doubt if it can happen while Vlad is still among the living.

Red6: "At this point, the focus is likely shifting from terrain to the enemy.
Meaning that it's the Ukrainian military itself which is the target for the Russians.
There the goal will be two fold as well.
(1) Prevent the Ukrainians from being able to reconstitute a military force capable of real offensive operations.
(2) Keep the pressure on so that there is a realization in the West that as time goes on Ukraine simply gets worse off, we have to keep sending billions and even more billions in equipment, and there is no advantage in continuing the war."

What certainly seems true is that neither side today is capable of major offensive operations, but that Russians keep launching suicidal "Meat Wave" assaults against Ukraine's defense-in-depth -- assaults producing Russian casualties in the range of 10 for every one Ukrainian.

What also seems true is that Ukraine will not launch another major counteroffensive until the battlespace is properly "prepared" and Ukrainian forces are as capable as they need to be.

As for Western aid to Ukraine, it is entirely possible that Europeans will be forced to step up and carry a much larger share of the load as Americans "pivot" and refocus on acute crises elsewhere -- in the Middle East, Indo-Pacific and our own borders.

How the war will finally settle is anybody's guess right now, but, as I said above, I doubt if it will happen while Vlad the Invader is still alive, and I doubt if Ukrainians will ever accept anything less than full sovereignty over their own 2013 borders.

Red6: "We are failing in every respect regards Ukraine, but that was likely a known outcome and a far more sinister, Machiavellian plan is behind all this.
It is becoming clear, even to our NATO partners, that this war in Ukraine is part of a US geo-political strategy.
Our allies still are not making the leap that maybe we wanted this war, instigated this war, but the fact that this is part of a bigger US vs. Russia campaign has become clear."

Naw... that is all just fact-free babbling Russian propaganda nonsense with no contact whatever to actual events.
The first obvious absurdity is accusing our current Democrat administration of having some kind of intelligent plan.
The truth is, they have no higher IQ than a rock -- sure, if you hit your head hard enough on a rock (as Vlad the Invader did in Ukraine), it will hurt like h*ll, might even kill you.
But that doesn't mean the rock has an intelligent plan or devious intentions, no!
You did that to yourself, dumb-*ss!

Red6: "We created a security problem for Russia that was impossible to ignore.
We had to have known that war would ensue when we offered NATO membership to Ukraine, fast tracked things, and stonewalled the Russians.
The Russians stopped us in the Republic of Georgia 2008 and Ukraine 2014.
With our violations of Minsk, withdraw from the Ballistic Missile Treaty, massive intel activity in Ukraine which was actively working against Russia...
We poked this bear pretty hard and then pretended like we were attacked "unprovoked" in a "war of aggression."
They were not going to accept this."

All that is just more pure Russian agit-prop, and every word of it is lies which no reasonable person should be repeating.

The real truth is that Russia has well-earned, through Vlad's bad behavior, every action that every neighbor has taken to defend itself against threats and assaults from "the bear".
And the list of those threats against Russia's neighbors is long and growing daily, and this is not even counting the infinite lunatic rantings of Vlad's official propagandists:

Russian threats to neighbors since 1991:

Azerbaijan (1990–1994);[1][2]
Moldova (1992–present);
Georgia (2004–present);
Lithuania (2006);
Estonia (2006–2007);
Poland (2006–present);
Belarus (2007);
Ukraine (2014–present);
Syria (2015–present);
Turkey (2015–2016);
Kazakhstan (2021–2022) ;[3] and
Armenia (2022) [4] amongst others.[5]

Red6: "Imagine this scenario: In our global chess game at trying to seize oil and gas rich nations in South America, North Africa and the Middle East which are aligned with Russia, weakening Russia militarily and economically assists our efforts.
By causing this war in Ukraine, we have the Ukrainians doing the bleeding, the Euro's flipping 1/2 of the bill and taking on most the refugees, and we stand to benefit from it around the world!"

I'm sorry, but yet again, all of that is pure fact-free paranoid Russian propaganda insanity, with no connection to reality that any normal person can accept.

Red6: "But that does not change the fact that Ukraine will get sacrificed in this process."

Well, the truth is that for many centuries Ukrainians have sacrificed themselves unsuccessfully to achieve independence and sovereignty from the Russian Empire.
Today they have their best opportunity ever to achieve full success and we don't today know how it will turn out.

Naturally, I hope for the best for Ukrainians and the worst possible for Russia, because no country has behaved as evilly as Russia in Europe since the end of the Second World War.

Russians need to suffer major negative consequences, including reparations for the destruction in Ukraine and loss of Ukrainian lives.
I think that bill right now is roughly $1 trillion and rising rapidly.

US Allies, Partners and Friends***:

***Not completely accurate since Turkey and Bulgaria are NATO allies; India, Vietnam and Mongolia are friendlies, especially as relates to CCP China; Laos and Cambodia are more oriented towards China, iirc.
Moldova is friendly, though partly occupied by Russian forces, Serbia not so much.
Pakistan and Iraq I'm very unclear about.

We even admitted at one point that Maiden was largely instigated by us.

You should read the article I provided in Qoura. It provides a detailed explanation of who, when, how and then sources all of it, in how we caused this revolt.

Outside help to fuel a revolt is nothing new: https://www.dw.com/en/how-germany-got-the-russian-revolution-off-the-ground/a-41195312#:~:text=A%20political%20paradox%2C%20or%20so,been%20at%20war%20since%201914

—

Roughly 40 Russian media outlets are censored (blocked) in the US. Many of the arguments when made get censored (deleted) in social media. But a little Nazi chat is OK since they aren't so bad anymore: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/facebook-new-zealand-neo-nazis-white-supremacists-a8837886.html

Al Jazeera isn't pro-Russian, they just aren't pro-US. Sadly, it's foreign media today that often fills the gaps since our media being managed to the degree it is has become sterile. Al-Jazeere for example had a very good article when the entire Nazi and Ukraine story broke. At that time few people were aware of any of this and in fact were in disbelief. Al-Jazeere delved into the story well: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/who-are-the-azov-regiment I can see why you would not like them, since they don't march according to our orders, Ukraine = Good, Russia = bad (now write all stories accordingly).

When you censor one side, but allow free reign for the other, you end up with a Ghosts of Kiev. Fake-

Stories about little girls with yellow and blue ribbons in their hair, sucking a lollipop and holding a shotgun. Staged-

Stories about telling the Russians “F-you” when trying to hold Snake Island. Fake-

Meantime, you get little reporting on the use of mercenaries, Ukrainian casualties and material losses, what cities have been lost that day, forced conscription...

Our media was FULL of reports on how the Ruble will collapse - for days as we implimented our sanctions. It hasn't, but the Ukrainian Hryvnia has recently, where's the flood of news stories?

The West controls the narrative which its people hear and see, so all they see are heroic Ukrainian victories, massive Russian losses and someone discontent speaking out, the horrible evils Russian soldiers comit but not one story about any Ukrainian attrocities (and there are many to include executing POW, shooting kids that are scared and want to run away once shot at...) One sided reporting because of a MSM that is lockstep with government in this case (mutual interests), and social media (where most people today get their news from) which censors.

(mass censorship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation_Governance_Board Despite being “paused” the US basically runs a mass censorship program, and this has been the case even before this board was announced. All the activities of this board were and are still being conducted, you just don't have an official board setting standardized national guidelines on how this censorship looks like. However, you have the DHS, State Department, DoD, CIA, NSA, FBI, all in the censorship business. They aren't coordinated 100% because you don't have one centralized US government censorship authority (what the DHS wants to create and make itself the head of), but we have mass censorship. The classification system is heavily used to shield bureaucrats and in some cases politicians from public scrutiny and avoid litigation. The classification system has become a rubber stamp for every government agency and the MSM is reluctant to publish these things. Finally, FOIA has lost its effectiveness. Government agencies have been able to redefine the standards to their liking, which basically means you get a bunch of junk and half the page is redacted.

For example, this is Twitter and thanks to Elon Musk this transparency in government censorship became possible. Musk has become somewhat of a champion for free speech (good for him!): https://x.com/EpochTimes/status/1615354395813883905/photo/1

(mass propaganda) At the same time, you have mass US government propaganda. Propaganda is government information operations intended to influence perceptions and thereby change behaviors. Propaganda is akin to advertising, only that is civilian / corporate. In the US we have a massive government media presence. You have in some cases government embedded in the private media, social media and big tech. You also have pure government media outlets (Agency for Global Media, NPR...) and every government agency has doubled or even tripled there organic PR personnel. For example, a 600 personnel FBI field office has 2 full time media reps and 2 full time social media reps. By controlling access the government can also shape how the media plays along. For example, the White House and Pentagon will simply not give those journalists which ask hard questions and are critical easy access. Play along is the message.

You do not need to look hard or long to see this censorship and propaganda model at work: J6, 2020 elections, Covid, Ukraine.

Everything which fell outside the governments narrative regards covid was labeled as mis or dis information and usually not reported on, or reported on only as a crazy conspiracy theory, deleted in social media, and having those people which post this seeing their accounts suspended: Wuhan origin, gain of function, mortality rates, vaccine effectiveness, vaccine safety, mask effectiveness, social distancing requirements.

One simple question: where were the “crazy conspiracy theorists” wrong?

That is what happens when you get a stupid / uniformed public. The MSM is not providing accurate and timely information, they will public what they KNOW is factually false or partially false. Presenting both sides on issues where there is conflict has become the exception, not a norm. The MSM, social media and Google are in the business of “influencing” perceptions on those issues deemed important by the federal government, especially when the White House is filled with a Democrat.

You literally have to go to the fringes, and step outside of the main stream, to get any sort thought other than the official corporate-government message, example TCN, Info Wars, foreign media (outside the West).

You have to actively work on getting around all the US / Euro censorship if you want to actually hear the other side. No different than in the East Block where folks also had to exert effort on trying to receive Western radio which was being jammed, get their hands on Western news papers which were banned, etc. Only today that's us doing these things and because EVERYTHING is over IP today, it's much easier to do.

Sad state of affairs for the home of the free and brave, where we once talked about government transparency, free speech, a right to expression, and a watchdog media.

There is so much wrong with your write up that it's impossible for me to address all the errors.

India is not our friend. If they had to choose sides, they would choose Russia.

Nicaragua, where I have been, is aligned with Russia. You have it aligned with us on your map (green).

Brazil, Egypt and South Africa are green but in BRICS and they do not really like us all that much. Not even the blacks in South Africa like us (most are commie, tribal...) and especially the whites (whom we threw under the bus) have no love for us.

Belarus and Russia are about as close as two nations can get without engaging in sexual relations on the geo-political map. What are you talking about? A dispute that was resolved politically is now a threat of war and invasion? You're just making crap up!

Vietnam is controlled by the PRC and they do not like us. No different than PRC, they just want to do some business with us. They shouldn't be green.

Not even the Mexicans like us. If you leave the tourist areas, it's not a compliment when they call you a Gringo. We annexed their lands, treat their citizens like shit in our country, threaten outright invasion and military strikes because it's a good sound clip for some politician that is grand standing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD4kFxyHALo Recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dw1pcDoewY

Armenia has 10,000 Russian troops in their country and they are shitting their pants as the Russians are withdrawing these troops because they are needed elsewhere. Armenia has security issues and the Russians are their life-line.

To much to correct...

You live in an imaginary world.

When you deny reality, the physical realities around you, nature or physics, will eventually catch up with you.

Ukraine is already an abject failure. The only question now is how bad of a failure it will become and how we can exit this while saving face?

If you live in a dream world like Adolf did, and you keep going to the bitter end, that defeat will be a hard reality to deal with when it inevitably comes.

If you're smart, you look at geo-political realities like a business, maximize returns and minimize losses. You apply the concept of risk and ROI. But that is not how a government bureaucrat or politician thinks.

Having a good imagination is a great thing.

Allowing this imagination to fill in the voids where you really don't know much, or to substitute reality with this imagination, can bring you awful results.

Ukraine will only slip further and further into a big hole as this war rages on. Not only is Russia in a superior position in near every respect: GDP, industry, manufacturing, military aged males, population, Intel service size, military size...

Russia also is absolutely NOT suffering from any sort of morale issues regards this war:

https://www.norc.org/research/library/new-survey-finds-most-russians-see-ukrainian-war-as-defense-against-west.html

https://kyivindependent.com/poll-77-of-russians-support-war-in-ukraine/

Russia is not fully mobilizing may that be conscription or converting to a wartime economy. Russia is partially mobilizing. Even Ukraine still has a fairly large pool of military aged men they could tap into. Their conscription starts at age 25, but it may not be socially acceptable to conscript younger folks, down to 18.

Regards Russia: “only citizens who are currently in the reserve and, above all, those who served in the armed forces, have certain military specialties and relevant experience would be subject to conscription.” https://www.bbc.com/russian/news-62977634 (limited mobilization)

Russia is ramping up their war machine, spending about 6+% GDP (a balanced approach), while Ukraine, desperate, is sitting at 37% GDP for their war machine and running out of bodies. I'm not talking share of government spending from a federal budget, but percent (%) of GDP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditures

Why does this matter?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns_versus_butter_model#:~:text=%22Butter%22%20represents%20nonsecurity%20goods%20that,weapons%2C%20ships%2C%20or%20tanks.

As a nation focuses more on guns, the butter gets less and less. Ukraine is already a nation that cannot pay for their own government employees, retirements, health care, were it not for direct outside assistance (US and EU) infusing money and basic necessities month after month.

It is Russia that is in a sustainable position. Not Ukraine.

All the Russians need to do is keep the pressure on, which is what they are doing. Demographically, running out of new soldiers that can be conscripted, and economically trying to pour that level into ones war machine, cannot be sustained by Ukraine. But Russia can sustain where they are at.

Russia was never interested in conquering all of Ukraine. Why would they? Those areas that are majority nationalist would become a nightmare to hold.

All this babble of the Russians wanting to keep invading further and further, is literally “propaganda.” It is not even feasible, but it sounds alarming and gets people motivated to support the cause.

Likewise, Kiev was never a real objective. The Russians shot for Kiev in order to force Ukraine to dedicate reserves and other forces to the defense of the capital. It's similar to a feint. This made taking those areas which Russia does want to take and hold in Eastern Ukraine, easier. However, that does not mean that the Russians would not have sacked Kiev had the Ukrainians not reinforced the defense of this city.

The idea is simple: No one can defend everything everywhere at all time. You choose something of extremely high value to the enemy and which could possibly be taken in an attack. However, this is not really your main objective. When you go for this high value target you force the enemy to react. You force the defender to dedicate forces and equipment that they would otherwise be able to use against you as you go for the main objective. Divide and conquer.

So, as folks like you were celebrating the victorious Ukrainians holding Kiev and “kicking those Russian's asses” you were actually losing ground in Eastern Ukraine which Russia took and has been holding ever since. It made the taking of a port city and the heart of Ukraine's steel industry easier, Mariupol. It made taking the heart of Ukraine's industry in Eastern Ukraine, easier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_of_Ukraine

But you really don't have a choice. That's the problem when being put in a situation like that. Not dedicating forces to a hasty defense would mean you'd lose something even more important. You essentially get forced into a situation where you must draw forces off your main defense. And for the enemy attacking you, this feint is successful if it draws forces away, or actually takes the objective.

We do this too, and it can even be achieved without a single shot fired. For example, we are plussing up our personnel in the Balkans (Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia), conduct really big exercises, not because we are threatened by Russia, but because we are putting the Russians under pressure, making them react to our very public demonstration which causes the Russians to pull forces that could otherwise be used in Ukraine. So the Russians are forced to send thousands of men to twittle their thumbs along a border in the Balkan states.

https://news.usni.org/2024/06/05/nato-to-kick-off-largest-baltic-operations-exercise-to-date

When on the topic of tactics, a few things need mentioned.

1.) It is technological innovation which drives tactics (mostly). For example, the civil war era Gatlin Gun ended the idea of a frontal assault. A few Gatlin Guns can take out a lot of people coming your way in the open. Trench warfare began at the end of the US Civil War and was continued in WWI.

2.) The tank ended trench warfare and began the era of maneuver warfare by the end of WWI.

3.) Maneuver warfare was continued and perfected in WWII with the concept of the Blitzkrieg.

*** However, the tank in its current day form has been obsolete for a while. Against a modern military equipped with advanced ATGMs and RPGs, drones, and mines, the MBT/IFV/APC is at a disadvantage. The reason why the M1 or Leo for that matter stuck around for as long as they have, is because we were fighting third rate military's in the Middle East that are poorly equipped, trained, and usually are incapable of fighting a joint and combined battle. So, this obselete hardware was still survivable. However, in a battle with the Russians we are right back to trench warfare.

*** Furthermore, ISR in the form of satellites, drones, robots, balloons, high power thermal sights, GSR, is not only extremely capable, it is also proliferated and something that provides intel all the way down to the squad or even individual convoy as they move out. Capabilities that once were reserved for the most strategic levels and required national assets, are now providing this information down to a fire team or squad, using networks that provide this information in real time. What does that mean? Massing troops, trying you create concentration to achieve a penetration is difficult. This isn't WWII where the Germans can hide a huge force in a forest and surprise us in a Battle of the Bulge. That battle would never happen today. As soon as 4 or more tanks are sitting in close proximity, some sort of arty/missiles would be fired at that location.

Mechanized/armored warfare has a reduced survivabilty and concentration is hard to achieve. So what are you left with? Trenches: https://www.magicmurals.com/civil-war-trenches.html

What is sad is that there simply was no need for this. Any of it. There was no eminent security need either for Ukraine or the US which required Ukraine to join NATO immediately! There just wasn't: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/ This was a 100% avoidable war.

Nothing prevented us from continuing to provide military assistance to Ukraine, intel, foreign aid. Nothing was preventing us from training their troops like we had been for years. The course we were on was good for Ukraine and good for us. Why the course change?

Red6: "When the war began, Ukraine had already been receiving lethal military assistance for years and we quickly swooped in giving them a massive military aid package to include 6 or 7 thousand Javelin missiles literally in the first month.
Some of the military equipment we provided such as the Javelin hits at the heart of a mechanized force."

It's worth remembering here that all of the US lethal aid to Ukraine came from the alleged "Putin's Puppy", Pres. Trump, and that Pres. Biden stopped that aid -- among many other Trump policies -- when Biden came into office, January 2021.

Red6: "No, there were some things we provided the Ukrainians that do give them an advantage both in weaponry, but also access to our SIGNIT, HUMINT and GEOINT etc.
Ukraine doesn't have 44 dedicated intel satellites (not communications, GPS etc).
Ukraine doesn't have the ability to turn the lights off in Serbia already in the mid 90s like we did."

So, first off -- that's the first I've heard about the CIA allegedly "turning the lights off in Siberia".
It sounds to me like Flip Wilson/Geraldine Jones tele-transported into the Kremlin's Ministry for Agitation and Propaganda, only in Russian "the devil made me do it" translates to, "the CIA made it happen".

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT!

As for intel and other lethal aid to Ukraine, sure, Biden was all-in, after Vlad's 2022 invasion, except that he never really was.
From the beginning, Biden's slogan was always, "as long as it takes" -- which could mean anything and never represented a Biden commitment to Ukrainian victory over Vlad the Invader's "Special Military Operation".

Nor has any European leader ever stood and said, in effect: "we will do whatever is necessary to defeat Russia's invasion of Ukraine, restore Ukraine's sovereignty over its 2013 borders, and secure reparations from Russia for the deaths and destruction Vlad has caused."

I think its highly unlikely that goals we are afraid to set can ever be met.

Red6: "Perceptions are skewed because we have broad censorship in the West (literally like in the former East Block).
Everything is over IP and we have two servers on the West Coast, and two on the East coast through which everything coming into our out of the country go (total government control).
This has likely even contributed to this war."

Possibly somewhat true.
Many years ago, the "World Wide Web" was called the "Wild, Wild West" for being lawless and out of control, with every illegal enterprise imaginable conducting business more or less openly.

Today all of the complaints come from the opposite direction -- that the "World Wide Web" is overcontrolled by global algorithms, artificial intelligence, personal preferences and governments' surveillance, and that these are preventing the Voices of Freedom -- especially conservative voices -- from being heard.

I personally have no idea how much of any of this is true or not true, but one thing I do know is that we hear lots of different voices from many different perspectives on Free Republic, and I hugely appreciate the opportunity to engage them here in relatively civil discussions.

😄

Red6: "China's voice is heard, they have lobbyists, donate to political campaigns, the two party's, their media is active in the US, and they have some influence on our media.
Because of the prolific trade, the US is concerned about trade spats and there is constant dialog between the two.
So China and their concerns, “how they see the world” is heard both by the American citizenry and our government.
But with Russia you have little trade, little media spill over, and little influence in our government."

That's an interesting and somewhat valid point.
You may remember, we first began hearing about the US government's intentions to "pivot to China", from the War on Terror, back in the Obama administration!
And yet... and yet... somehow, some way, for some reason, because of some distraction or another, we never really did "pivot" towards China and Asia, in the way they kept saying we should.
Why?

Doubtless, one reason is that China seems like less of a direct threat than Russia.
Just consider these events -- since first coming to power in 1999, Vlad the Invader has:

Invaded, destroyed and subjugated Chechnya.
Invaded and in effect annexed South Ostia and Abkhazia in Georgia.
Maintained Russian troops occupying Moldova.
Invaded Crimea and the Donbas (2014)
Effectively annexed Belarus
Threatened every neighbor in Russia's "Near Abroad" and many others more distant.
Massively invaded Ukraine in 2022 and continues war there on a scale not seen in Europe since 1945.

By stark contrast, China has indeed huffed and puffed and threatened to blow our house down, especially over Taiwan, but the CCP's Xi-snake's actions have been markedly less aggressive than those of Russia's Vlad the Invader.

Red6: "Because of this broad censorship on our side, you get near one sided success stories, one sided bleeding heart stories, one sided horror stories.
This creates appearances that are simply not in step with reality, which has Russia having taken nearly all they want to take (the Eastern ethnic Russian areas).
Ukraine is not in NATO and Russia blocked that through force.
We are in the position of making up new goal posts to pretend we are victorious, hence the BS casualty reports.
Feel good junk.
As we pretend that we won, Russia is simply keeping the pressure on Ukraine in order to make them and in particular their masters (us) negotiate some sort of deal to end this eventually (likely after our elections - should also tell you who is really in charge), but also to make sure Ukraine is unable to muster a force for a counter offensive."

Here, typical of propagandists, you are simply projecting your own behavior onto Americans.
In reality, Vlad the Invader's "goalposts" are set according to what he thinks he can accomplish, and in February 2022, that included the rapid conquest and subjugation of all of Ukraine.
At the time, Vlad himself said:

"Ukraine is not just a neighboring country for us.
It is an inalienable part of our own history, culture, and spiritual space.""

And Vlad's official government mouthpieces like Vladimir Solovyov put it bluntly:

"If you think we'll stop at Ukraine, think it through 300 times.
I'll remind you that Ukraine is just an intermediate step in the establishment of the strategic security of the Russian Federation."

So, whether you chose to call it "strategic security", or "strategic depth", or "buffer zones", or "Russkiy Mir" or "Grand Strategy", or "Foundations of Geopolitics" -- it's the same thing: intellectual and theoretical justifications for wars of aggression against Russia's smaller neighbors and more distant opponents.

Everything else is just noise and nonsense from the Kremlin's Ministry for Agitation and Propaganda -- agitprop.

From "Putin's Brain", Alexander Dugin's "Foundations of Geopolitics" -- worth noticing here that Dugin fantasizes Russian dominance over China, and yet today Russia is effectively CCP's client state.
Sort of reminds me of the 1939 Ribentrop-Molotov Pact...

Today, Vlad the Invader plus CCP's Xi-snake = 1939 Stalin plus Hitler?

Out of time now... must stop here... more later...

JonPreston: "Lindsey Graham has just confirmed that they are not sacrificing the Ukrainian people for "freedom" and "democracy," but for Ukraine's minerals, which are worth trillions of dollars, and the West wants them.
This is unbelievable…"

What are "unbelievable" are endless Russian propaganda lies & nonsense we see repeated so often right here.

What Sen. Graham here is trying to explain is just one of many fundamental reasons why Vlad the Invader's conquest of Ukraine must not succeed.
Those reason include:

Moral Commandments:
- #6 Thou Shalt Not Murder -- your neighbors civilians and military without serious justifications.
- #7 Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery -- or rape your neighbors' women while you murder their men.
- #8 Thou Shalt Not Steal -- your neighbors' territory, property, resources or children.
- #9 Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Your Neighbor -- or lie about mythical "coups" or alleged persecutions to stir up violence in your neighbors' countries.
- #10 Thou Shalt Not Covet -- your neighbors' land, properties, resources, people, children or happiness among other neighbors.
Countries by Democracy Index:
Shades of blue = democratic. Shades of red/brown = dictators
Legal: Russia's War Crimes in Ukraine
- Prohibited weapons: gas attacks against Ukrainian forces
- Kidnappings Ukrainian children, abduction and disappearances of Ukrainian civilians.
- Attacks on civilians, their homes and other non-military property.
- Stealing civilian assets such as hospital equipment and notoriously, Ukrainian washing machines, dishwashers and refrigerators.
- Torturing civilians
- Using civilians as human shields
- Sexual violence against Ukrainian civilians
- Widespread looting
- Forced conscription of Ukrainians in Russian occupied territories
- Mistreatment of POWs
- Crimes that fit definitions of "genocide"
- Criminal investigations by international courts including the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, the International Commission of Inquiry, the UN Human Rights Monitors, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and a proposed International Tribunal for Crimes of Aggression, among others.
Threats to the Western-democratic World Order
While Russian propaganda babbles insanely about a "unipolar world" and an alleged "American Empire", the truth is the world today consists of around 200 independent countries, all of which are dependent on world peace and order guaranteed by western democratic militaries and peacekeeping forces.
If Vlad the Invaders' Special Military Operations in Ukraine and elsewhere succeed, it will existentially threaten the world order as we know it and begin returning us to the 19th Century Age of Authoritarian Empires.
March of the New Axis of Evil Dictators -- Russia's Vlad the Invader, CCP China's Xi-snake, NoKo's Little Kim and Iran's Moolah Mullahs.
We could add to that list any number of other two-bit brass-horn dictators -- from Venezuela's Chavez-Madura to Cuba's Castro-Canel to Belarus' Annexed Lukashenko and any number of tin-pot tyrants in Africa and Asia.
Fact: since at least 2020, liberal Western-style democracies are in retreat and aggressive dictatorships are on the march.
Geo-strategic revanchism of the Old Soviet and Tsarist Russian Empires.
Ukraine was, arguably, the "jewel in the crown" of the Old Soviet and Tsarist Empire-Prisons of Nations.
Ukraine is roughly the size of Texas, with over 50 million talented people (in 1993), huge natural resources and strong industries -- conquest of Ukraine would add:
- One-third to Russia's population = 50% to Russia's Russian-speaking population, and potential military manpower.
- Less than 5% to Russia's overall territory, but over 20% to Russia's farmable land and agricultural production.
- 20% to Russia's available raw materials and manufacturing capacity -- Sen. Graham's point.
Geo-strategic military preemption:
Of nine historical invasion routes into Russia (according to Peter Zeihan in 2015), Russia directly controlled only two in 2013, though I'd add a third:
- In the South -- East Caucuses coastal approach
- In the South -- West Caucuses coastal approach
- In the North -- White Sea Coast
Peter Zeihan's nine invasion routes into Russia's heartland (as of 2015):
In 2013, Ukraine controlled three more:
- Polish Gap
- Bessarabian Gap
- Crimea
The final three are:
- The Baltic Coast (from Finland to Poland)
- The Central Asian Corridor (North from Afghanistan)
- The Tien-Altay Gap (from China through Kazakhstan)
Vlad the Invader's conquest of Crimea removed one of three routes through Ukraine, but has now also added nearly 1,000 miles of new border with NATO's Finland.
How then is Russia safer today than it was in 2013?
If geo-strategic military preemption can justify Vlad Invading Crimea, how does it not also justify Vlad Invading every other country near one of Russia's historical invasion corridors?

Finally, it's well worth noticing that what Sen. Graham was talking about is not US or Western seizure of Ukraine's natural resources, but rather the importance of preventing Vlad the Invader from seizing Ukraine's natural wealth by conquest.

Can you count the nine historical invasion routes into Russia's heartland on this map?

Just grabbing things out of thin air, is no argument either.

Chechnya and Ostia are terrorist hot beds, even Uzbekistan.

I remember when Condeleeza Rice was lecturing the Russians regards Chechnya, until 9-11 happened and we got a good dose of Islamic terror of our own.

In fact, once the US was fighting Chechen volunteers in Iraq, suddenly the US had an epiphany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_siege (look at where the Islamic terrorists came from)

In fact, while we were looking for evil Russian spies behind every tree (while the Chinese are boring holes through us like Swiss cheese even in our intel and DoD), we failed to be able to use the information the Russians provided to us regards two Chechen brothers: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA2P02R/

The Europeans are paying for roughly ½ of this war in Ukraine while also absorbing the majority of the refugees (Fact). The Ukrainians are doing nearly all the bleeding (Fact). And the US is the one that stands to benefit on the world stage (Fact).

You might not like that statement, but it's true.

(1) Motive

Syria: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_intervention_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

Libya: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya

Iraq: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

Venezuela: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gideon_(2020)

Fact: These are all nations we attacked, invaded, or sponsored a coup in. These are all nations that are aligned or formal allies with Russia. These are all oil and gas producing nations. None of these nations posed a threat to us when we attacked, invaded or sponsored a coup in them.

(2) History. Russia already in 1994 made it clear that they do NOT want NATO expanding into their former Soviet Republics and border states. They see this also as a promise we made with them: https://www.france24.com/en/russia/20220130-did-nato-betray-russia-by-expanding-to-the-east

Biden was one of the people sounding the alarm in 1997 regards NATO East expansion into the Balkan States: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIoRKLdwxXA

The Russian invasion of the Republic of Georgia in 2008, and the Ukrainian limited operation in 2014 were clear signs that Russia will not accept us expanding NATO to their borders. In both cases, the US was heading on a path for NATO admission by these states.

Georgia 2008: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_38988.htm#:~:text=Allies%20agreed%20at%20the%20NATO,reconfirmed%20at%20successive%20NATO%20summits. (we don't even go back and edit the web pages and deny it, like we often do. Flat out, we decided to bring Georgia into NATO, and Russian said “Niet”)

Ukraine 2014: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30587924 (That was the cause of the war in 2014)

As usual, we apply a doubled standard. We don't want a foreign power setting up permanent bases along our border, and historically invaded countries (Grenada) and risked a war over this exact same issue (Cuban Missile Crisis). But when we want to put someone else in the same position we didn't find acceptable in 1962 and 1984 for us, why then of course it's all different and suddenly “sovereignty, democracy, human rights” come flying from our ass.

(3) Intel. Before a major invasion like this happens, there is a massive amount of chatter, logistics, rich folks getting a heads up (so they can move their stuff), things which happen that indicate it's serious: real and eminent. Our civil leadership and White House is briefed daily and it is nearly impossible not to know.

(4) Again common sense (Logic): Ukraine has the same rail gauge as Russia and they share many bridges and hard ball roads. Ukraine is large enough in landmass, economically and in infrastructure to support a very large foreign force be stationed there indefinitely. North East Ukraine is 6 minutes time of flight to Moscow for a hyper-sonic missile, and most of Russia's ballistic missiles are impacted by a first strike advantage and by missile defense if we set up in Ukraine. Our basing in Ukraine would entirely tip the scales of nuclear deterrence against Russia, the only area where they have parity with us. Ukraine has deep sea ports, large and many airfields able to support big warships and strategic logistics (C5) and bombers (B52/B2). The area between Ukraine and Russia offers many large maneuver corridors, through which we can shove a mechanized force (i.e. invade) and the larger cities and forests allow for things to easily be hidden. Finally, Ukraine borders Romania, Poland, Hungary and Slovakia, NATO nations, making logistics via land from other NATO nations easy. It is from a national security standpoint, for Russia, unacceptable that Ukraine enters NATO. There is no rational person who would accept this situation is in Putin's shoes.

A war between Ukraine and Russia, even though Russia will prevail long term, will weaken Russia and give us more freedom of movement in those places where we and Russia have been struggling for control: Libya, Syria, Iraq, Venezuela, Niger (didn't go as we anticipated since we just got the boot there). This war in Ukraine makes it much harder for Russia to defend their sphere of influence around the world. It makes it harder for them to project force.

Our war industrial complex is working overtime, literally. In fact this has been a boost for US hardware even among our NATO allies: https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/12/14/germany-clinches-8-billion-purchase-of-35-f-35-aircraft-from-the-us/

It's not just LM, it's Northrup Grumman, Boeing, General Dynamics, all of them: https://www.statista.com/statistics/260877/net-sales-of-lockheed-martin-to-the-us-government/

This has been an opportunity to eliminate the competition for gas in Europe: https://www.aa.com.tr/uploads/userFiles/ab870dc1-e87c-46af-a54e-cc928be7834a/gass.jpg

Meanwhile, our gas sales to Europe are going up: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2022.06.07/chart2.svg

In defense sales, oil and gas sales abroad, our ability to push Russia aside in the Middle East, North Africa and South America, we are the ONLY ONE that stands to benefit. Do you think Germany which is left with paying higher energy costs and is losing its competativeness, is flooded with refugees, and is hemoriging money for Ukraine is benefitting (they buy our weapons and buy our energy)? Who is the only real beneficiary in this war? People are starting to figure this out. This might not end well for NATO.

The average American is not a winner here. They pay the taxes for the 61 billion we give to Ukraine in a single appropriation. The winners are as usual the oligarchs, the ones that wanted NATO in Ukraine and stand to benefit even if a war starts. You're not any more wealthy, safe, or free. But you do have some image of yourself and faux morality with babble about sovereignty, democracy, and human rights to make yourself feel good if you support this war. That's how you sell it to the public, "you're a good person if you wear your double mask, you're patriotic if you get your vaccine..." You create some sort of association where you're a good person if you do or think as told: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/12/21/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-fight-against-covid-19/ Not because it makes sense, not because they have an actual sound argument, but because you're responsible, professional, patriotic, whatever if you do as they tell you. You see the same regards Ukraine.

Claiming our government “stumbled” into this war out of incompetence, is highly unlikely. I do believe we have a more or less incompetent civil leadership, but even they had to have known that this will cause a war: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/

There was no pressing need for this. There was no eminent threat to us or the Ukraine. In fact, things in Ukraine were going very well, even for us. Why the sudden course change and push for NATO?

Ask yourself this, did it make sense in terms of Risk? Did it make sense in terms of ROI? We were already arming and training their forces, we were already feeding them intel... Ukraine was on a path to EU membership before the war and that was well in their reach. It makes no sense!

Proving that we wanted this war is another story. Unless there is some sort of a leak of documents etc. which show this (example Bush torture memo: a red pill) it will be almost impossible to prove and those people who want to be willfully ignorant will be able to live on in their blue pill world even though there is a plethora of evidence suggesting things are not as they appear both for the cause of this war, and how it is going.

Claiming our administration didn't know NATO expansion into Ukraine would cause a war, is like you trying to tell a traffic cop that you didn't know you had to stop at a red light. It's not even remotely feasible, BUT it's something where at least to the public you can pretend not to have known.

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.