Yesterday I described Alexander Mercouris’ latest as a bit of a tour de force. The focus of his comments are largely on the crisis of Europe occasioned by the failure of their war on Russia. In fact, it looks like the definitive failure of the European war on Russia that has been ongoing for centuries—certainly dating back to the
What if the 2024 presidential election is stolen again and Trump is not elected? Or Trump gets into some kind of "accident". What then? You will have a large million plus army of Russians armed for war. They WILL invade Europe and push as far as Paris. I have been to the factory where most of the shells for our military are made and they can ramp up production to the hundreds of thousands per month.
Our military refers to the US military. The factory is in Ohio. They were a customer of mine and I sold technology that for the machines to run faster and to be more reliable. I have also been to Russia 4 times, not for work. Once when it was still the USSR.
So your point is that there will be a Russian army of a million which will invade the West and the US will respond with a massive ammunition build up for which the infrastructure already exists? Then what?
My point is that Russia is building up its army and some experts that I have read, either Mark or Simplicius, estimate it to be up to a million troops strong. As a result of all of the effort to raise this army Russia will invade Europe. My second point is that the US has the ability to ramp up munitions production, although it is limited unless they have brought back some of the machinery. The shells are made on a machine called a multi spindle machine which is old technology but has the lowest cost per unit. These helped us to win WWII. They even had them on the WWII US Navy ships to make spare parts on board.
I disagree. There is no reason for Russia to seek territorial conquest beyond its traditional borders. Russia learned that lesson after WW2--maintaining an external empire ends up dragging the imperial power down--as we're slowly learning. Russia is focused on building up its industrial and tech strength as well as trade links.
I've just finished reading the Bulwark article that American Cardigan posted elsewhere on MiH. Don't laugh at me if I say I am trying to make sense of it. The authors (two of whom are former US ambassadors to Ukraine) insist that Ukraine is winning and can win the war if we just provide them with more missiles, drones and F-16s. As you say, more 'ammo'. Well with a FY 2023 military budget of $1.52 trillion (plus the combined budgets of the rest of NATO) surely we can supply Ukraine with enough ammo to 'win' the war?
If the kleptocrat government of a country steals 90% of the value of the aid of various sorts sent to a country, is the problem that more aid wasn't sent? Or are the kleptocrats the problem? I wouldn't ask any american citizen to work 1 minute more to provide anything to Ukraine.
Thanks for sharing Cass. Like most surveys things can get skewed (See Rasmussen). However, it appears in general they support President Z's ambitions to continue the conflict albeit in the South and East regions trending slower each period surveyed.
Adding females and males of older age based on the revised conscription means being put in play may hasten their thinking differently. I don't see this ever going 50/50 but probably closer to 65/35 (favor vs. opposed) to continue the conflict.
Trying to imagine a scenario where we here in the USA lose 18% of the country and my feelings to "continue the fight" would be expected. The challenge is the Ukrainians will have "no say" in the process as we all know.
In other words, the survey is useless. Public opinion by Ukrainians won't influence any final result/action IMO. Thanks again!
I'm on the same page. Polls certainly can be flawed.
I would add the impact of selective news dissemination (aka propaganda). Perhaps the average Ukrainian poll respondent doesn't know the total number of casualties (does anybody?), or the impact of the war on the Ukrainian economy (since we have been subsidizing it since Feb 2022), or the infrastructure devastation inflicted on remote battlefield areas, or the consequences of the war on global security. Perhaps the average Ukrainian poll respondent has been told that if they fight a little harder or a little longer they will win.
Good point at the end Mark. Events are moving at the speed of events. In other words at the speed that people who are not our friends can drive them. If Bad Orange gets elected and strikes a deal with Putin we can begin to make rational foreign policy. Neutral Eastern Europe with Russia pointing its 1.5 million man army East. Perhaps we can then begin the work of peeling Russia away from China. For that to happen we will need regime change here via the ballot box. Will it take Putin reducing the dollar to rubble through new international trade systems and our fiscal incontinenence for this to happen? It seems like we will have to experience a calamity before a critical mass of voters realize that we need major change.
Since when is *war* a solution to the little guy's problems? I am thinking, for example, of one little guy in particular: myself...
Perhaps you might consider doing a post, Mark, discussing your views why the various governments now building towards a widening war or wars feel free to ignore my opinions and concerns about war as a solution while they pursue arms buildups, treaty violations, criminal law of war violations, manpower mobilizations, increases in government debt and deficits, outright lies, civilian deaths and genocide, economic devastation, and much more, all as appropriate policies to be carried out (most often without debate) presumably in the best interests of their constituents?
Writing off Europe was part of Russia's calculus over the past ten years. They are looking for partners who have their back (the Chinese, as you explained recently) and are not looking to blow up their resources (Nordstream). Russia is doing a favor to Europe to sell them energy and other resources. They can sell it elsewhere. Russia just wants to be a part of the European cool kids. At some point, you take a hint that you aren't wanted and find someone else to hang out with.
I have never thought of the US Neocons as using Russia as a tool to destroy the EU. I see them as looking at the situation exactly opposite, with the EU as a tool to destroy Russia.
The suicidal decisions of the Europeans are happening in parallel with the war in Ukraine, specifically with regards to energy. How could anyone have endorsed the destruction of Nordstream? Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a foundational player in it. What on earth were they, and are they thinking?
Will The Biden Administration force some type of peace before the 2024 election?
Does it matter if Ukraine is still in a war? Or if Putin wins. The Congo civil war had around 6 million dead, and most U.S. voters never heard of it. If the msm decided to stop coverage, my guess the election consequences would be minor.
U.S. forces were actually in Afghanistan, so a different situation than Ukraine. Ukraine U.S. voter perceived impact was massive anti Russian propaganda. Some of those with Ukraine flags on their social media accounts will be upset, but I’m sure they will vote for the Democratic anointed, rather than that deplorable Trump.
Europe is just squawking about the Russian threat to distract their voters from the bed they’ve made of stupid suicidal decisions, and try to get the U.S. to continue supporting Ukraine. Europe is not serious about building up their military, it’s too expensive and would impact the climate too much. The ruling class is happy with their de-industrialization. It’s all virtue signaling. And perhaps as an excuse for more censorship to keep the proles from revolting.
U.S. is more focused on the Gaza mess.
I’m not sure how and when this Ukraine mess will happen, but my guess on the end game:
Russia will eventually seize all of the Black Sea Ukrainian land.
Ukraine will end up a much smaller landlocked area demilitarized.
Belarus will join Russia.
Voters in Europe are noticing their uniparty is ignoring the desires. No matter how and who they vote, it’s usually more immigration, climate change, political correctness, and censorship.
We know that Biden's strategy for addressing failure is to either ignore it or claim it as a triumph, and the media collaborate with him to spread the narrative.
At the same time, he will not be successful getting Ukraine (or Europe) to conduct the surrender negotiations for him because Russia will insist that only America (despite the fact we are "not agreement capable") can make an agreement that will have any hope of being binding.
Fascinating to see how this plays out, because of course Biden is desperate to clear Ukraine out of the news cycle for 6-9 months prior to the election. I agree that the MSM will be the praetorians, but can they really just pretend that a war in Europe is no longer happening? The Congo is one thing...
I don't doubt that Russia will continue the fight until Biden is sitting across the table from Putin, but what shape will it take? Will his army have to be lined up on the borders of Galicia? Do they have to cross the Article 5 threshold and take out NATO missiles in post-1998 forward positions? Doubtful, since that would violate the stated aims of the SMO...
An EU coming to its senses would do well to revisit elements of Willy Brandt's realpolitik & Ostpolitik policies. Orban and Fico are already there. The EU seems to be first up to test the proposition, 'a lot of ruin in a nation'. How much longer can the stunted sovereign members of the EU continue to pursue policies against popular national interests? Lavrov has it right, the West in their overly-lawyered approach cannot be honest about who benefits, who shoulders the burden, and the meagerness of the result versus the promise: everything done "on the sly". A predicate to reform and change will be more sunlight and accountability. Hmmm, a lot of ruin ...
What if the 2024 presidential election is stolen again and Trump is not elected? Or Trump gets into some kind of "accident". What then? You will have a large million plus army of Russians armed for war. They WILL invade Europe and push as far as Paris. I have been to the factory where most of the shells for our military are made and they can ramp up production to the hundreds of thousands per month.
'our military' = Russian military?
Our military refers to the US military. The factory is in Ohio. They were a customer of mine and I sold technology that for the machines to run faster and to be more reliable. I have also been to Russia 4 times, not for work. Once when it was still the USSR.
So your point is that there will be a Russian army of a million which will invade the West and the US will respond with a massive ammunition build up for which the infrastructure already exists? Then what?
My point is that Russia is building up its army and some experts that I have read, either Mark or Simplicius, estimate it to be up to a million troops strong. As a result of all of the effort to raise this army Russia will invade Europe. My second point is that the US has the ability to ramp up munitions production, although it is limited unless they have brought back some of the machinery. The shells are made on a machine called a multi spindle machine which is old technology but has the lowest cost per unit. These helped us to win WWII. They even had them on the WWII US Navy ships to make spare parts on board.
I disagree. There is no reason for Russia to seek territorial conquest beyond its traditional borders. Russia learned that lesson after WW2--maintaining an external empire ends up dragging the imperial power down--as we're slowly learning. Russia is focused on building up its industrial and tech strength as well as trade links.
The carefully built up standing army is for defense of its vast realm. As in the past.
One wonders why there's any ammo shortage in Ukraine.
I've just finished reading the Bulwark article that American Cardigan posted elsewhere on MiH. Don't laugh at me if I say I am trying to make sense of it. The authors (two of whom are former US ambassadors to Ukraine) insist that Ukraine is winning and can win the war if we just provide them with more missiles, drones and F-16s. As you say, more 'ammo'. Well with a FY 2023 military budget of $1.52 trillion (plus the combined budgets of the rest of NATO) surely we can supply Ukraine with enough ammo to 'win' the war?
If the kleptocrat government of a country steals 90% of the value of the aid of various sorts sent to a country, is the problem that more aid wasn't sent? Or are the kleptocrats the problem? I wouldn't ask any american citizen to work 1 minute more to provide anything to Ukraine.
Want to read something funny? By the way, we're known now as "armchair pundits". https://plus.thebulwark.com/p/ukraine-peace-now-means-war-later
From the Bulwark article: https://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=eng&cat=reports&id=1301&page=2
Apparently Ukrainians support the war...
What do you make of this, AC?
Thanks for sharing Cass. Like most surveys things can get skewed (See Rasmussen). However, it appears in general they support President Z's ambitions to continue the conflict albeit in the South and East regions trending slower each period surveyed.
Adding females and males of older age based on the revised conscription means being put in play may hasten their thinking differently. I don't see this ever going 50/50 but probably closer to 65/35 (favor vs. opposed) to continue the conflict.
Trying to imagine a scenario where we here in the USA lose 18% of the country and my feelings to "continue the fight" would be expected. The challenge is the Ukrainians will have "no say" in the process as we all know.
In other words, the survey is useless. Public opinion by Ukrainians won't influence any final result/action IMO. Thanks again!
I'm on the same page. Polls certainly can be flawed.
I would add the impact of selective news dissemination (aka propaganda). Perhaps the average Ukrainian poll respondent doesn't know the total number of casualties (does anybody?), or the impact of the war on the Ukrainian economy (since we have been subsidizing it since Feb 2022), or the infrastructure devastation inflicted on remote battlefield areas, or the consequences of the war on global security. Perhaps the average Ukrainian poll respondent has been told that if they fight a little harder or a little longer they will win.
Agreed. All good and valid points on information sharing.
I think this is funnier, and I'll bet Putin agrees:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/polish-truckers-start-round-the-clock-blockade-fourth-ukrainian-border-crossing-2023-11-27/
Oh my Lord. Think we’re going to see more and more of these follies.
Good point at the end Mark. Events are moving at the speed of events. In other words at the speed that people who are not our friends can drive them. If Bad Orange gets elected and strikes a deal with Putin we can begin to make rational foreign policy. Neutral Eastern Europe with Russia pointing its 1.5 million man army East. Perhaps we can then begin the work of peeling Russia away from China. For that to happen we will need regime change here via the ballot box. Will it take Putin reducing the dollar to rubble through new international trade systems and our fiscal incontinenence for this to happen? It seems like we will have to experience a calamity before a critical mass of voters realize that we need major change.
Since when is *war* a solution to the little guy's problems? I am thinking, for example, of one little guy in particular: myself...
Perhaps you might consider doing a post, Mark, discussing your views why the various governments now building towards a widening war or wars feel free to ignore my opinions and concerns about war as a solution while they pursue arms buildups, treaty violations, criminal law of war violations, manpower mobilizations, increases in government debt and deficits, outright lies, civilian deaths and genocide, economic devastation, and much more, all as appropriate policies to be carried out (most often without debate) presumably in the best interests of their constituents?
Great essay!
Writing off Europe was part of Russia's calculus over the past ten years. They are looking for partners who have their back (the Chinese, as you explained recently) and are not looking to blow up their resources (Nordstream). Russia is doing a favor to Europe to sell them energy and other resources. They can sell it elsewhere. Russia just wants to be a part of the European cool kids. At some point, you take a hint that you aren't wanted and find someone else to hang out with.
I have never thought of the US Neocons as using Russia as a tool to destroy the EU. I see them as looking at the situation exactly opposite, with the EU as a tool to destroy Russia.
The suicidal decisions of the Europeans are happening in parallel with the war in Ukraine, specifically with regards to energy. How could anyone have endorsed the destruction of Nordstream? Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a foundational player in it. What on earth were they, and are they thinking?
Will The Biden Administration force some type of peace before the 2024 election?
Does it matter if Ukraine is still in a war? Or if Putin wins. The Congo civil war had around 6 million dead, and most U.S. voters never heard of it. If the msm decided to stop coverage, my guess the election consequences would be minor.
U.S. forces were actually in Afghanistan, so a different situation than Ukraine. Ukraine U.S. voter perceived impact was massive anti Russian propaganda. Some of those with Ukraine flags on their social media accounts will be upset, but I’m sure they will vote for the Democratic anointed, rather than that deplorable Trump.
Europe is just squawking about the Russian threat to distract their voters from the bed they’ve made of stupid suicidal decisions, and try to get the U.S. to continue supporting Ukraine. Europe is not serious about building up their military, it’s too expensive and would impact the climate too much. The ruling class is happy with their de-industrialization. It’s all virtue signaling. And perhaps as an excuse for more censorship to keep the proles from revolting.
U.S. is more focused on the Gaza mess.
I’m not sure how and when this Ukraine mess will happen, but my guess on the end game:
Russia will eventually seize all of the Black Sea Ukrainian land.
Ukraine will end up a much smaller landlocked area demilitarized.
Belarus will join Russia.
Voters in Europe are noticing their uniparty is ignoring the desires. No matter how and who they vote, it’s usually more immigration, climate change, political correctness, and censorship.
We know that Biden's strategy for addressing failure is to either ignore it or claim it as a triumph, and the media collaborate with him to spread the narrative.
At the same time, he will not be successful getting Ukraine (or Europe) to conduct the surrender negotiations for him because Russia will insist that only America (despite the fact we are "not agreement capable") can make an agreement that will have any hope of being binding.
Fascinating to see how this plays out, because of course Biden is desperate to clear Ukraine out of the news cycle for 6-9 months prior to the election. I agree that the MSM will be the praetorians, but can they really just pretend that a war in Europe is no longer happening? The Congo is one thing...
I don't doubt that Russia will continue the fight until Biden is sitting across the table from Putin, but what shape will it take? Will his army have to be lined up on the borders of Galicia? Do they have to cross the Article 5 threshold and take out NATO missiles in post-1998 forward positions? Doubtful, since that would violate the stated aims of the SMO...
Another tactic is blame Trump.
An EU coming to its senses would do well to revisit elements of Willy Brandt's realpolitik & Ostpolitik policies. Orban and Fico are already there. The EU seems to be first up to test the proposition, 'a lot of ruin in a nation'. How much longer can the stunted sovereign members of the EU continue to pursue policies against popular national interests? Lavrov has it right, the West in their overly-lawyered approach cannot be honest about who benefits, who shoulders the burden, and the meagerness of the result versus the promise: everything done "on the sly". A predicate to reform and change will be more sunlight and accountability. Hmmm, a lot of ruin ...
The EU has to go. It's as simple as that.
Excellent summation