The only hope, if hope there is, is the replacement of all the current Western leaders with people who are sane. However, as politics is downstream of culture, I'm not sure where those people are to be found. Interestingly, Simplicious is downplaying the risk of WW3 and nukes, calling those who warn about it "hysterical". Let's hope he's right.
‘One almost suspects that the narrative was constructed intentionally—to head off any attempts of dissenters to demand a rational approach to resolving any supposed differences with Russia.‘ Exactly!
."Logisticians decide the battle before it even begins."
Nato will lose against the Russians.
America will lose against the Chinese. I have detailed the reasons before on this blog. It is question of simple math and analysis of current trends.
BTW.. my bet is that the Americans will go with first use of Nuclear weapons. No hard evidence on this, just looking at "past decision making" and current history. Maybe I will be wrong. We shall see.
What we've learnt in the last few years is that this is purely about retaining power. The neocons and globalists will do anything to retain that power. Anything.
Yep, But you know with these guys, (DC) they will make up anything to fit their needs/narrative.
Examples
"There is no genocide in Israel, our carrier fleets are safe from enemy strikes and Benghazi was caused by a film, We are winning in Afghanistan, and the Ukrainian Offensive will push the Russians back and probably out of Crimea. " and many more..
Truthfully Mark, the American Ruling class has become illegitimate in the area of telling the truth.
And you are correct. You do not negotiate with Hitler. So the Narrative of Putin being Hitler has painted the West into a box. (Was this is intentional or just stupid?)
Because how can you end the conflict when it is Hitler you are facing? You cannot negotiate with him, because that would be an abomination. So your only choice is war.
There are only two answers here. Either our political class is insanely stupid.
OR
they want this war and are going to do everything in their power to ensure it happens.
I don't know much about Napoleon's adventures across Russia but I do believe Putin is a very calculated thinker. Playing his cards to have troops perform tactical nuclear drills brought a response he may not have been expecting but allowed for Russia to get NATO to show their cards when they bombed the ballistic missile advanced radar stations.
Blinken, Zhou, Jake the snake all think they're smarter than everyone else and yet they show no intelligence in their actions. Globe trotting means nothing and is all for "show" while they play both sides of the fence.
As far as being a threat to China, the US will have a flat top blown out of the water early in any escalation and we'll run back to Pearl.
All armies are close to their supply lines. Better to say a war of attrition favors the army with the shorter supply lines. In a war with China, the U.S. aircraft carriers would be sunk in the first week should they be used to project force- the U.S. would have to depend on air bases in Japan and South Korea.
I don't think it would even be a sea war- carriers are just big targets and the Chinese surely by now have the land to sea missile capability to knock ships out of the water. Carriers are great as long as you are facing a technologically inferior opponent.
The Chinese have been working on that for decades. Davis talks about how stupid the idea of using carriers is now. Not to mention, the Russians with their hypersonics will be sure to be backing the Chinese. Woops--I mentioned it.
Carriers exemplify the neocon mindset which is still trapped in 1991: big, brash, in your face. In reality, they are underwater artificial reefs waiting to happen.
The only hope, if hope there is, is the replacement of all the current Western leaders with people who are sane. However, as politics is downstream of culture, I'm not sure where those people are to be found. Interestingly, Simplicious is downplaying the risk of WW3 and nukes, calling those who warn about it "hysterical". Let's hope he's right.
‘One almost suspects that the narrative was constructed intentionally—to head off any attempts of dissenters to demand a rational approach to resolving any supposed differences with Russia.‘ Exactly!
That mindset presumes that the neocons would win. If they don't it's a suicide note.
Concur...To quote Rommel...
."Logisticians decide the battle before it even begins."
Nato will lose against the Russians.
America will lose against the Chinese. I have detailed the reasons before on this blog. It is question of simple math and analysis of current trends.
BTW.. my bet is that the Americans will go with first use of Nuclear weapons. No hard evidence on this, just looking at "past decision making" and current history. Maybe I will be wrong. We shall see.
What we've learnt in the last few years is that this is purely about retaining power. The neocons and globalists will do anything to retain that power. Anything.
Look at it this way. If you've been attacked by "literal Hitler" of course you got with first use. That's the narrative, right?
Yep, But you know with these guys, (DC) they will make up anything to fit their needs/narrative.
Examples
"There is no genocide in Israel, our carrier fleets are safe from enemy strikes and Benghazi was caused by a film, We are winning in Afghanistan, and the Ukrainian Offensive will push the Russians back and probably out of Crimea. " and many more..
Truthfully Mark, the American Ruling class has become illegitimate in the area of telling the truth.
And you are correct. You do not negotiate with Hitler. So the Narrative of Putin being Hitler has painted the West into a box. (Was this is intentional or just stupid?)
Because how can you end the conflict when it is Hitler you are facing? You cannot negotiate with him, because that would be an abomination. So your only choice is war.
There are only two answers here. Either our political class is insanely stupid.
OR
they want this war and are going to do everything in their power to ensure it happens.
I wish you and your family the best,
I don't know much about Napoleon's adventures across Russia but I do believe Putin is a very calculated thinker. Playing his cards to have troops perform tactical nuclear drills brought a response he may not have been expecting but allowed for Russia to get NATO to show their cards when they bombed the ballistic missile advanced radar stations.
Blinken, Zhou, Jake the snake all think they're smarter than everyone else and yet they show no intelligence in their actions. Globe trotting means nothing and is all for "show" while they play both sides of the fence.
As far as being a threat to China, the US will have a flat top blown out of the water early in any escalation and we'll run back to Pearl.
All armies are close to their supply lines. Better to say a war of attrition favors the army with the shorter supply lines. In a war with China, the U.S. aircraft carriers would be sunk in the first week should they be used to project force- the U.S. would have to depend on air bases in Japan and South Korea.
Carriers are large slow moving targets, air bases are even larger stationary targets, mobile missile launchers are different things altogether.
Davis has stuff to say about carriers.
Define naval power. The Houthis are a naval power because they can control vast swathes of the Red Sea.
I don't think it would even be a sea war- carriers are just big targets and the Chinese surely by now have the land to sea missile capability to knock ships out of the water. Carriers are great as long as you are facing a technologically inferior opponent.
The Chinese have been working on that for decades. Davis talks about how stupid the idea of using carriers is now. Not to mention, the Russians with their hypersonics will be sure to be backing the Chinese. Woops--I mentioned it.
Carriers exemplify the neocon mindset which is still trapped in 1991: big, brash, in your face. In reality, they are underwater artificial reefs waiting to happen.