Today I want to follow up and, hopefully, expand on some topics that have come up recently, including in yesterday’s post. The title is the title of Doug Macgregor’s latest book, Margin of Victory: Five Battles that Changed the Face of Modern War. I was alerted to this book by a brief interview with Macgregor
Crooke's "War Makes for Clarity" article is fascinating. His observations about the European economic and political situation seem to mirror those of Luongo. What Crooke adds is the idea that the "core" EU countries might jettison the "periphery" countries of Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Greece in the interest of their own economic survival - "fragmentation" will not be limited to just bond spreads. I can certainly see that happening eventually but that would be tantamount to admitting that the Davos dream is over. Will the current crop of leaders admit that under any amount of pressure? But perhaps their governments will have fallen by the time we reach that point. So it will be fascinating if not horrifying to watch how the Davos PTB will try to manage the nearly inevitable dissolution/disintegration of the EU.
The second thing that is interesting and frightening that he hints at is the social state of Europe and the U.S.. respectively. As the societal institutions on both continents degrade and the "center no longer holds," will Europeans and Americans value order and peace more than they do their own political objectives? Are the greens in Germany willing to compromise and recognize the rights and opinions of others before their country is totally destroyed? Is the left in the United States willing to do the same? Has the current generation ever been taught the discipline needed to consider the ramifications of their acts and the morality to recognize the rights and values of others? The answers to those questions scare me. As Mark has noted, we appear to be pre-revolutionary.
"It’s the war, stupid ..." No, it's still the economy, stupid. We are unfit to fight any war, but can be bought on the cheap. Our regime has not miscalculated. Your columns have pointed out that 'the New World Order' seems to be the priority, and as Deplorable Dave pointed out in his comment, "The American military has been redesigned to fight Americans. "
It must be remembered that the Russians fought like animals, said the Germans, refused to admit defeat at Stalingrad, and made rapid advances taking significant casualties afterwards. The American soldier is superb when initiative is encouraged. As Patton put it, "Your goal is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his country." And under Trump we were well on our way to integrating small combat units with air, artillery, armored and land forces. Pity.
Thank you, Mark. Very informative. One question for anyone who has an answer. What is ideologised SCIENCE? A vague idea: it has to do with progressive ideas. But how?
The most recent obvious use of The Science™ was to scare us into accepting policies around the world that locked us down and vaccinated us against Covid, a common cold developed in a lab, all in service of a greater good conceived by the WEF.
Please bare with me. I’m an 84 yr old retired neuro psychologist in Ontario. Is The Science what I call junk science, or crap science if it’s really awful? As in “We followed The Science, so this edict is justified”? I’ve seen Science that any Stats 101 class could pick apart as the basis for some law, edict, whatever that got dumped in us in the US or here in Canada.
"Macgregor argues that Zhukov applied lessons learned “on the plains of Nomonhan” against the Japanese to his victories against the Wehrmacht. I would actually argue against that view in some respects. Without in any way denigrating Zhukov’s accomplishments, I would argue that he was applying standard Russian military doctrine. "
I haven't read MacGregor's book, though I will likely put it on my list. I suspect that he is quite correct about Zhukov and Nomonhan. Soviet losses in that battle were quite serious, and exposed weaknesses in the Red Army. Martin Van Creveld, in his recent biography of Stalin, argues that the Russians did learn useful lessons from Nomonhan, and I found his case persuasive. I can't speak for MacGregor's, but hope to read his book.
The Russian army, historically, has a pretty iffy track record for offensive operations at the start of a war. The first and second world wars, Ukraine, Finland, and that business in Grozny all provide examples. They aren't ten feet tall, those Russians, and they can make a lot of mistakes. They can also learn from them. The Russians usually lose the first battle, but that doesn't keep them from winning the last.
You're right about the Russian losses at the start of the Japanese offensive--they were significant. Apparently once Zhukov got the Soviet counter offensive in gear they did some serious ass-kicking. Enough so that the Japanese were the ones looking for peace and they didn't mess with the USSR even when Stalin was fully occupied in the West.
One interesting aspect that I noticed in the Wikipedia article is that Zhukov put together a supply line using 10,000 trucks. In the Polish war the Soviets had very serious coordination and supply problems and got out ahead of themselves, while the Poles shortened their lines. There was also a big intel gap. A young Stalin was probably part of the problem and that may be why he had Tukhachevsky (sp?) executed later.
The Russian way of war tends to be very cautious and methodical.
It can be, but a lot of times that's making a virtue of necessity. They can be methodical indeed when logistics force them to be, which I suspect is a factor in what's happening now. Bagration wasn't especially methodical, but by that time Detroit had provided them with an armada of trucks and halftracks, as well as rolling stock. Suddenly an armored advance could go a lot further and faster, because the infantry could keep up and the petrol kept flowing. Russians tend to make pragmatic soldiers. They're methodical when they need to be, but methodical isn't the only thing they have in their playbook. See Afghanistan in '79.
EDIT: Years ago Jim Dunnigan made a profoundly true observation that we would do well to remember. An army's reputation can be entirely unrelated to its actual win loss record. The German army has lost every war it has fought since Germany became a unified state, but the German army is still held in high regard. The Russian army has won nearly every war since the Bolshevik Revolution, but is held in low regard in the West.
Stalin's purge of senior Soviet military leadership prior to Operation Barbarossa being launched by Hitler was one of the major reasons for initial German successes. The remaining Soviet colonels and lieutenant colonels were elevated to command brigade, division, and corps formations without any experience at that level of command. And while it is easy to blame Hitler for German blunders at Leningrad and Stalingrad, Stalin also was guilty of incompetence as well, trying to initially stop the Germans across the entire front which resulted in entire Soviet armies being cut off and destroyed/captured by German armor. This was likely due to Stalin suffering a mental breakdown after Operation Barbarossa was launched which incapacitated him for a period of weeks.
On the topic of American military recruitment, it will be interesting to see what recommendations are put forward by DoD if recruitment continues to fall well short of goals. If the recommendation if to dust off and implement selective service (the draft), that would be a major political hot potato.
It would be disastrous for democrats if you look at their history with the draft. If recruiting becomes a bust, the only thing that could save Brandon is a tanking economy which is one of the best environments for military recruiters - but that was with an apolitical military which is not the case today.
Compare the perspective of people like Macgregor and Crooke to the remarkably unintelligent perspective revealed in Sundance's transcript of Margaret Brenna and Olaf Scholz. Brennan views Ukraine pretty much in purely military terms--how to stop Russia from conquering the world!--and Scholz is happy to play along with the stupidity, so he doesn't have to give serious answers.
Crooke‘s analysis is very interesting, and probably reflects Saudi Arabia thinking. He gets Middle Eastern funding for a think tank located in Beirut.
Biden and his associates did a major mistake on the Jamal Khashoggi murder. They have poisoned the well with the Saudis.
I’m not sure there is anything the Biden Administration can do, besides authorizing war / strikes on Iran, that would appease the Saudis.
The Biden Administration has shown they can’t be trusted politically, militarily, or economically, and side with KSA’s enemies.
And the Saudis can see the Western currencies are being devalued due to out of control money printing. So what will the Saudis do to counter inflation, while not destroying their export market?
Your first sentence was a lightening bolt. We've all seen the obtuseness and sanctimony of the Milley's and other mil-bots. We saw how Obama fired 197 war fighter generals. The utter incompetence that has ensued has been stunning, but it never really occurred to me that the US armed forces were not merely being subverted, weakened--literally and figuratively. The patriots are being pushed out. The yes men are being promoted.
It only makes sense if they are being repurposed into a civil war fighting corps.
Crooke's "War Makes for Clarity" article is fascinating. His observations about the European economic and political situation seem to mirror those of Luongo. What Crooke adds is the idea that the "core" EU countries might jettison the "periphery" countries of Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Greece in the interest of their own economic survival - "fragmentation" will not be limited to just bond spreads. I can certainly see that happening eventually but that would be tantamount to admitting that the Davos dream is over. Will the current crop of leaders admit that under any amount of pressure? But perhaps their governments will have fallen by the time we reach that point. So it will be fascinating if not horrifying to watch how the Davos PTB will try to manage the nearly inevitable dissolution/disintegration of the EU.
The second thing that is interesting and frightening that he hints at is the social state of Europe and the U.S.. respectively. As the societal institutions on both continents degrade and the "center no longer holds," will Europeans and Americans value order and peace more than they do their own political objectives? Are the greens in Germany willing to compromise and recognize the rights and opinions of others before their country is totally destroyed? Is the left in the United States willing to do the same? Has the current generation ever been taught the discipline needed to consider the ramifications of their acts and the morality to recognize the rights and values of others? The answers to those questions scare me. As Mark has noted, we appear to be pre-revolutionary.
Now I remember! That was gross.
"It’s the war, stupid ..." No, it's still the economy, stupid. We are unfit to fight any war, but can be bought on the cheap. Our regime has not miscalculated. Your columns have pointed out that 'the New World Order' seems to be the priority, and as Deplorable Dave pointed out in his comment, "The American military has been redesigned to fight Americans. "
It must be remembered that the Russians fought like animals, said the Germans, refused to admit defeat at Stalingrad, and made rapid advances taking significant casualties afterwards. The American soldier is superb when initiative is encouraged. As Patton put it, "Your goal is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his country." And under Trump we were well on our way to integrating small combat units with air, artillery, armored and land forces. Pity.
Thank you, Mark. Very informative. One question for anyone who has an answer. What is ideologised SCIENCE? A vague idea: it has to do with progressive ideas. But how?
The most recent obvious use of The Science™ was to scare us into accepting policies around the world that locked us down and vaccinated us against Covid, a common cold developed in a lab, all in service of a greater good conceived by the WEF.
Thanks, Tamsin. I got it. Please see my reply to Mary a few minutes ago.
I think he basically means pseudo-science in the service of ideology.
Please bare with me. I’m an 84 yr old retired neuro psychologist in Ontario. Is The Science what I call junk science, or crap science if it’s really awful? As in “We followed The Science, so this edict is justified”? I’ve seen Science that any Stats 101 class could pick apart as the basis for some law, edict, whatever that got dumped in us in the US or here in Canada.
streif at RedState posted a dead-on military recruiting post. Highly recommended based on his background.
https://redstate.com/streiff/2022/07/03/army-backs-off-enlisting-high-school-drop-outs-but-the-woke-cancer-killing-enlistments-remains-stronger-than-ever-n588076
"Macgregor argues that Zhukov applied lessons learned “on the plains of Nomonhan” against the Japanese to his victories against the Wehrmacht. I would actually argue against that view in some respects. Without in any way denigrating Zhukov’s accomplishments, I would argue that he was applying standard Russian military doctrine. "
I haven't read MacGregor's book, though I will likely put it on my list. I suspect that he is quite correct about Zhukov and Nomonhan. Soviet losses in that battle were quite serious, and exposed weaknesses in the Red Army. Martin Van Creveld, in his recent biography of Stalin, argues that the Russians did learn useful lessons from Nomonhan, and I found his case persuasive. I can't speak for MacGregor's, but hope to read his book.
The Russian army, historically, has a pretty iffy track record for offensive operations at the start of a war. The first and second world wars, Ukraine, Finland, and that business in Grozny all provide examples. They aren't ten feet tall, those Russians, and they can make a lot of mistakes. They can also learn from them. The Russians usually lose the first battle, but that doesn't keep them from winning the last.
You're right about the Russian losses at the start of the Japanese offensive--they were significant. Apparently once Zhukov got the Soviet counter offensive in gear they did some serious ass-kicking. Enough so that the Japanese were the ones looking for peace and they didn't mess with the USSR even when Stalin was fully occupied in the West.
One interesting aspect that I noticed in the Wikipedia article is that Zhukov put together a supply line using 10,000 trucks. In the Polish war the Soviets had very serious coordination and supply problems and got out ahead of themselves, while the Poles shortened their lines. There was also a big intel gap. A young Stalin was probably part of the problem and that may be why he had Tukhachevsky (sp?) executed later.
The Russian way of war tends to be very cautious and methodical.
It can be, but a lot of times that's making a virtue of necessity. They can be methodical indeed when logistics force them to be, which I suspect is a factor in what's happening now. Bagration wasn't especially methodical, but by that time Detroit had provided them with an armada of trucks and halftracks, as well as rolling stock. Suddenly an armored advance could go a lot further and faster, because the infantry could keep up and the petrol kept flowing. Russians tend to make pragmatic soldiers. They're methodical when they need to be, but methodical isn't the only thing they have in their playbook. See Afghanistan in '79.
EDIT: Years ago Jim Dunnigan made a profoundly true observation that we would do well to remember. An army's reputation can be entirely unrelated to its actual win loss record. The German army has lost every war it has fought since Germany became a unified state, but the German army is still held in high regard. The Russian army has won nearly every war since the Bolshevik Revolution, but is held in low regard in the West.
Stalin's purge of senior Soviet military leadership prior to Operation Barbarossa being launched by Hitler was one of the major reasons for initial German successes. The remaining Soviet colonels and lieutenant colonels were elevated to command brigade, division, and corps formations without any experience at that level of command. And while it is easy to blame Hitler for German blunders at Leningrad and Stalingrad, Stalin also was guilty of incompetence as well, trying to initially stop the Germans across the entire front which resulted in entire Soviet armies being cut off and destroyed/captured by German armor. This was likely due to Stalin suffering a mental breakdown after Operation Barbarossa was launched which incapacitated him for a period of weeks.
On the topic of American military recruitment, it will be interesting to see what recommendations are put forward by DoD if recruitment continues to fall well short of goals. If the recommendation if to dust off and implement selective service (the draft), that would be a major political hot potato.
Dusting off of the draft in a time of “restorative justice” would be disastrous for civil society.
It would be disastrous for democrats if you look at their history with the draft. If recruiting becomes a bust, the only thing that could save Brandon is a tanking economy which is one of the best environments for military recruiters - but that was with an apolitical military which is not the case today.
Compare the perspective of people like Macgregor and Crooke to the remarkably unintelligent perspective revealed in Sundance's transcript of Margaret Brenna and Olaf Scholz. Brennan views Ukraine pretty much in purely military terms--how to stop Russia from conquering the world!--and Scholz is happy to play along with the stupidity, so he doesn't have to give serious answers.
Crooke‘s analysis is very interesting, and probably reflects Saudi Arabia thinking. He gets Middle Eastern funding for a think tank located in Beirut.
Biden and his associates did a major mistake on the Jamal Khashoggi murder. They have poisoned the well with the Saudis.
I’m not sure there is anything the Biden Administration can do, besides authorizing war / strikes on Iran, that would appease the Saudis.
The Biden Administration has shown they can’t be trusted politically, militarily, or economically, and side with KSA’s enemies.
And the Saudis can see the Western currencies are being devalued due to out of control money printing. So what will the Saudis do to counter inflation, while not destroying their export market?
Key point above is that the Regime “has shown they can’t be trusted...”
If you can find any place where Macgregor uses the word "takeover" I'd be interested to see that.
Don’t forget depleted our strategic petroleum reserve.
Other than that, things are going pretty well.
Your first sentence was a lightening bolt. We've all seen the obtuseness and sanctimony of the Milley's and other mil-bots. We saw how Obama fired 197 war fighter generals. The utter incompetence that has ensued has been stunning, but it never really occurred to me that the US armed forces were not merely being subverted, weakened--literally and figuratively. The patriots are being pushed out. The yes men are being promoted.
It only makes sense if they are being repurposed into a civil war fighting corps.