The American-controlled media and politicians got a directive to escalate the reaction into the “moral high ground” position vs. Russia, and not to calm things down and contextualize. This means that the situation will quickly escalate beyond the local boundaries of the conflict. Also, the sanctions regime was gradually escalated over the years to the point where there’s almost no space for growth, and also practically no incentive for Russia to pursue peace; they basically lost the peace and the only way to a normal situation would be through war, because unless America is soundly militarily defeated, their colonies will never normalize relations, but if they are defeated, the secondary issues will disappear.
6 thoughts on “Analysis”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
At the moment Murica doesn’t insist that Russia should be completely cut off SWIFT. I don’t know what that shit means? Are they satisfied with having sabotaged North Stream 2 project by not letting it go into operative state and some bullshit sanctions like freezing assets of Russian Banks and ones of Putin and his associates in Murica? What’s left before the final countdown?🤔
I don’t know, but the media narrative, combined with knowledge of who is pulling their strings, makes it clear that they (the order-givers) want to make the situation worse, and knowing how bad it already is, there aren’t many places it can go from here. Also, things are evolving rather quickly, so we might know more in the following days.
I’m working with the assumption that the Russians know the same thing all the analysts were saying before this, and that Ukraine is not a worthy goal; nothing there but a potential quagmire to get stuck in, and the only reason to go there is to neutralise a threat. Also, it is unlikely that you can just go in and neutralise threats without all hell breaking loose, so it must all be a part of a bigger strategy, or otherwise the price would be too great. Essentially, the question I’m asking is, if the real goal is neutralising America, where does lack of control over Ukraine become a fatal issue, so that it absolutely must be dealt with first?
Also, this created lots of disturbance, so I’m trying to see what we’re not seeing, or noticing.
This is a good analysis that arrives at a lot of similar conclusions as you did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
Isn’t Ukraine simply a single painful point of US influence in Europe that would be a huge weakness for Russia if they engaged with the US on basically anything? So far it was used to exert influence over Russia and tip the scales in the Europe against them too many times.
I’m wargaming a scenario with a NATO conflict with Russia, and I see a two-pronged ground attack, from Ukraine towards the Rostov region at first, but eventually all the way to the Caspian sea, and from the Baltic states to St.Petersburg, which would force Russia to be on a constant defensive with its forces preoccupied by ground attacks, its important military infrastructure exposed to attack, its military intelligence flooded by information, while America completely controls the scene. By eliminating the southern prong of the attack now, Russia is protecting vital assets and significantly reducing noise in any conflict. Also, he who attacks first will basically hold all the cards, as we can see now with Ukraine, and the Russians are quite obviously refraining from use of any kind of weapons of mass destruction, protecting the civilian population even at the expense of military effectiveness. If they wanted to *really* hurt someone, that would be a different sight.
Note that I didn’t mention the far east; I think that part is protected through the recently formed alliance with China, so that they can now focus on the European theatre.
Also, I’m looking at the wider picture now: the Kazahstan event that took place earlier was a part of the American scheme of attack on Russia: if it were controlled by US and UK agencies and proxies, attack from this direction could be directed simultaneously with the other two, creating a desperate situation for Russia. It seems that the war started much earlier than I gave it credit for, and the Russians know what they are doing, and the Americans not so much. Kazahstan has been pacified, now it’s Ukraine’s turn, and I think the next possible move would be the mopping up of former Soviet republics and Warsaw pact countries of American advanced weaponry. Alternatively, Russia will feel safe enough from ground assault to deal with America directly.
I think cutting off SWIFT would hurt both EU and US more than Russia at this point. It would essentially promote Chinese, and to a lesser extent Russian payment systems, as a viable alternative to SWIFT. Russia is not dependant on SWIFT; Russia is allowing the West to pay for Russian exports by SWIFT.
Nord Stream 2 is largely irrelevant to Russia if they control Ukraine, as the main gas pipelines (Soyuz, Yamal, Brotherhood) are going through Ukraine. The political situation in Ukraine was likely the primary reason for Russia to route around it with Nord Stream 2. And BTW, Ukraine has largest area of agricultural land in Europe, it’s a leading European exporter of ammonia which is used to make fertilizers. Great strategical work by European politicians all in all. Oh, and Ukraine has the largest uranium deposits in Europe, but luckily, Germany closed most of its nuclear power plants so that’s not needed anymore, right?