The Pentagon said on Thursday that Ukraine is allowed to use US weapons in its offensive in Russia’s Kursk Oblast, which began on Tuesday.
Pentagon spokeswoman Sabrina Singh was asked if Ukraine’s use of US-provided weapons in Kursk was “consistent” with US policy. “It is consistent with our policy,” she said.
Singh framed the attack on Kursk as a defensive operation against Russian attacks from across the border, saying the US has “supported Ukraine from the beginning to defend themselves against attacks that are coming across the border.”
For the first two years of the war, the US prohibited Ukraine from striking Russian territory with US-provided missiles but recently lifted that restriction in the wake of Russia’s offensive in Kharkiv. The administration claims it won’t support “long-range” strikes into Russian territory, but it’s not clear what the limit is.
“I’m not going to put a specific range on it,” Singh said when pressed about the possibility of the US supporting an attack on Moscow. She added that the purpose of allowing Ukraine to use US weapons in Russia was for “cross-fire” purposes.
According to the Russian Defense Ministry, Ukrainian forces have used US-provided Bradley Fighting Vehicles in the incursion into Kursk. The sanctioned use of US armored vehicles in a ground operation into Russian territory marks a significant escalation in the proxy war and risks a major Russian response.
Last year, pro-Kyiv militias, including the neo-Nazi Russian Volunteer Corps, used US armored vehicles in raids into Russia’s Belgorod Oblast. At the time, the US said it was opposed to its equipment being used for such an attack.
The Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday that 1,000 Ukrainian fighters with dozens of armored vehicles entered Kursk. The ministry said it thwarted any breakthrough, but heavy fighting continued on Thursday.
Ukrainian officials haven’t directly acknowledged the assault, but President Volodymyr Zelensky said Thursday that Russia needed to “feel” the consequences of its war. “Russia brought the war to our land and should feel what it has done,” he said.
This is an asymmetric war of national resistance that is determined by hearts and minds, not force of arms. The Russians lost over two years ago when the consensus of the Ukrainian nation united to resist the Russian invasion. Even if the Russians eventually defeat the Ukrainian army, the Russians will be an occupying power fighting a hopeless guerrilla war in hostile territory. If the Ukrainian resistance did not have genuine popular support, the Ukrainian Army would have disintegrated long ago. The sooner Russia gets a leadership capable of recognizing the futility of Putin's war, the sooner it will end.
In the 3 August 2024 issue of the Financial Times, Dmytro Natalukh, head of the Verkhovna Rada's Economic Affairs Committee, estimates 800,000 Ukrainian men are hiding from the draft in Ukraine. According to an April 17, 2024 Politico article, an estimated 650,000 Ukrainians of military age have fled from Ukraine. When the war began it was estimated 7 million Ukrainians fled Ukraine. Sounds like a lot of popular support. And the Ukrainian army is considered by some analysts to be in the process of disintegration through through unreplaced battle losses.
Then add in the growing number of Ukrainians who have begun to favor a negotiated end to the war. Polling since the failure of Ukraine’s 2023 offensive shows that 44 percent of Ukrainians favor entering into talks with Russia and only 48 percent—still a plurality but, notably, no longer a majority—believe Ukraine should fight on.
Your understanding of Ukraine's resiliency in terms of popular support may be in need up updating.
Assuming what you say is true – how do you explain how poor the Russians military is performing?
Or to put it an other way, either the Russian army is utterly shit or the Ukrainians are doing much better than what you imply.
The US trained and equipped Afghans were defeated the Taliban (at that point a non state movement) in less than one and a half year, even with direct but increasingly limited direct support from US troops.
Whereas the Ukrainians still two and a half years after the start of the Russian invasion is capable of preventing major Russian breakthroughs and slowing Russian advances down to a crawl.
It is one thing to be cynical but then what is it truly that you wish to convey Michael 64?….
That people should think critically about what they think – you know check it for internal consistency.
Only by doing so can you hope to better your knowledge.
I can't tell you that the Ukrainians are well motivated – only that if they are not then there is something seriously wrong on the Russian side.
"That people should think critically about what they think" good advice. You should consider it for yourself.
As a rule I do – which is why you seldom will find my arguments displaying the kind of internal inconsistency that I pointed out in Begemot’s comment. Feel free to look through my comment history, it is open, and point out any cases of me implicitly contradicting my own stance.
It's simpler. Some are well motivated. some are not.
As for me, I'm completely cynical about all sides to all conflicts. I won't be very disappointed when Global warming really starts to have an impact that even the idiots in charge of Earth's "governments" start to notice how late it is.
Your knowledge of Russian tactics and strategy is not impressive, possibly because you are under the impression that war in this century is like the wars in Europe and Korea in the last one. It's not.
Try to visualize driving with one foot on the accelerator and the other on the brake, a reasonable metaphor for the proxy war in Ukraine. If this conflict is ever ended, there will have been no winner – just losers, and why? Thanks to the government of the United States, a resolution to the conflict – which both sides could have lived with – has been rendered impossible.
Yes that was always a given the point however stands, if the Ukrainians on average are as poorly motivated as implied then…
Where have you drawn any conclusions on my knowledge of Russian tactics???
Have I commented on them anywhere?
You haven't paid much attention to how this war is being carried out. It is true that Russian advances, after the first summer, have been slow. But the same is the case for the Ukrainians. The Ukrainian summer 2023 offensive stalled and died in the forward security zone of the Russian defense line. Military experts are discussing why this is so and many think that the technologies of today's battlefield in Ukraine have established defensive primacy, like what occurred in WW1 on the Western Front.
As for the plight of the Ukrainian army, here is a quote from the 6 August 2024 Economist ( https://archive.ph/UDD7j#selection-1131.190-1131.421 ): "A commander of the 24th brigade, recently transferred from Niu-York to Chasiv Yar, two of the hottest sections of the front, says battalions in his brigade are now fighting with just 20 people in position, less than a platoon size." That is a serious problem, regardless of what you wish to believe.
As for Afghanistan: the Russians were in that country for ten years. The Americans for twenty. Both left. One might posit that the Russians had better sense to leave sooner than the Americans.
Is it your claim that the advantage of defense is so great as to make the motivation of troops irrelevant?
You either have to own that their plight is irrelevant according to your view on defensive war. Or explain why Russia with the crushing advantage it has fails to advance/win faster.
The US lost far fewer troops – the point was not who made the worst error but why US trained, equipped and supported troops could not hold the line against a much weaker enemy.
So explain why they in defense, better equipped and supported could not defeat let alone slow down the much weaker Taliban.
Did the advantages in defensive war not apply back then in 2021? With the US supported Afghans having better equipment as compared to their adversary?
God is generally on the side of the big battalions. So Ukraine still existing is impressive. This attack who knows could be their battle of the Bulge, one last desperate act, could be their Tet offensive a military loss but a political victory and a turning point. I would be surprised if they can hold territory. Still they attacked the Russians where they are weaker rather than where they are stronger which does make sense.
How many Russians have fled their country to avoid conscription?
Mere infinitesimal fractions of Russians compared to Ukrainians. Ukrainians have fled because they want to stay alive and/or look for a better life than what Ukraine will offer for years to come. They have turned their backs on Ukraine. Most of those Russians who left when the war started were a minority of pampered elites who relocated to Europe or Israel to be closer to their money. Large numbers, especially those young men who fled the reserve call up, have returned.
The difference is that Russia is a nation and Ukraine is a divided conglomeration.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/06/nearly-4m-russians-left-russia-in-early-2022-fsb-a77603
4M Russians in the first 3 months! Knock your s**t off, my man!
They’re leaving to stay out of the WWII style meatwaves the Russians use as “battle tactics”.
Please support your claim that they’ve “returned”. (If you don’t, you expose yourself as a Russian troll — and a douchebag.)
By definition this is an asymmetric war. A major power invaded a weaker nation. Hearts and minds determine whether the asymmetric war is an asymmetric war of national resistance. The test is whether the defending army quickly succumbs to the superior conventional power of the invader. For example, when India invaded East Pakistan during the Bengali genocide of 1971 the Pakistani Army crumbled in weeks and there was no significant opposition to the Indian invaders. The Bengalis were not going to defend the Pakistani regime that was oppressing them.
I am sure there were hundreds of thousands of draft dodgers among the 7 to 8 million Ukrainian refugees. Most people don't want to fight. But the unexpected effectiveness of the Ukrainian military and the resilience and persistence of the Ukrainian resistance defeated the Russian invasion. Unfortunately it takes a long time for imperial powers to recognize when they have been defeated in asymmetric wars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_resistance_in_Russian-occupied_Ukraine
If this was a war solely between Ukraine and Russia your argument might have some weight. However, this has not been a war solely between Ukraine and Russia. The US and its NATO allies are and have been involved in this conflict on the side of Ukraine since at least 2014.
Furthermore, if this war was solely between Ukraine and Russia this conflict, if it had even come to a war, would have ended early in an agreement as the talks between Ukraine and Russia showed in February – April 2022 showed.
This is no more a war between US/NATO and Russia than Vietnam was a war between USSR/China and the USA.
The Ukrainians benefit from US/NATO aid as the VC and North Vietnamese benefited from aird from the USSR an China. But Aid can’t motivate soldiers to fight and in a war of national resistance or national liberation, the benefactor state(s) can’t dictate the terms of the settlement. Ultimately the US had to negotiate directly with the VC and the North Vietnamese as the Russians will the have to negotiate with the Ukrainians.
BTW, even if Zelensky sold out and conceded the occupied territories to Russia, the Ukrainian resistance would continue. There are a lot of Ukrainians who are willing to resist a return to Russian domination and the more Russia doubles down on the resistance, the stronger it becomes.
If you don't see or understand what is going on in this conflict at the strategic and geopolitical level then talking to you further is wasting both our time.
Again, what is "asymmetric" in any of this; I know you like that word, but it has to mean something – everything Ukraine has been doing is conventional warfare. Where is there any concrete evidence of a home grown Ukrainian "resistance" operating in the captured areas?
So far we can see only resistance to the total mobilization. Those who couldn't run away to other countries, are hiding wherever they can. Still there is a lot with Nazi motivation. Otherwise Ukrainian state would go to pieces a long time ago.
According to this Wikipedia article hundreds of Russian soldiers, collaborators, mayors and officials have been killed by Ukrainian partisans in the occupied territories, including Crimea since March 2022. The article also cites many acts of sabotage by partisans. I can't vouch for all the sources cited, but I certainly recall some of the instances, including the bombing of the Kerch Bridge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_resistance_in_Russian-occupied_Ukraine
I always believed that the real threat to Putin's invasions would be the Ukrainian partisans, not the Ukrainian army. But the Russian Army has been so inept that the Ukrainians have even been able to invade Russia!
No army can fight as long or as effectively as the Ukrainians have without serious motivation. And the Russians seem to be fighting lethargically, like a typical occupying army inserted into hostile territory. In asymmetric wars of national resistance, the outcome is determined by hearts and minds, not force of arms. Putin may not have the capacity to recognize defeat. But he started a war that Russia can't win.
You are assuming that the Russians are using the strategy of gaining territory rather than attrition and political exhaustion That does not appear to be the case.
As far as the Ukrainian incursion into Kursk? The Russians look to have been caught with their pants down. If it is true that the Russians were demining the area in preparation to an assault into Sumy, those troops are going to be available in short order. The Ukrainians have some of their best units engaged in the assault. Equipped and trained by NATO btw. The smartest move for the Ukrainians would be to have those units preserved by disengagement and garrison troops dug in. That would mean the Russians would use up assault troops against dug in garrison troops.
But I suspect the Ukrainians aren't going to do that. A waste of better troops is likely. Ukraine doesn't have those to waste.
They seem to be attempting to gain territory and at great cost losses of 1000 troops a day if the Ukes are to be believed. A static war would be way more conservative of their troops
And trading garrison troops for assault troops at even 1:1 (or more) would be a advantage for the Ukrainian regime.
But what if the goal is to get as many Ukrainian men killed IS the objective? Less potential resistance to the future take over of parts of Ukraine by Blackrock.
That could be the goal, the “Russians” they get killed are ethnic minorities and convicts so sure Putin is using the war to cleanse Russia ethnically and otherwise. Us Westerners find that way of thinking a little odd
If it’s thought odd, it’s a recent development. In Vietnam, African-American males comprised half again the percentage of draftees than of the general population.
Except they are “winning”. Should Pokrovsk fall, and Chasiv Yar and Vuhledar with it, the war in Donbas is essentially over. All Ukraine has done is seize a bunch of potato fields, at high cost, and is now being pounded by standoff Russian weapons. Nothing they have “accomplished” in their incursion into empty farmland has 1% of the tactical significance that their losses in Donbas have. Your allusions to some widespread “Ukrainian Partisan resistance” is silly and fantasy.
No
A war between Neoconnazi Washington/Brussels and the RF only exploiting Ukrainian territory & fighters. The only thing asymmetric are the respective IQs.
If that was true the Russians would destroyed the Ukrainian Army and pacified the occupied territories. No amount of US/NATO military aid can motivate people to fight to support a corrupt regime. Look at Afghanistan and South Vietnam.
The Ukrainian resistance is genuine.
There are Nazis in Ukraine, like in many Caucasian countries. But the Ukrainian Nazis don’t wield the influence the Kremlin propagandists pretend they have. Seven million Ukrainians fought the Nazis in the Red Army. Ukraine lost millions of people during World War II. Very few Ukrainians would fight for a Nazi regime. They are fighting for something else. Something many Ukrainians obviously believe in. And they are fighting with a motivation the Russian invaders do not have.
All you need to make a man braver than his opponent is the fear of something worse. The UkraNazis and a few other assorted sociopaths occupying the commands are that marginal difference over the Russians.
Robert, I have been observing national resistance, national liberation, anti-colonial and anti-imperialists conflicts and movements for a long time. Fear of a reprisals simply will not motivate people to fight effectively for an extended period of time. That is why ISIS,l-Qaeda, Boko-Haram, the Lord’s Army and other terrorist outfits have never been able to have never been able to hold territory. In Afghanistan the US was able to defeat al-Qaeda, but not the Taliban, because despite being authoritarian fundamentalists, the Taliban was indigenous and had popular support. Al Qaeda was foreign and did not have popular support.
In 1971 when India invaded East Pakistan, the Pakistani army crumbled and the Bengalis refused to resist the Indians because they opposed the Pakistani regime. Ukrainian army has taken horrible losses for a long time. No way that army could hold together unless they were motivated by something more than fear of their government.
And the vast majority of Ukrainians would never support a Nazi regime. That is Russian propaganda. Millions of Ukrainians died fighting the Nazis. Virtually every Ukrainian family had relatives killed by the Nazis during World War II.
The Ukrainian regime is triumphantly Banderist. They have banned the the Russian language, the Orthodox Church, Dostoyevski, taken down staues, renamed streets, created fake Russian atrocities, saturated pop-cult with atrocity porn and stealing of children, … and constantly lied into believing they are winning. I grant men will fight for homeland, religion, and transcendant idea, … as Cuba, Ireland, Hamas; but that’s not the case here. Ukraine is all about corruption.
They didn’t “ban the Russian language.” They limited the Russian language’s use 1) on government documents and 2) in government schools.
They also didn’t “ban the Orthodox church.” There are at least two Orthodox denominations operating in Ukraine — the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) and the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
They didn’t burn all books, either; but, I think every ethno-Russian got the idea … reign of terror like I said.
Translation: You were either incorrect or dishonest, someone noticed, and you’re trying to bluff your way past it. By all means feel free to try. But I doubt anyone’s going to be buying it.
See my comment above to Robert Scheetz. You are certainly incorrect. You may also be dishonest, but I'll leave that to your conscience.
So you actually believe the Uke’s enlisted to follow a guy like Zelinsky out of the highest motives? … that is, aside from the usual fraction of pitiful types?
You are correct. The people in the eastern parts of Ukraine got the message when the status of the Russian language was demoted as one of the first acts of the Maidan Rada. Unlike someone here on this site who thinks he knows the Ukrainians' reality better than the Ukrainians who live that reality do, the message to the Russian speaking Ukrainian populace was loud and clear. They were under attack by Russian hating Ukrainian nationalists whose vision for Ukraine is as a monoethnic authoritarian state where diversity was not to be tolerated.
The civil war followed. Now the bigger war.
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church is under attack by the Kiev regime and its puppet Orthodox Church of Ukraine (set up under Poroshenko with the help of Hillary Clinton and the pliant and ambitious Patriarch of Constantinople).
Again, you are right. The other guy is full of …
Yes, the whole thing takes its color from Bandera.
Yes. Ukraine is Mother. Bandera is Father. Too sad, really.
They succeeded in creation of Nazi state but not in whole Ukraine. Some regions outside of those who already Russia recognized as Russian, are, de facto, under Nazi occupation. That's why, I think, Putin's last peace proposition wasn't good. The only justification is that Putin knew it wouldn't be accepted. He did it for PR.
… and American corruption the bastard sibling.
Another stipulation (entering into force on 1 January 2023) states that, in Ukraine, it is permitted to publish books only in Ukrainian, the languages of Ukraine's indigenous ethnic groups[6] (that is, Crimean Tatar, Karaim and Krymchak), alongside the official languages of the European Union.[7] Furthermore, during the same seating, the Parliament adopted a law that bans importing, staging and broadcasting Russian and Russian-language music in Ukraine.
All public schools in Ukraine have removed the Russian language from their programs to implement the 2017 law passed by the Ukrainian Rada.
There are two reasons why Russia has to fight: Ukrainian Nazism and American imperialism.
Why are the Russians being so stupid?
They were stupid (Putin has acknowledged) in the decade immediate following the collapse trusting American ‘restructing’ expertise; and the entire 30 yrs,
Washington’s diplomatic good faith. Hard to believe, I know, but there it is.
I wouldn't call it stupid. 35 years ago The West was much more attractive than now. It was natural that after 70 years of communist regime, people looked at The West with great hope.
“greed” you mean? They saw all those public assets going for a song, and all those Western investment banks salivating at the prospect of the most collossal gang-rape (aka “privatization”) known to man. They had very sophisticated marxist economists superbly adequate to expose Neo-liberalism for the time-honored capitalist swindle that it is.
The criminal privatization was a consequence of the miserable failure of communist regime.
Yes, the Russians intervened in what began as a civil war which began AFTER the US over threw the legitimate Ukrainian government and AFTER the US puppet regime sought to ethnicity and culturally cleanse Russians in Ukraine. The attempts by Russian to peacefully resolve the civil war via the Minsk accords was undermined by NATO countries in a cynical and criminal effort to destroy and dismember the Russian Federation.
Washington DC appears to be attempting to blackmail the Russian Federation with a first strike nuclear potential. Yes, that's insane. But Washington DC is dominated by psychopaths, sociopaths, narcissists and those that are inflicted with borderline personality disorders. They seek dominance and control of the entire planet.
As far as a united Ukraine? Nonsense. The Ukrainian military is concerned? Dragging men out of their homes and kidnapping them on Ukrainian streets aren't indicating that the Ukrainian people are either united or willing to die for US hegemony.
Wealth extracted from Americans fuels this war. Salaries of the Ukrainian government, their pensions, the military equipment are funded by the US. The US plans this war and US intelligence guides it. The idea that it is a united Ukraine fighting evil Russia is absurd. This conflict is the result of yet another Washington DC intervention in the internal affairs of another country.
No need for the US to threaten nuclear first-strike. The Russians can’t even beat the Ukes in a conventional war.
Then why has the USA been ginning up all the fear about Russia for many decades? Russia is not fighting Ukraine alone, hardly, so don't continue to be fooled. If the USA butted out this war would have been over soon after it started with a win win for both! USA wants no part of that, USA wants to control all of that vast area so rich in everything. Shame on USA and NATO, war mongers for sure.
Of course they can. But they're not fighting Ukraine. If they were it would have been over long ago. You were bemoaning the aid being withheld for a reason.
Nuclear first strike policy is irrational. Yet I have to conclude that the US is convinced it has some sort of symbolic deterrence value as there is no connection to reality as such. It doesn't really matter for the outcome if first Russia launches a nuclear weapon at the US or the US is the first to launch a nuclear weapon at Russia. It doesn't matter if it is one, two, eight, 100 or 1000 at once. ICBM's will take slightly less than half an hour (not slower, not faster it's just basic physics) from launch to impact and within that interval thousands of nuclear weapons will be fired at every significant industrialized agglomeration on both sides, first ICBM's from land, slightly after that bombers take off on no-return missions with ALCM's and antique gravity bombs, and last surviving will be the submarines to launch SLBM's and then there will be no America and there will be no Russia and whatever lies in between, among which Ukraine, will be completely sterile.
Nuclear war is not quantitatively different from 'conventional' war, it is qualitatively different. The nuclear weapons that were used on Japan, both Hiroshima and Nagasaki have almost nothing to do with present day nuclear weapons. They are not just much, much bigger. It is different. The effects do not extrapolate linearly with yield.
Suggest reading Herman Kahn’s “Thinking about the unthinkable”. Then review the Pentagon’s position paper on winning a nuclear exchange.
I used the words insane, psychopaths etc. If you think the people that run the USA are sane…… I don’t think so.
All major nuclear powers are thinking about winning a nuclear war. Reasonable people don't talk about it publicly because a full scale nuclear war means billions of killed people. It is a bit too awful.
Talking about it publicly: thebulletin.org/2022/02/us-defense-to-its-workforce-nuclear-war-can-be-won/
Russians and Chinese never talk about that.
Indeed. But neither the Russians or the Chinese have nuked anyone either.
Most of those who are hidden in bunkers will survive. I think China is prepared the best. Particularly good chance for them to get a full spectrum dominance in the post nuclear war world, is in case the full scale nuclear war happens between NATO and Russia.
I am sure Kamala, the Holy Non-Mother of the World, will have a great solution, unless JoBye acts first. 🙂
Shades of JD Vance and his cat ladies bullshit. Harris sucks. the fact that she isn't a mother has nothing to do with her 'suckiness'.
I beg to differ with my good friend "wars", (that is Senator" speak), JD Vance was right on with his comment. I will go on record as stating that those who decide to go through life without a child, or children are lacking in a key facet of humanity and are in the end less than fully human. Vance should have been the one running for President and not goof ball Trump. Kamala,,,LOL!! "Express Elevator To Hell",,prepare.
That is really insulting to so many people. I really didn't think you were such an arrogant prick.
wars, don't be so triggered, you are a big boy and should be able to handle discussion without such insults. I forgive you and please do enjoy what summer we have left up here in the Great North. 🙂
But it's alright for you to insult me? And you forgive me? Kiss my ass, Jay.
wars, I did not insult you my friend, I will just ignore your nasty comment as I know that is not the real you. My best
"I will go on record as stating that those who decide to go through life without a child, or children are lacking in a key facet of humanity"
I took that to mean people and not just women. Either way, it's disgusting. That's a personal thing that you have no right to use as criteria for anything.
There’s plenty of room on the planet for all kinds of people, including those who, for whatever reason, decide not to be parents.
Vance should never have run for anything. He seemed thoughtful when he wrote Hillbilly Elegy, then turned into the worst sort of pander bear.
Such is politics, but no one plays dirtier than the Obama and Jobye Admins and democrat party. I however will give Vance a thumbs up and hope Trump does not destroy him in the end. He made it through Marine Basic, hats off to him and the 4 years he spent including some time in an active war zone.
Naturally I’m interested to see how a Marine does for VP on a major party ticket. To the best of my knowledge, only two Marines have ever appeared on ballots for veep, and they were both minor party candidates. One was Darrell Castle, for the Constitution Party. The other was me, for the Boston Tea Party.
https://dovidka.info/en/ Your guide in this unstable and dangerous time.
https://kyivindependent.com/tag/war-analysis/
https://news.liga.net/en/politics/news/lipetsk-airfield-first-satellite-images-show-ukrainian-strike-aftermath
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/ukraine-war
https://tass.com/military-operation-in-ukraine
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/op_eds/2024/08/09/ukraines-bold-and-risky-gamble-in-kursk/
Russia has no desire to rule over the Uk's, just those areas with Russian population.
" Even if the Russians eventually defeat the Ukrainian army, the Russians will be an occupying power fighting a hopeless guerrilla war in hostile territory."
In predominant ethnic Russian territories? So, If Russia loses won't the Ukrainians be fighting a hopeless guerrilla war in hostile territory? You keep talking like this is the US in Vietnam or Afghanistan. It isn't.
Hundreds of Russian soldiers, collaborators, mayors, officials and Quislings have been killed by Ukrainian partisans operating in the occupied territories since March 2022. There have also been hundreds of acts sabotage, very few of which have been reported in the MSM like the Kerch bridge attack in Crimea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_resistance_in_Russian-occupied_Ukraine
In addition to the armed underground partisans there has also been a growing nonviolent resistance movement in occupied Ukraine:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/02/28/ukrainian-civilian-resistance-movements-women-war-mavkas/
For different reasons the US/NATO, Ukrainian government and the pro-Kremlin media have been suppressing the extent of the partisan resistance to the Russian invasion. Especially the independent actions taken by Ukrainian resisters independent of the Kyiv government. While the independent resisters oppose the Russian invasion, many of them do not support Ukrainian alignment with US/NATO. Independent journalists cannot get free access to the occupied territories so the information we get is generally limited to the competing narratives of the Kremlin, US/NATO and the Kyiv regime.
It is Kremlin propaganda that ethnic Russians are all on the side of secession. For centuries Russia suppressed Ukrainian language and culture and planted Russian settlers in Ukraine as part of the Russian imperial project to assimilate Ukraine into Russia. The Russian plantation in Ukraine was much like the British plantation in Ireland. The fact that most Irish speak English and most Ukrainians speak Russian has nothing to do with their loyalties. It is a result of British and Russian imperialism in both cases.
The vast majority of Russian speaking Ukrainians and many ethnic Russian Ukrainians oppose the Russian invasion and many of both groups serve in he Ukrainian military. On the other hand, the indigenous secessionist groups in Donbas have never been able to act effectively independent of the Russian military.
There is ethnic conflict in Donbas. But Russia has no right to use force to interfere in an internal Ukrainian matter. Putin’s policies of agitation and military intervention on behalf of ethnic Russian secessionists in Ukraine and other former Russian dependencies is following Hitler’s blueprint of waging imperial war on the pretext that he was coming to the aid of German ethnic minorities in other countries.
Putin should have pursued his grievances diplomatically. Russia’s legitimate grievances simply did not justify a war. Moreover, the war has been a terrible mistake for Russia that is only going to get worse because the Ukrainians won’t quit. Even if Zelensky surrendered, the partisans will continue to fight for independence.
After three years of war, the Ukrainians still have the capacity to invade Kurst, take Russian prisoners and they will continue to resist until the Russians leave. Like Vietnam or Afghanistan or Algeria, an imperial power, convinced of its military supremacy, once again underestimated the capacity of indigenous people to resist an imperial army in an asymmetric war.
You just keep repeating the same thing over and over and never address what I say. And right back to comparing Vietnam and Afghanistan to Russia's situation. Driving the US out of those countries didn't affect the US' security one iota. But you keep ignoring that big elephant in the room. Russia is just as motivated if not more. And Putin did pursue diplomacy but was rejected repeatedly.
You keep ignoring the fact that the Ukrainians won’t stop resisting. This is a war about hearts and minds that the Russians lost over two years ago. Eventually the Russians will get a government that recognizes that the Russians can’t win in Ukraine.
Then it will continue until Russia receives security guarantees. I can't see them backing away. The Russians can't lose in Ukraine, and I don't mean that because I think they have a superior military. I think you underestimate the motivational factor on Russia's side. We'll have a big war first.
The events of the past 30 months have shown that the Ukrainians are more highly motivated than the Russians. The Ukrainian army has suffered catastrophic losses but still fights on. The Russian army crumbles under pressure. Consider Bakhmut. The Russians eventually took the town inch by inch. But the result of the “victory” was to permanently remove Russia’s most effective fighting force, the Wagner Group, from the war.
From a security standpoint Russia would be better off with a Ukraine in NATO than fighting a forever war against a NATO proxy on its southern border. Eventually Russia will get a leadership that will appreciate how much Putin’s war has damaged Russia’s legitimate security interests.
The events of the last 30 months have shown that Ukraine's decision to get in bed with the West has resulted in catastrophic losses. And your description of what happened in Bakhmut is more of a description of resolve than of them crumbling under pressure. Russia's ass has yet to be against the wall in this war. When that happens and they scurry back across the border with their tail between their legs let me know. My take is that it will take a major war for that possibility becoming a reality. I guess proximity means nothing to you. It does to Russia.
And you're crazy if you think a NATO/US controlled Ukraine would be more secure for Russia than maintaining a stalemate while controlling 20% of Ukraine's land. And your hope that Russia will get another Yeltsin is delirious.
The Ukrainians will not put Russia’s ass against the wall This is asymmetric war. The Vietnamese, Algerians and Afghanis won by persisting and resisting, not overwhelming the stronger power. The Palestinians and Ukrainians will win the same way.
Personally, I would prefer a neutral Ukraine. But Putin’s thuggish reliance on force has probably made that impossible. Ukraine’s alignment is something to be decided by the Ukrainian people, not by guys like us in the peanut gallery. Ukraine joined and remained part of the Soviet Union because Lenin understood self-determination, even when he didn’t agree with all the choices Ukraine and Finland made. Unfortunately, Putin is a Russian chauvinist who never understood the Ukrainian point of view or appreciated the Leninist principle of self determination.
Then expect the stalemate to continue. The Russians would rather a stalemate than Ukraine be under NATO/US control regardless of the resistance. I don't know why you would think Russia is going to back away if that would be the result of them doing so.
And those war games on Russia's borders were what? And they had them planned into the summer of 2022. What was going to change? Not a damn thing. Russia was either going to have to capitulate or invade at some point. And I'm all for Ukraine deciding who they can align with. But when it's an openly hostile military alliance led by a country who would have reacted much worse than Russia under the same circumstances, then I guess you should expect the inevitability of Russia's actions. They're just playing by the same rules the US plays by.
You keep repeating that Russia was in a difficult situation and US/NATO was not going to let up. Agreed. But the war just made things worse for Russia as well as Ukraine. The Ukraine war is a classic example of how preemptive wars backfire o imperial powers. Russia is fighting the war that Putin went to war to avoid. Instead of a security threat on its southern border, Russia is entangled in a forever war that it can’t win. NATO has expanded, the advocates of detente n NATO and in Ukraine have turned around, and there is no possibility of Ukrainians ever trusting Russia for many years. Even if Russia destroys the Ukrainian Army, Russia will be an occupying power fighting a guerilla war in hostile territory that it can’t win.
Where would things stand right now if Russia hadn't invaded? Would Russia's security concerns have been addressed by now? You know, the ones that were dismissed as "out of hand" by our state department. Saying that Russia's situation is worse because of their invasion is pure speculation. And I'll repeat what I said before about the "resistance" being something Russia can deal with more than having the whole of Ukraine, including Crimea, under NATO/US control.
If Putin had not invaded Russia would not be fighting a forever war on its southern border that Russia can’t win. Russia would not be fighting off raiders and invaders from Ukraine. Tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of dead and disabled Russians would be alive an full bodied. Sweden and Finland would not be part of NATO and Ireland, Austria and Switzerland would not be collaborating with NATO and considering joining NATO. The European countries would have continued to reduce their defense budgets, which was politically popular at a time when a possible war in Europe seemed like a fantasy. Leaders in France, Germany and Turkiye and other NATO countries would still be advocating detente and the electorates in continental Europe would continue to question whether NATO was necessary in post cold war Europe. Ukraine would not have been admitted into NATO because Russia occupies Crimea and article 5 would make Ukraine’s NATO membership impossible. Ukraine might have joined the EU, but that is more likely now then before the Russian invasion.
NATO expansion created an insecure world for Russia. But the war in Ukraine has made the situation worse for Russia. During the cold war the USA had to accept the fact that it couldn’t change having a Soviet ally 90 miles from Florida. Lenin understood the limits of force in maintaining Russia’s relations with Ukraine. Putin abandoned Lenin’s commitment to self determination and tried to coerce Ukraine. Predictably, Putin’s war backfired. Putin is a classic Russian chauvinist who underestimated how hard Ukrainians, including many ethnic Russians, would resist a Russian invasion.
I know what happened. I don't know what would have happened. And neither do you. You can say other countries would have done this or that, but we do know what the US would have continued to do. Belligerence. And whether Ukraine was in NATO or not they were still going to be used as fodder as has been proven. We could already be doing WW3 for all anyone knows.
C’mon, Wars! Ukraine would never attack Russia. Cui bono? Not Ukraine. Thant is like saying Cuba might one day attack the US. This is Putin’s war entirely. His choice. His war. The consequences were predictable. In February 2022 I said this war was going to be a disaster for Russia. And it has been. Even more than I thought at the time. This is an existential war for the Ukrainians, Even if Russia destroys the Ukrainian army. Even if Zelensky surrenders and signs a peace treaty ceding territory, Russia will be an occupying power fighting a hopeless guerrilla insurgency until Russia withdraws. In February 2022 I really believed that Putin had learned from the history of asymmetric wars since World War II. But his Russian chauvinism blinded him to the obvious and predictable consequences of launching a war of choice against Ukraine.
Justifiable grievances almost never justify a war. But macho strongmen like Putin never seem to learn the limits of military power. Who will be the last Russian to die for Putin’s mistake?
I didn't read past the first sentence. Where did I say I thought Ukraine would attack Russia?
So you admit that Ukraine wouldn’t attack Russia. Agreed.And you believe that NATO provocations would have continued if Russia had not invaded Ukraine. Agreed.
Exactly what has Russia gained from this war of choice?
And how long do you think it will take Putin to win in Ukraine?
Two and a half years in, when does a war become a forever war?
I can't repeat this often enough, I don't think Russia gained a damn thing by invading. I knew damn well what would happen. The US' wet dream came true. Russia took the bait. Me thinking the invasion was inevitable isn't because it was what I would have done. I'll use Knapp's analogy of overgrown street gangs as a description for countries like the US and Russia. Based on that, the invasion didn't surprise me in the least. But it didn't change my opinion of Putin. I thought he was a thug before invasion, and I still do. But he did what any other gang leader of those overgrown street gangs would have done. So, my comments are based on Knapps analogy. The "Crips" were just doing what the "Bloods" do. If they hadn't invaded and the status quo was the same as before the invasion, I would still be saying the war is inevitable and arguing about the same points I have been since invasion.
I don't think Putin can "win". And diplomacy seems to be out of the question. I guess we'll get that big war no one thinks can happen.
As usual, I agree with most of what you and Knapp say. If your’re gonna quote Knapp, remember that Putin chose to fight in Ukraine. The war was not inevitable. Like many other commenters on this site you analyze the war as a conflict between US/NATO and Russia. It is actually a conflict between Russia and Ukraine that US/NATO provoked and is encouraging. Much like Vietnam was an asymmetric conflict between the US and Vietnam with the USSR and China aiding the Vietnamese. US/NATO aid is helping Ukraine. But the Taliban and the Kyhmer Rouge proved that indigenous resistance forces with significant popular support can prevail in asymmetric wars without significant foreign aid. If the US/NATO cuts aid to Ukraine, the army would go underground and join the partisans in a guerrilla war that the Russians can’t win. Neither US/NATO nor Russia wants a direct conflict with each other and they will avoid it.
My comments are my opinions. They differ from yours. We can repeat the same thing for days, like we have, and our opinions aren't going to change. We are still on the same side.
I think the war WAS inevitable.
As I wrote before it started, Vladimir Putin was unwilling to be Neville Chamberlain to NATO’s Third Reich. Yes, I know that’s an imperfect analogy, but it’s valid to the extent that, unlike Chamberlain, he had drawn lines he intended to enforce.
Thomas, Tuesday you wrote:
“The war was entirely optional for Russia. That’s a fact.”
Yesterday you expanded on that comment and I upvoted you when you said:
“Ukraine had neither the actual ability, nor the potential to develop the ability over a period of less than several decades, to present any substantial military threat to Russia.
“There was also precisely zero chance that Ukraine would be able to join the only multi-country alliance to Russia’s west that could prevent[sic] such a threa[t] (NATO).”
https://news.antiwar.com/2024/08/12/putin-says-ukraine-launched-kursk-offensive-to-gain-leverage-for-peace-talks/#comment-6527326508
Whether Ukraine aligned with the West, affiliated with Russia or maintained neutrality would not appreciably change Russia’s strategic situation in Europe that dramatically deteriorated when the USSR broke up and NATO expanded from 16 to 30 nations.
If Putin talked to Xi before invading Russia would be in a better strategic position today. The Chinese understand asymmetric warfare and they think long term which is why they haven’t invaded Taiwan and when they invaded Vietnam they turned around and went back after 4 weeks. To avoid the mess of fighting an asymmetric war on your enemy’s turf.
As you said, this war was Putin’s choice. He had alternatives which would have left Russia in a stronger position vis a vis Ukraine and US/NATO than it is in today. This war is a classic example of how the consequences of most wars are worse than their causes.
Thomas, Tuesday you wrote:
"The war was entirely optional for Russia. That's a fact."
Yesterday you expanded on that comment and I upvoted you when you said:
"Ukraine had neither the actual ability, nor the potential to develop the ability over a period of less than several decades, to present any substantial military threat to Russia.
"There was also precisely zero chance that Ukraine would be able to join the only multi-country alliance to Russia's west that could prevent[sic] such a threa[t] (NATO)."
Whether Ukraine aligned with the West, affiliated with Russia or maintained neutrality would not appreciably change Russia's strategic situation in Europe that dramatically deteriorated when the USSR broke up and NATO expanded from 16 to 30 nations.
If Putin talked to Xi before invading Russia would be in a better strategic position today. The Chinese understand asymmetric warfare and they think long term which is why they haven't invaded Taiwan and when they invaded Vietnam they turned around and went back after 4 weeks. To avoid the mess of fighting an asymmetric war on your enemy's turf.
As you said, this war was Putin's choice. He had alternatives which would have left Russia in a stronger position vis a vis Ukraine and US/NATO than it is in today. This war is a classic example of how the consequences of most wars are worse than their causes.
Yes, this war was entirely Putin’s choice.
But it was pretty obvious that he would make that choice if he didn’t get his way — including on some things where he already HAD it his way (e.g. there was never any chance that Ukraine would become a NATO member state, so there was no way to assure him that it wouldn’t).
And now, even to whatever extent he might be able to find a way to declare “victory” and get his teat out of the wringer, he has diminished, and will likely continue to diminish, Russian stature/influence.
I admit I was mistaken about Putin, Ukraine and Crimea. I thought Putin was too much of a mensch to leap into the briar patch. I forgot that chauvinism and arrogance often overcomes intelligence. Guys who rise from humble beginnings to lead empires are macho double alpha male assholes who always underestimate the limitations of military power. Maybe there is something to be said in favor of hereditary monarchies where leaders are trained for decades. I spent some time on the Huu-ay-aht First Nation land in BC about seven years ago. The Huu-ay-aht’s are required by Canadian white man’s law to have an elected tribal council to officially represent the nation with the regional and national government. The Huu-ay-ahts also have a council of hereditary chiefs who tell the elected council what to do and make the real decisions. The Huu-ay-ahts told me that leadership was something that required many years of preparation. Their hereditary chiefs are trained from childhood to be ready to lead. As a child grows up there are ways to change the chief designate if the tribe recognizes a child seems unfit for leadership. The Huu-ay-ahts shake their heads about the white man’s “democracy.” It is inconceivable for them to regard anyone as a leader just because the person got the most votes in a competition.
Of course this is BS like most "news" about this war. The US military planned this attack using its intel agencies and provided the equipment along with many CIA paid mercenaries for this PR stunt. It wants to show Ukraine is still fighting despite horrible losses along the Donbas front.
That is correct. In the next two months before the elections we will see more of similar PR actions.
The PR seems to be working VERY well though, right?
Both political miscreants (not political bodies) are hoping for the expanded war to not start until after the election. Then the media will rev up the idea that we got do defend America from Iran and those other big, bad boogeymen. A million lifted pickups will be racing around, American flags flapping behind. It will be glorious (not). Ukraine will be on page 14 of the news.
If Iran fails to respond hard enough, Israel could eventually attack again even before the elections. If Iran hits hard, Israel will respond also hard, for sure. We are lucky if it wouldn't come to the use of nukes. So, the situation can easily get from under control even before the elections. There are too many crazy Zionists both in Israel and in U.S.
100%
Ukraine is taking 2,000 casualties per day. Per day.
American weapons were involved in attacks on Zaporozhskaya nuclear power plant, against Crimea and in all other places where Ukrainian military were active. Don't be surprised when Russian weapons are used against NATO in different parts of the world.
Russian weapons are used against NATO countries around the world already. Are you OK?
If they are it is in response to years of USA NATO war mongering.
Are you confused with what weapons are being used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria?
What weapons did you think Wagner was using when they got their a**es kicked by US special forces?
U.S. special forces have not been involved in the war in Ukraine. A few American mercenaries.
Who said Ukraine? You’re not up on your recent history?
https://thewarhorse.org/special-forces-soldiers-reveal-first-details-of-battle-with-russian-mercenaries-in-syria/
There are a lot of NATO career military specialists in Ukraine who are pretending they are mercenaries.
LOL!!! How about massive targeting??? Of course Spec. Ops. have been on the ground,,gotta show off those big Ballz Ya know!
Very few of the people on those countries wanted or want US involvement in their countries.
You seem to feel strongly about these conflicts. Perhaps you should you should use your own money to support such.
You essentially are anti-American. The people of the USA do not benefit from these wars and interventions. We are deeply in debt and have urgent problems that need addressing domestically.
You cheer on Americans being put at risk. We have families have been devastated by these conflicts. Marriages ruined. Children left fatherless or motherless. Maimed and suffering from drugs and PTSD. Suicides. My own family is included in that list.
Are U talking about the fight in Syria? Be specific when trying to make a point. USA supplies weapons to the world, and where did all the massive arms cache JoBye and his great military left in Afghanistan end up, do tell. What about USA bombs etc. being used to carry out genocide in Israel, USA is a disgrace.
We are already and if you know something, share it. We need to cooperate more if we want peace.
I know
Arms are for hugging!
:-}
Zelensky: Send more money. Fighting 'till the last Ukrainian everyday!
learned yesterday he's bought a vineyard in Tucsany
Ha! He'll need a stiffer drink than a fine Sangiovese in the coming months. Guess he must have drank all the vodka already 😉
……………………
Mr Zelenski now owns a nice winery in Italy. Has a nice place there. Also in Florida. Has a bunch of money stuffed away somewhere in South America. Living the good life. For a while, until we don't need him. He will then be rounded up, placed in a armored carrier, then exit the carrier in a casket. That is how things work. We did that to several South Vietnamese higher ups that did not toe the line with us. Lt. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, stated as much, and he thought that Z had a protection force 24/7.
Has Congress declared WAR on Russia? When does the USA START upholding our own laws and honoring the treaties they have already signed on to? Ukraine is doing nothing except providing their bodies and time for the Ukrainian People to get rid of their CLOWN.
Since when has the US upheld it's own laws?
The ICJ is a construct of the U.N. charter which was written by the U.S.. By calling it illegitimate as to the ruling against Israel is pretty funny. We are governed by unfunny people in important places.
USA is now an exact copy of the old Soviet Union, clearly! The Scott Ritter raid is just another nail in the coffin if you bad mouth Israel, Ukraine war, or USA policy.
It is an exaggeration. USSR and modern U.S. are very much different countries. The greatest difference is about the right of the private property. In USSR nobody had the right to own banks, corporations, factories, mass media etc. All those assets belonged to the state.
Ya, the 1%ers are great!! Actually I was talking about something very different, elections, Coup’s, and having a Constitution that U just ignore.
I spent the day yesterday (and will spend the day today) on a riding course to get my motorcycle license. But I’m not sure yet whether I want to be a 1%er 😉
Whew — passed the tests, got the card, now I just have to pay some Danegeld and I’ll be licensed for motorcycles. Next step: Find a bike I can afford.
In your comment you mentioned neither elections nor constitutions. You have written: "USA is now an exact copy of the old Soviet Union" and that is all.
“All those assets belonged to the state.”
Which meant they belonged to whomever controlled the state.
There is a difference between to have something and to have a good opportunity to steal something. Many of important people went to prison for corruption. For example the son in law of Brezhnev got 10 years.
If they owned all those state assets, they would never allow the criminal privatization. If you think all communist party elite became superrich after the collapse of USSR, you are wrong. Even Gorbachev was advertising pizza in 1990th.
Ownership is the prerogative to control a thing.
If the state owns a thing, the people who run the state control that thing.
I didn't say anything about "all communist party elite became superrich after the collapse of USSR." That's not the issue. PRIOR TO the collapse of the USSR, the communist party elite controlled — that is, owned — all the "state-owned" stuff. And acted like it.
What do you mean by control? They couldn't do with those assets whatever they wished. There was a state plan and they acted according to the plan. They were only managers. If they did their job bad, or stole, they could be sacked or imprisoned. Most people in The West have no clue how it worked.
Nobody gets to do “whatever they wish” with assets they own. There are always limits.
Nonetheless, “state ownership” means “ownership by those who control the state.” There’s no magic utopia in which the government elites are really humble “public servants” merely administering assets without benefiting from them. Ruling class is ruling class whether the title is “Your Majesty” or “People’s Commissar.”
The scariest moment in the history of the world is the current 6 months. Joey Biden still has his hands on the nuclear football and we have no idea who really is in control of it!
Not so. Read Daniel Elsberg's The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. Eisenhower granted power to lower level officers who could call in a strike. Eisenhower determined that there could be instances where delayed time could make of unfortunate circumstances. Hence, the president is not the only man with the "football".
However, those people were not angry, senile, liars like Joey Biden!
I think of Budanov as a special forces guy who doesn't know how to conduct a sustained operation. Some people think he is trying to gain an area to trade with Russia when the two sides finally sit down to negotiate. But my theory is that he's doing what he does best. His invasion of Russia is a 𝘧𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘵 designed to get a lot of media attention, to inflict terror on civilians, and to disrupt/complicate Russia's master plans.
Like most of Ukraine's offensives in this conflict, there is an obsession to take territory without much regard for the lives of the AFU soldiers involved, or their equipment. Initial reports suggest that Ukraine has already lost 40% of its forces in the first wave of its surprise attacks against Russian soldiers who have little combat experience.
Ukraine had to halt its attack so that artillery and support elements can catch up with the others. They are attempting to move artillery forward. But Russia is eliminating that equipment from the air, and Russia is also sending significant reinforcements. The fighting is about to get a lot more serious, and I assume that Budanov's forces will be fleeing for home by this time next week.
It's amazing to see and hard to understand why the Ukrainians are fighting so hard. They're not only putting themselves at risk, they're putting their families at risk. Let's suppose they succeed and remove Putin from office. The Russian nuclear bombs would be erasing Ukraine soon after.
Day 2 of my tankies being agitated…
There's always an element (sociapaths, strangeloves, Navy Seals, …) finds a home in it. And there's always cocaine, etc.
It would seem they don't want to be Russian.
They'd rather be dead Ukrainians. But dying to have one corrupt flag flying in your backyard instead of the other corrupt flag flying in your back yard is SO worth dying for.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/08/08/one-of-ukraines-toughest-and-fastest-brigades-has-joined-the-invasion-of-russia/
Can you provide evidence to support your comment?
Why Budanov? Syrskyi is the boss there (of course he is taking orders from Americans and Zelensky).
Ukrainians moved into that region at least 6 brigades, and more will come. It is not clear yet, whether Russians lured them into this trap on purpose or it was just a blunder. One way or other, the situation developing very bad for Ukrainian army.
Thank you. It is time a Russian supporter present a good argument on what is really happening.
I am not Russian supporter. I am for justice and for Christian values.
I am a Russian supporter.
I also support Iran, China, Palestine, Syria, Korea and any other people under attack by US totalitarian dreams of world military domination.
its quite literally not are you blind
Budanov is handling the Kursk operation.
Where you got this information from? Shari and other knowledgeable Ukrainian bloggers are sure Syrskyi is in charge, and in case of failure, he'll lose his job.
I heard it on a video. But here is an article that supports the notion: https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/08/06/mixed-forces-allegedly-breach-into-russian-kursk-oblast-from-ukrainian-side/
It is an obvious disinformation. There are at least 6 brigades already. Most of them were moved from Ukraine-Belarus border where they were concentrated probably exactly for this operation. There are a lot of foreigners among them, Poles, French and others. They captured quite a large territory. Of course this operation was planned by NATO generals. Mostly for PR. They badly need a success story. The last 10 months they had only bad news.
russia deserves it
That is an expression of an emotion. Everybody should be entitled to their emotions, which, by the way, is a moral statement.
However, there are consequences following from this action that project into the future, I'm afraid exclusively to the further detriment of Ukraine.
But the costs to Ukraine's (now pitch dark) future has never been part of the calculus of this NATO proxy war against Russia. Or try to find that concern somewhere, start looking for it on pages 96 – 103 and please report back when you find any sign of it:
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html
I fear that very soon the USA region will " feel the consequences of this war". Russia has shown great weakness as to it's "Red Lines", if and when they let loose the USA citizen will be in for a very rude awakening,,and so will the bloody, evil, bought off, DC GHOULS!
More lies and deception from the Land-O-Lies.
Where did it begin? Truman when he created the CIA? Well before, going back thousands of years when rulers learned how to manipulate the masses?
When a population is dumbed down in a banana republic the head apes can make a mockery out of human existence!
Satan the father of lies taught people how to lie.
“Everything comes from God; everything exists by his power; and everything is intended for his glory.” – Romans 11:36
Satan is the father of lies and God is the father of Satan, who exists because God wishes it to be so.
God is beyond human capacity of understanding. According to Christian teaching, humans can know God only through Christ. Opinion of St Paul is just an opinion of a human. Satan, as described in New Testament is kind of a carnivorous animal in the jungle of life. He is hunting for human souls. It is a necessary condition of the evolution. However, if Satan get upper hand, there will be no future and no evolution for the humans.
If you are omnipotent, as God is, then God is omni-responsible. Nothing can exist without God’s permission. Evil exists because God wants evil to exist.
God gave us freedom to choose how to live. Freedom comes together with responsibility.
Will get encircled and destroyed. Resistance is futile.