2024-10-03 -

10:53

Sometimes when you feel that you are perceived as too negative, it is good that Ukraine speaks frankly – straight from the horse’s mouth, Budanov lets us know that the West does not care that Russian missiles are packed full of Western components.
https://x.com/maks_nafo_fella/status/1841590577453842894?s=46&t=Vah3JXV31B9lXwZOK5gF7w

And when Greenpeace announced that the Russian shadow fleet is approaching EU ports, the EU is also giving Russia the money to buy these components.

Does this sound familiar, who are the ones who have de facto financed H..as, how have the sanctions against Iran gone, who was there shaking hands with mullan as prime minister?
I…el and Ukraine are drifting closer and closer to each other, which should be positive?
I..el probably understands today how much RU has been behind the past year – here there are more Russian weapons with Hez…bollah.
https://x.com/anno1540/status/1841483756831440975?s=46&t=Vah3JXV31B9lXwZOK5gF7w

I got a text on WhatsApp from Dengamle yesterday.
“I once wrote that the strength that creates an empire is what crushes it. The West’s empire has been built on democracy, openness, and justice.
Is this what we see now that causes the empire to fall? 🥺”
Whether he originally wrote it on a stone tablet or papyrus was not clear, but wise words.
Already in the 1700s, some great thinker in England wrote that democracies implode because citizens always vote for those who give them more free money, not those who make the country better.

I want to remind you of Pearson’s book which forms the basis for my entire analysis of how the “axis of evil” has planned the war. October 7 last year fit perfectly.

Then during the past year, things have gone worse and worse for the Axis of Evil, but when the West continues to do nothing, they finally manage to get back on track after many crashes and punctures, but patience is a virtue and if you get many chances, you eventually succeed.

According to Pearson –
-The crisis in MENA will lead to an oil crisis – one scenario is a sunk ship in the narrowest part of the Strait of Hormuz.
-Another is to really test the USA by sinking an aircraft carrier and letting 10,000 sailors drown under the burning oil film on the water Bismarck-style. Houthi at least gets points for trying where Iranian ships provide missile batteries on land with targets, and Houthi fires missiles at the West’s fleet and civilian maritime traffic – with missiles they got from Iran and Russia.
-The next steps are to wipe out I..el and then China wakes up.

I personally believe that Putin hopes for a financial crisis that hits the West hard so our willingness to support Ukraine becomes as small as Germany’s.

Then according to Pearson, Iran is supposed to have in its missiles against I..el a few missiles with a biological agent not unlike Covid. After Covid, that scenario suddenly became much more likely. That is how you break the back of I..el, the country falls ill earlier than its neighbors simply.
Which raises the question of whether China, which cooked up the whole weapon, accidentally released it too early by mistake 😀

Have you noticed that recently there has been a discussion in the thread about all the dangers that can happen if Russia loses the war and it is painted in the worst possible light. What we have to compare with is 1989, which is a likely outcome of a collapse, but it doesn’t even have to come to that if Ukraine wins.
It is mostly me hoping that Russia will be divided into about ten countries so we can avoid 300 more years of oppression. But the most likely scenario for me throughout the war has been that Russia just declares a big victory, retreats to the 1991 borders, and goes back to plundering the country and oppressing the citizens – we have discussed that many times.
I have wondered if it might be the pro-USA faction trying to justify the USA’s actions with this horrible outcome, but unfortunately it only ends up being pro-Russian instead. The only ones supporting the USA’s line today are Putin and Xi, so it becomes increasingly difficult to find humane explanatory models for why the USA stops the EU from letting Ukraine strike targets in Russia with their long-range weapons.

Now maybe this can be read differently, but here I think Ukraine officially confirms that a ceasefire is on the table?
What do you read and can we put behind us that it is underway?
https://x.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1841128066204008464

Then it is interesting that both The Economist and FT are publishing these articles right now – not your usual pro-Russian publications directly but of course it could be coincidence.

Since the EU and USA have announced that Russia will be able to attack Europe in 2029 (in five years), I want to develop the reasoning below a bit –
-we have 1989 behind us and it went well until we financed Putin’s rearmament and gave him free rein.
Do we now have to choose between Russia being able and likely to attack the EU in 2029 or having another 1989
– wouldn’t the sensible choice then be another 1989?
I don’t understand the motives at all here, one chooses war instead of at least a chance at less war. And the whole nuclear threat that makes the USA terrified of escalation (according to their own statements and many long discussions in the thread)

We know that the Soviet doctrine was to attack in a cloud of tactical nuclear weapons. How do we know that after the UA war they won’t conclude that they have to do that again and refine their nuclear forces over five years because that time might be enough.
They barely advance today and need to advance in the next war. And deliver crap with FAB bombs with longer range that cannot be shot down instead of missiles?
Or use tactical platforms that UA has had difficulty shooting down?
Frontline proximity is good enough and then they advance through the lunar landscape.
Easier than pounding with artillery for months.

What makes you think it won’t be RU’s conclusion from this war.

Then there is the discussion that a lot of nuclear weapons and arms went astray in 1989 and we don’t want that again, so 1989 is not preferable
What weapons would go astray now we think – compared to 1989 they have nothing left.
Now is probably an opportunistic time for the Russian Federation to become significantly smaller?

This is a bit of friendly criticism here when one is realistic but right now we are here because Ukraine is not allowed to rain down Storm Shadow and strike targets in Russia as well as a lot of chatter about negotiations and ceasefires which I think Ukraine confirmed above.

The devil is in the details, what is the definition of “winning” and a “just peace”.
We in the thread shout in unison “the 1991 borders”, but when did you last hear that from the West 😀
A year ago you heard it in most statements.

Words and Actions, at first we did not see the words translate into action, and now the words are starting to change.
A ceasefire is synonymous with Ukraine not getting back the territory that RU has conquered today.
Because if Russia uses the time during negotiations to build a Surovikin line along all fronts – will the West help Ukraine break through it later?
But you can be assured that the legacy will be as watertight as some people’s are.

There is also a lot of discussion about war material production from the West that is to be located in Ukraine – do you think this will happen in a future rain of missiles?
This, more than anything, should worry us about war material production, as these are primary targets and then it is an investment from private companies in the EU – if it is open war, they are not interested.
https://x.com/maks_nafo_fella/status/1841397120244326771?s=46&t=Vah3JXV31B9lXwZOK5gF7w

But why are peace negotiations even on the agenda here, really, is a question I keep asking myself –
-Ukraine announces that they manufacture 155mm shells, 4 million drones per year, and have ballistic missiles underway.
-Biden can send those 4-5 million DIPCM shells anytime, GOP cannot stop it.
-Raytheon can manufacture 12 Patriots per year, if they just get an order.
-The Taurus manufacturer is still waiting for orders…
-Ukraine is supposed to get +100 billion USD from everyone, if not more?
-They are already using Palyinitsa and the Neptun land version very successfully.
-There are thousands of M113 and M1117 in warehouses.
-Ukraine still has T64s to upgrade.
-They manufacture BTR-4 themselves together with Bohdana – the wheeled howitzer is 20 per month
-70-80 F-16s are waiting for delivery.

What is missing is scaling up UA’s domestic weapons production but the G7 have been slow to transfer funds and so have the EU and the USA – Zelensky went out and said they had 20 billion USD redundancy in domestic production.

The shortage of materiel for Ukraine is highly artificial – it is created. The stocks are well filled in the West and now contracts for new materiel are starting to come – but to countries in the West, not Ukraine, and Ukraine does not get the surplus materiel that becomes leftover which instead goes to scrapping or is phased out too slowly, instead of being put on heavy transport immediately.

-Ukraine’s domestic weapons industry also has redundancy which is understandable since it doesn’t bring in cash for the West 😀
-UA attacks while outnumbered and defends even better so numbers are not a problem at all.
-If Ukraine has air defense, they shoot down 95% of the missile rain, they have shown us they can do that.
-Now RU artillery is only 3:1 in advantage which is a SENSATION
https://x.com/euromaidanpress/status/1841115946116694366?s=46&t=Vah3JXV31B9lXwZOK5gF7w

Ukraine is able to strike deep and RU is defenseless so their high-value targets are just one attack away.
-To date, Ukraine has carried out 48 attacks on refineries that have caused large fires in presumably key components.

-Putin cannot retake Kursk no matter how much he wants to and that is Priority No.1 right now.
-Ukraine can achieve breakthroughs in mine lines that were well built
-And UA is experimenting with mobile combat and early information is very positive.
-Also, UA has 300 watercraft to conduct amphibious combat down at the Dnieper.

Ukraine is about to win this war 😲

And that despite NK reportedly sending 6 million artillery shells to RU – a buddy you can simply trust.

Negotiations at this stage are catastrophic but the motivation CANNOT be
-that Ukraine is losing
-that Russia is too strong.

What remains as motivation then, here are some I can think of –
-The West does not want Ukraine to win and Russia to lose.
-It is getting urgent because RU is about to lose
-Countries in the West can no longer handle it.
More suggestions?

This thing with NATO and EU membership is also very deceptive. We saw with Sweden and NATO how long it took so having that as a carrot for an otherwise bad deal is directly dishonest and EU membership is at least +10 years away?
Can’t the EU but I guess Poland, Slovakia and Hungary can slow it down and I recall Germany has been hesitant about UA membership too quickly?

Do you know why Ukraine is retreating (yes you already know).
This was posted by LW yesterday – consider that there is a platoon or group under that detonation in a reinforced trench or bunker – do you think they survive?
https://x.com/AggregateOsint/status/1841340669735874832

4000 FAB bombs per month is a lot of groups or platoons buried alive.
The weapon is so effective that the West has sent the same to UA but it was probably under 1000 total.
And UA now manufactures their own, but small production due to lack of money.
RU is light years ahead in use and production.

Gregg wrote yesterday about Vovchansk
“A big problem is the snipers the tourists have there as well as their glide bombs. The glide bombs are a big problem along the entire front line so one can ask WHERE ARE our F16s?”

And this is what we read about Vuhledar yesterday, I think it was the living genius Erik14 who in his kindness posted it?
“Ukraine fended off the attack for nearly 7 months but ultimately lost the town on April 21st, almost entirely due to airstrikes that annihilated it”

Considering that Denmark wanted to send F-16s already in 2022 and Poland was not allowed to send its Patriot battery, or no one places orders for Patriots to Raytheon, or there are 500 Patriots in storage in the USA.
-So it is hard to get away from the feeling that the West does not consider FAB a priority to combat.
Can it be interpreted any other way?

Why is it not a priority to combat?
Good grief, some think – can the idiot be more wrong.
But Ukraine themselves say it – it is part of their plan to win to knock out the FAB bombers 😀

And if you do not approve their plan, you do not want them to win as fast as possible.
Again – what an idiot Johan No.1 is.
But this has Zelensky himself stated recently, right?

Sometimes it is aired a bit in the thread – Ukraine should be grateful for what they get and the West has done more than one can ask.
Yes, NATO thought so in 2023 too when they in several statements called Ukraine ungrateful.
But then you belong to a new generation than the 50s generation for those who understand Russia, they understand that if Russia is not defeated fundamentally in Ukraine then Europe will get an extended war in Europe.

Sullivan who wants to avoid escalation in Ukraine at all costs. He is to cooperate with I..el for a retaliation that shakes Iran to the core. Just saying.
https://bsky.app/profile/johanno1.bsky.social/post/3l5jviivqii23

And I..el has just attacked a Russian airbase in Syria without the USA giving a red card.

Did you know that Russia and Iran have a security agreement so Sullivan’s willingness to help I..el strike Iran goes exactly against the escalation they are trying to avoid in Ukraine.

Is it starting to become difficult to understand Biden’s and Sullivan’s “non-escalation strategy” here?

Ukraine’s retreat is artificial, it is created – RU found something that UA could not eliminate and the West has consistently denied Ukraine the equipment to eliminate it despite numerous requests from Ukraine.
The Whack-a-mole is currently rigged to Ukraine’s disadvantage.
If the FAB bombs disappear, RU is completely finished, they have no ace to pull out of the sleeve.

But over time RU also improves. Yes, we only see RU being chased like rats by drones but the same happens to the Ukrainians. This one is from Rob, whom I consider part of the negative Ukraine-support faction.
https://x.com/ralee85/status/1841532087502881006?s=46&t=Vah3JXV31B9lXwZOK5gF7w

This did not start in 2022.
– In 2014 Russia began its active phase to take over Ukraine after their subversive activities failed.
– And before 2022 they had gotten the EU to shut down its electricity production and become dependent on Russian gas.
– RU also created the refugee crisis in 2015
– And then they got Brexit through by creating the refugee crisis just before it.
– RU has created many right-wing parties in addition to the left-wing parties they controlled for political instability.
– RU also controls autonomous movements on the left and right wings (and the Islamists) and for me the P..demonstrations are exactly what it looked like during the Cold War – a classic Russian influence operation.
Russia is simply 25 years ahead of the West in planning.
– And now they have managed to paralyze major Western countries like the USA, Germany, UK – and they have effectively blocked the EU on important issues.
– They also hold the chairmanship in the EU and UN and their candidate for the US presidential election is one murder of Kamala Harris away from winning.

Everyone sensible in this thread sees negotiations as a catastrophic development and a ceasefire as a potentially suicidal losing move. This thread does not have a lot of domestic politics or different affiliations to consider – we want what is best for Ukraine.
And most pro-Russians in the thread are quickly weeded out by LW.

Then the thread has correctly identified that what is best for Ukraine is also best for the EU.
This has also been identified by the EU, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, UK, Italy, and France so we are not completely alone in our amateurish opinions.

Mette Frederiksen has made almost the sharpest statements in the EU after Macron but Denmark is also the country that has done the most for Ukraine in action.

We have during a war learned to distinguish between what is said and what happens on the ground/in action and right now there is a discrepancy.
Then we are pushed to latch onto some statements that indicate why there is a discrepancy – because suddenly they become more likely as an explanation for why we do not see anything in action.

If the legacy is that the US election gave Putin the chance he so desperately needed, it is not a high rating for the West but it would be managing the legacy from 1939 or Yugoslavia in an expected way.

There are some saving graces –
– Ukraine decides to go full throttle with or without the EU, preferably with the EU.
– Ukraine and I..el discover that the enemy of your enemy thinking has brought them together.
– The USA gets its Lusitania or Pearl Harbour moment but Putin and China are probably not completely ignorant of history 😀

But if Putin manages to talk down the West and the West manages to get Ukraine to come to the negotiating table, and for Putin to even consider showing up there must be a temporary ceasefire.

Then you have not listened to Reagan who said there is nothing more permanent than a temporary law from Congress and then we have real problems because then we are heading towards a global escalation that can no longer be stamped out.

There is a very small crack in the wall where the light seeps in and the man with the ice axe who widens it is none other than bicycle handlebar Mark Rutte.
The day after he took office he immediately said that NATO members themselves can choose whether the weapons they sent to Ukraine can be used by Ukraine against targets inside Russia.
This statement is in direct conflict with what the USA has communicated on the issue.

Now comes another statement from Rutte where he bursts out laughing (you can see it in the picture) at Biden’s and Sullivan’s fear of nuclear weapons ✊
https://x.com/maks_nafo_fella/status/1841385110358081930?s=46&t=Vah3JXV31B9lXwZOK5gF7w

11:47

There are many conflicting statements on this issue right now but let’s look at this positively.

– Ukraine needs to eliminate the FAB bomb droppers and against the 100 targets as quickly as possible, they have just lost Vuhledar because of that and are probably not very eager to lose on land.

– Now Matthew Miller does not say anything about access to ammunition which is also needed but we have to assume that it has been delivered in the quantities needed.
There are ATACMS cluster munitions long-range and there are Storm Shadow/Scalp.

If so, we should have combat against this target group within weeks at the latest and thus be back on track 👍

What the spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs says is that the plan is accepted and that Ukraine has full freedom to implement it.

We also know that this included getting approval for Kursk 😁

11:57

Was the point that it happened in 1991 when I wrote 1989 or was the point that the Soviet Union collapsed and it did not lead to nuclear war, war, or otherwise the end of the world.

Before the Soviet Union fell, weapons did not go astray but the Soviet Union ARMED the world’s rogue states.

Just as Russia does today – they have armed Hezbo…ah and H…as, we have proof of that.

And they have probably cooperated with Iran for their nuclear weapons program, if I remember correctly?

12:30

Checked out Debunkbot above, at first it refused to answer whether it was the Soviet Union that violated Sweden in the 80s but when you entered probability it became the Soviet Union – smart AI.

Now the Thai guy who writes my posts can go fly a kite, tomorrow it will be AI 👍😁

What this AI does is probably scan all available information so instead of latching onto individual statements it makes a holistic assessment?
How it values different sources is immediately my question?

Below is what Debunkbot from MIT had to say.

My question to AI
According to available information, is it likely that United States will allow Ukraine to strike targets inside of Russia with American ATACMS and European Storm Shadow or Scalp missiles?

AI conclusion after a page of nonsense.
It’s important to continuously monitor official statements and defence policy updates from the U.S. and European governments for the most current information regarding military aid to Ukraine. However, based on what is known at the present, the likelihood of the U.S. and Europe consenting to supply Ukraine with long-range missiles capable of striking inside Russia’s borders remains low, given the risk of escalation.

I then changed the question to whether it was likely that the USA would NOT approve it to see if the answer would be different.

AI response
Based on the available information and public statements from the United States and its European allies, it is indeed likely that they will not allow Ukraine to use American or European-supplied weapons systems like ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) or cruise missiles such as Storm Shadow or SCALP to strike targets inside Russia.

The primary concern of the U.S. and European countries supplying weapons to Ukraine is to prevent further escalation of the conflict. They are focused on enabling Ukraine to defend its territory against the ongoing Russian invasion that began in 2022 while avoiding steps that could lead to a direct military confrontation between NATO countries and Russia, which is a nuclear-armed state.

These concerns have been reflected in the types of military assistance provided to Ukraine. For instance, when the U.S. supplied HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems) to Ukraine, they did so with the explicit condition that the supplied systems would not be used to target Russian territory and only more limited-range munitions were included, not the longer-range ATACMS missiles that can strike targets up to 300 kilometers away.

The decision to provide or withhold certain weapons systems, like ATACMS or European Storm Shadow or SCALP missiles, is made considering the risk of escalation, the legal implications of such military support, and the potential for driving the conflict into a larger war involving NATO and Russia with potentially catastrophic consequences.

As the conflict continues, the United States and its allies have regularly reassessed their support based on the evolving situation on the ground and strategic policy considerations. Although they have increased the scale and capability of the assistance over time, they have maintained a cautious approach regarding systems that could strike deep inside Russia.

Therefore, while the situation may change, as of the last available information, it is likely that the U.S. and its allies will continue to restrict the provision of long-range strike capabilities that could be used to attack targets within Russian borders, due to the high risks of such an action.

12:57

I don’t think I’ve commented with you before, Exist?

What has happened is that it is the USA that has not delivered what is best for Ukraine this time, and then the USA – Ukraine are set against each other, which has upset several in the thread.

You read my posts as intended and understand their purpose – sometimes sharp/insightful comments come, and I then try to take their arguments and analyze them in the days after, and sometimes they fall apart.

Some unfortunately choose to misinterpret or latch onto peripheral information or alternatively call it supporting Trump or creating a doomsday atmosphere automatically.

The critical point you raise is – the USA (at the forefront) is preventing Ukraine from winning as quickly as possible. That claim is today indisputable and therefore cannot be questioned.
Had that not been the case, we would already have had a Storm Shadow and ATACMS rain over the 100 targets in Russia behind us.

Everything can change, and that is what I keep writing that I hope for, but we have a reality today to relate to, and August 6 is today two months away without Ukraine having followed up with steps 2, 3, 4…

As a person, I am enormously frustrated that I cannot find a motive for this that is best for me, Ukraine, the West, or even the USA. Right now, it is only Putin and Xi who think the USA’s strategy is good, and moreover, the USA has a completely different strategy with I…el as we have just seen.

(EU, UK, Italy, France, Finland, Sweden, and a few others have all explicitly said that Ukraine may use their missiles against targets in Russia. The USA has explicitly said that Ukraine may not).

Fun post to read anyway, Exist, even if I hijacked it and probably drew completely wrong conclusions 😀

13:03

Yes, so I guess we both want a defeated Russia if I understand this right – regarding the discussion really?

I have gotten the impression that you see a threat in a defeated Russia?

Now I would like to go a step further and see the (second) last colonial power that gladly starts interstate wars, is a criminal clan, and carries out sabotage throughout the EU collapse completely so the federation splits into 10 more countries, but maybe you don’t always get what you want, I’ve learned.