MORE STRATEGY
Yesterday I explained why Putin's strategy was doomed to fail from the start. Today I explain why Ukraine's strategy will inevitably win.
Perfect victory is bloodless. Near perfect victory has many paths to victory, and no path to defeat. I have repeatedly pointed out, I have several paths to victory, and Putin has no path to victory. Some of my paths are bloodier than others.
Yesterday I explained why Russia's strategy in Ukraine was doomed to fail, because it relied on the West just giving up, not caring, doing nothing, being internally and internationally divided and throwing Ukraine under the bus. None of that happened: just the opposite in fact.
In other word's: Putin got senile, stupid, is thoroughly "off" his game and his mistakes will cost him his life. Yay! Yet: you must assume your opponent is on game, because the mere fact an opponent makes a mistake does not necessarily mean s/he will make more mistakes. People can learn from their mistakes, though it is better to avoid making mistakes by learning from others mistakes. Finally: Effective traps look like mistakes and are somehow enticing to their victim. The severed serpents head can still bite!
Today I wish to point out why Ukraine's strategy, though similar to Russia’s, would succeed even without vital Western aid, though at greater cost in lives. This is to show you the bloodiest, stupidest, and most impoverishing path to victory: but when you're in a war for survival ya do all kinds of cray cray stuff.
Goddess, what i would give for a Cray supercomputer... :) WISH LIST!
I also start to explain why it is in Washington’s own interest to aid Ukraine.
Ukraine's Struggle for Survival Against Russia's Criminal War of Conquest
The ongoing Russian war crime in Ukraine is characterized by a stark asymmetry in motivations and objectives between the Muscovite Mafia State masquerading as the "Russian" Federation and Ukraine. Russia's invasion of Ukraine reflects a calculated strategy aimed at a criminal conquest. In contrast Ukraine is fighting for its very survival. In other words: Russia is fighting a war of its own choosing. Ukraine is not. Russia can quit any time. Ukraine cannot.
The Russian Strategy:
Putin's decision to invade Ukraine was predicated on his belief that the West would lose interest and withdraw support for Ukraine. By exploiting this perceived weakness, Russia sought to assert sovereignty over Ukrainian territory through military force. However, for Russia, this conflict represents a war of choice—a calculated crime illegally aimed at expanding "Russian" territory through conquest. Moreover, the Russian strategy depended on the West making the mistake of abandoning Ukraine to a would-be conqueror. That has been shown to be Putin's fatal mistake. Yesterday we saw why that was really a stupid choice of Vampire Putin. Today we will look at why a similar strategy by Ukraine would win.
Ukraine's Fight for Survival:
Russia is fighting a war of conquest, a war it chose. In contrast, Ukraine's has no choice in the war and must fight, like it or not. Faced with the Russian threat to Ukraine's survival, Ukraine has been forced to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity at all costs. Unlike Russia, Ukraine lacks the luxury of choice; it's a matter of life and death. Ukraine has no choice but to fight on, even if totally occupied a savage fierce bloody violent guerilla war would rage on for at least a decade before Russia finally gives up. But Russia finally gives up. That's a win: a bloody savage stupid win, but a win nonetheless.
The Persistence of Resistance:
Despite Russia's military might and numerical superiority, Ukraine's determination to resist occupation ensures that the war would not end quickly with Ukraine just giving up and going home: Ukrainians are already at home. If you want a parallel, give a good look at Ireland versus England: Not pretty. Even in the event of complete Russian occupation, Ukrainian resistance would persist, sometimes sullen and silent, other times swift and explosive, still at times pretended acquiescence followed up by yet another dead occupier. Guerilla wars are fueled by a deep-seated resolve to defend one's home and homeland against who the fuck are these monsters and why are they here. The deep savage ferocity underlying any guerill resistance underlines the formidable challenge that Russia faces in attempting to subjugate Ukraine through force alone. Russia WILL give up. But at what price? My means are savage because I want the war to end as fast as possible so we can all get back to peace and prosperity.
Russia's Growing Domestic Unrest:
As the conflict drags on and on, with ever mounting Russian casualties, Russia will encounter increasing domestic dissent and opposition to the war. The human and economic costs of prolonged military engagement in Ukraine will inevitably strain Russia's resources and test the patience of its people. Just as Putin counted on the West to lose interest, Ukraine can similarly anticipate Russia's waning commitment to the conflict as its toll becomes increasingly unsustainable. And then one fine day: riots mutinies, rebellions, assassination, coup and/or civil war --I have many Many paths to victory, though some are bloodier. Prigozhin will prove not to be the last gunner to take a shot for the Kremlin.
The Inevitable Russian Withdrawal:
Ultimately, the inherent disparity in motivations between Ukraine and Russia renders Russia much more susceptible to defeat by attrition. While Ukraine's survival instinct compels it to persist in the face of all adversity, Russia's strategic objectives are subject to the constraints of domestic dissent and international sanctions and aid to Ukraine. Consequently, Russia is much likelier to finally withdraw from Ukraine and Ukraine is unlikely to capitulate.
Conclusion:
The conflict between Ukraine and Russia exemplifies the stark contrast between a war of survival and a war of conquest. Russia's aggression and attempted war of conquest west by a desire for territorial expansion: greed and ambitiion. Ukraine's resilience and determination underscore the futility of Putin's war. As the war persists, Russia's resolve will inevitably erode, paving the way for Ukrainian victory.
One path to explore, which is now conjecture, is Ukraine's 10 year guerilla war against the Russian occupier. Bloody, stupid, poor, victorious. My worst case scenario sucked even worse than where we are now. Ukraine would win even without aid, though at a much greater cost in innocent lives and with bad economic consequences for the stock market. HOLD FAST
WHY CONGRESS DECIDED TO AID UKRAINE
The US Congress' decision to provide aid to Ukraine was influenced by many domestic and international factors. Here are the objective reasons behind the US Congress’s decision, looking at the political, strategic, and geopolitical considerations that shaped the decision-making process.
1. Trump's Criminal Trials:
Former President Donald Trump's legal troubles played a significant role in the decision to vote aid for Ukraine. With his attention focused on his criminal trials, Trump's influence over congressional decision-making decreased, allowing for a more independent evaluation of aid to Ukraine. As a look through to the results: many members of congress know Trump will be found guilty in one or all of his criminal trials, might be legally ineligible for the office of President, is clearly unfit, and will in any case not be elected President.
2. Russia's Stalled Progress in Ukraine:
The situation in Eastern Ukraine was a crucial factor. Despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's bloodthirsty illegal ambitions to conquer Ukraine, his efforts faced significant resistance, preventing any substantial gains. This resistance, combined with international pressure, made it easier for the United States to respond and support Ukraine. The USA knows Ukraine will win, ultimately — and then what? The USA plans prudently to be on the right side of the future.
3. Ukraine's Successful Military Operations:
Ukraine's success in conducting repeated deep strike military operations inside the Russian Federation demonstrated its capability and resilience in the face of Russian aggression and war crimes. Deep strikes on air assets, factories, and oil infrastructure showcased Ukraine's determination and highlighted the importance of supporting the country in its defense efforts.
4. Bipartisan Agreement on Aid:
There was bipartisan recognition of the need to provide aid to Ukraine, transcending political divisions. Even some individuals within the MAGA movement acknowledged the strategic importance of supporting Ukraine, making it a consensus-driven decision within Congress.
5. Expectation of Ukrainian Victory:
There is a growing realization that Ukraine will secure victory in the long term, even without US assistance. This understanding led policymakers to recognize the implications of leaving Ukraine unsupported and the subsequent geopolitical consequences. The United States would be confronted with a dramatically altered global landscape, featuring:
i. A unified European continent, fresh from a victorious proxy war against Russia, fought without American assistance. This would have imbued Europe with significant military expertise, confidence, and self-reliance, transforming it into a more potent force on the world stage.
ii. The emergence of China as a formidable peer competitor. As a global superpower, China would pose a substantial challenge to the United States, boasting a robust economy, cutting-edge technology, and an expanding military presence.
iii. A Europe harboring less-than-friendly sentiments towards the United States. The fact that America abandoned its European allies during a critical moment would leave a lasting sense of betrayal, eroding trust and straining relationships. This would make it increasingly difficult for the USA to secure European support in future conflicts or diplomatic initiatives.
In essence, when you use someone else's army (Ukraine) to fight a war and then abandon them, only to see them emerge victorious, you have inadvertently created a powerful adversary. The Europeans, having successfully fought and won a war without American aid, would now possess the military prowess, strategic expertise, and confidence to potentially challenge the United States in the future. This would mark a significant shift in the global balance of power, with the USA facing a more assertive and independent Europe, as well as a rising China.
6. Israeli Response to Iranian Aggression:
Israel's calculated response to Iranian aggression underscored the need for stability and deterrence in the Middle East. The alignment of interests between the US and Israel contributed to a more nuanced approach in foreign policy decision-making. Netanyahu —and Zionist U.S. citizens —may not have completely abandoned Trump but plenty of Jewish Americans recognize anti-semitism associated with Trump.
7. Political Shifts in Israel:
The political shift in Israel: Netanyahu figured out Biden does not wish to oust him, and so Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decided to refrain from seeking to oust President Joe Biden, facilitated a more conducive environment for bilateral cooperation.
8. Misconceptions about Chinese Support:
China, despite Bonehead Blinken's dumb move, is giving great cooperation on Ukraine. However, the USA continues to complain, and it's not hard to understand why.
i. Lots of MAGAs are racist. Chinese people aren't whites. This underlying racism fuels a significant portion of the anti-China sentiment, making it a convenient scapegoat for the administration's failures.
ii. So, "the China threat" is a great drum to beat to motivate the brainwashed. By perpetuating this narrative, the administration can distract from its own shortcomings and rally its base around a common enemy.
iii. By banging the "China bad" threat drum enough, the MAGA base were stampeded off the cliff they love to dance on, complete with buffalo head. This orchestrated hysteria serves as a smokescreen, diverting attention from the real issues and allowing the administration to pursue its agenda unchecked.
Prepare to watch Blinken backpedal on his claims of Chinese support for Moscow. China isn't supporting Moscow, and it's only a matter of time before the truth comes to light. If Blinken insists, wrongly, to push that line further, well, I am not responsible for the consequences. The fallout from such a reckless move could be severe, damaging relationships and undermining global stability.
Conclusion:
The US Congress' decision to grant aid to Ukraine was the result of various domestic and international factors, driven by strategic imperatives and geopolitical realities. By recognizing the importance of supporting Ukraine, policymakers aimed to uphold stability, deter aggression, and promote democratic values in the face of evolving global challenges.
If Blinken insists, wrongly, to push that line further, well, I am not responsible for consequences.
btw the war in Ukraine will now end much quicker. In my worst case it ended with Ukrainian victory, but only after a long slog of guerilla war and possible Chinese intervention(s)
I guess Washington figured I know what I am talking about somehow?
You don't have to believe me
but
those who disbelieve me do so at their own peril.
News:
Китай уменьшил экспорт оборудования в Россию впервые с декабря 2022 года https://www.eastrussia.ru/news/kitay-umenshil-eksport-oborudovaniya-v-rossiyu-vpervye-s-dekabrya-2022-goda/
Гонконг заявил, что не будет соблюдать санкции США против Китая, России и Ирана
Подробнее: https://eadaily.com/ru/news/2024/04/23/gonkong-zayavil-chto-ne-budet-soblyudat-sankcii-ssha-protiv-kitaya-rossii-i-irana
Китай сократил поставки России машин и оборудования https://www.kasparov.ru/material.php?id=66274D1E86575