I'm aghast!!!!!!
While the European Leaders whine about JD Vance's Comments at the Munich Conference have any of them remembered why he is the American Vice President at all?
That, last year the Americans had had enough of the Biden Harris Administration that dragged the World into the Morass the Conference is meant to resolve.
And hasn't the German Chancellor seen the ominous parable of Munich and how Zelenskiy has done exactly what Adolf Hitler did in 1933? He used the Countries Democracy to become it's leader, then abolished it.
And if that wasn't enough, the unelected Dictator of Ukraine seems to want to become the unelected Commander in chief of a "European Army!!!!!!
This will be a Europe fighting a Russia that no longer recognises the INF Treaty and could nuke every City in it with short to medium range Missiles.
How much longer have we got to go along with this Mans delusional insanity?
Any hope that Britain might talk some sense into that 3rd rate Actor were dashed when David Lammy said how Ukraine was "on an irreversible path to joining NATO"!
Has he forgotten why this War started in the first place?
But what a lot of these NATOphiles forget is that a component of the Istanbul Agreement - which would have ended the Ukraine War in April 2022 - was about how other Countries - including Russia - would act as a security Guarantor should neutral Ukraine be threatened by any other.
In other Words, rather like NATO's Article 5 but by another Name, and better, because it does include the Russians, avoiding the confrontational Aspects that caused the Conflict.
But what if the War was different?
Zelenskiy seems so far removed from the Plot he has failed to realise this ......
Even if - and that's a very big, very speculative "IF" and completely hypothetical - Ukraine did prevail and fought the Russians to a Standstill, forcing Moscow to sue for Peace, what would be left of Ukraine to the Ukrainians?
Nothing if all it's natural, mineral, agricultural and manufacturing Wealth has been sold off to the West and most prominently America.
And he would have to continue selling off the Country if the very unlikely happened and he did push the Russians back to pre-2014 and recaptured the Crimea. Every Acre of it all captured would be sold to equip and fund the Ukrainian Forces necessary to do so.
So he, or more accurately the Ukrainian People, would gain nothing.
And to further the Hitler comparison there's a Video showing Zelenskiy with a huge Map on a Table showing where these rare Earth Deposits are - except many of them are now in Russian controlled Areas. He's like Hitler - who would do the same in the Fuhrer Bunker with Maps showing non existent Divisions, saying they should push here, or push there, except they'd been destroyed by the Soviet Armies on the Eastern Front.
And rather like the end of WW2 many of these Deposits are in the Russian controlled Zone like it was what would become Kaliningrad, the Area formerly known as East Prussia, Silesia and East Germany which saw Assets stripped as reparations for the War and taken back to the Soviet Union.
Seeing how the Munich Meeting is taking shape the War could end very similarly too, in how the main Winners won't be the European Powers but America and Russia.
And in that Munich Conference it seems the EU might not be involved in any final Talks to resolve the Conflict.
Ironic considering the EU insisted on excluding the Russians from the EU-Ukraine cooperation Summit in 2013 - which forced Yanukovych to abandon it and led to the Maidan Coup of 2014.
Zelenskiy has caused a Pooh Storm by now refusing to sign over Rare Earth Minerals to the Americans, except he must be suffering from Amnesia after offering those same Minerals to them as long ago as last October.
The thing is, not only was American influence on Maidan probably due to Oil Companies Chevron, Haliburton and Exxon doing exploratory drilling in Ukraine, he must have been very naive if he thought there wouldn't be a Caveat to all this military and financial Aid he's been getting since the Conflict started.
As I've said, he should have ratified the Istanbul Agreement instead, before his Country was wrecked by War, People died and were displaced in their Millions, it's Assets stripped by foreign Concerns, and he was still politically and diplomatically intact.
Quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting.
Why did a 2008 War in the Caucasus involving Russia make it the most dangerous place on Earth and how did it lead to where we are now?
ReplyDeleteIraq was a Warzone, so was Afghanistan, and both were quite dangerous places, but the Georgian Conflict was far more dangerous because it involved a Country that really did have WMD's, and enough of them to incinerate the Earth.
It was also the first tangible indication that things were deteriorating with Moscow. A prequel to the War in Ukraine because of Comments made in Bucharest about potential Georgian membership of NATO earlier that year.
How, given subterfuge in other Regions, and what we have seen in Ukraine and Syria, old Wounds in the Caucasus like those of the Chechen-Ingush People and the forgotten Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh could have been deliberately reopened to escalate the War. Chechens have since been fighting in Syria against Russia's Ally in Damascus, while NATO Turkeys Proxy in Azerbaijan might have been incentivised to recommence Hostilities with Russia's Friend Armenia. Indeed, more recently we have seen exactly that as the Nagorno-Karabakh has been blockaded by Azeri Troops and Armenians surrounded and besieged, violating a Truce brokered by Putin.
And what made the Caucasus so dangerous at that time was how, while everyone was focussed on Iraq and Afghanistan no one seemed to think so.
But it was this that led to where we are now.
It's no coincidence that after falling from Power in Tblisi Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili fled to Ukraine where post Maidan President Petro Poroshenko made him Governor of the Odessa Oblast. In an act of supreme Irony he resigned because of what he cited as Corruption.
But while Leaders meet in Munich to try and resolve the Ukraine Conflict the Problem in Georgia hasn't gone away. A Schism exists in Tblisi Politics as the ruling Georgian Dream Party with it's apparent pro-Russian leanings was at odds with the former President Salome Zourabichvili who openly had NATO and EU Flags on display in her Office. Georgia Dream has invoked criticism from the US and several EU Figures - but how much of that is as much due to the current Narrative as any actual Fact?
Afghanistan ....... again?
ReplyDeleteAt Munich Prime Minister Starmer has said he would send British Troops to Ukraine in a "Peacekeepers" Role. Except President Trump has asked for 50% of the Countries Resources.
The President added that American Soldiers would be sent to guard them.
The problem is, Ukraine has an ultra-Nationalist Community who would deeply resent any foreign Presence on their Soil, let alone one that is there to guard Resources that would otherwise belong to them.
How long would it be before they'd begin asking whether these Anglo-American Troops are there to protect them from the Russians, or those Resources from them?
If they begin to suspect it's the latter they have spent the last 3 years being heavily armed by both America and Britain, along with many other western Countries.
Subsequently, there would be a heavily armed ready made Militia to launch an insurgency against those American and British Soldiers.
This might sound familiar to anyone who remembers what happened in Afghanistan after the Soviet Army left and the Country was strewn with western supplied Weapons to fight them.
And the Weapons in Ukraine are far more sophisticated and powerful than anything that was sent to the Moujehedin during the Afghan-Soviet War.
ReplyDeleteWhile there are many similarities to the fate of Nazi Germany at the end of WW2 there is also one very big difference.
The western Allies presence in West Berlin and West Germany wasn't there to guard any Resources they might have acquired. Berliners and Germans in their Zones saw them as protectors against the Communists on the other side of the Iron Curtain. To this day there are Bases in Rammstein and Wiesbaden.
Also, Marshall Aid ensured indigenous Businesses would start and prosper, which is how Germany began it's journey to becoming as wealthy as it was.
No post-WW2 West Germany Chancellor offered half of the Countries Resources to foreign ownership, while western, then NATO, Forces were deployed to protect western Europe and the North Atlantic, not Resources in either.
Ironically, Ukrainians might start to see any western Military Presence as akin to the Soviet one in East Germany and the Warsaw Pact than what NATO was during the Cold War.
Something I mentioned about a year ago after their treatment by the Government in Kiev was what the Minorities in Western Ukraine might do after the War.
ReplyDeleteIf Ukraine is so broken and moribund it can't even own it's own resources would ethnic Romanians and Hungarians begin wanting to join their Regions to their respective Home Countries? What's to keep them in such a ruined Country - and what would be stopping them?
Might they see themselves as better off in Romania and Hungary than a failed State like Ukraine?
How about Ruthenians and their Relationship with Slovakia?
Would Poland want to reclaim Lvov?
Ironically, what guaranteed the Ukraine's Nationalist Capital against this was Moscow, whose Red Army captured it and made it part of the Ukrainian SSR near the end of WW2.
One test for all this Peace Talk will be if Russia recommences supplying Europe with Fuel and Natural Gas. Or more accurately, if Europe decides to roll back the Sanctions that stopped much of this.
ReplyDeleteIt was these that underwrote the German Economy of the last 30 years, whose "vorsprung durch teknik" underpinned the Value of the Euro - whose Value is attached to the financial Houses of Frankfurt.
Except up to very recently the EU has beaten the Crap out of People like Viktor Orban and Robert Fico for wanting to continue what might left of this arrangement, threatening them with Sanctions. Which Face will Zelenskiy wear at any Negotiations as - last year - he declined to renew the Gas Transit Contract that supplies Slovakia, Czechia, Austria and Hungary?
Will there be an initiative to repair Nordstream after it was destroyed by 'whoever'?
Something like this would have to happen if the Economies of Europe and the UK are to fully recover from the ravages of this Conflict.
The EU has lost a lot of its credibility because of how they very quickly kow towed to the Policies of the previous American Government, and went along with the machinations of the likes of Victoria Nuland before it. So much for being a Bloc that would stand up to more powerful Nations, whose leverage with Countries like America, China and Russia was how it was sold to us.
They're also responsible for some of the current mess anyway, being the People who excluded Russia from the EU-Ukraine Cooperation Talks in 2013. It was this that maybe provided a very good reason for Brexit as we were associated with an Organisation that was steering us on a collision Course with Moscow.
Now, it seems we are being conditioned to believe NATO can defend against Nuclear Weapons.
ReplyDeleteAt least, according to the latest Notification I've received from the Discussion Website Quora.
Except, further research tells me there is no Defence against the latest hypersonic Missiles the Russians have developed since 2018.
So, no NATO doesn't have some impenetrable 'Iron Dome' type Protection against Nuclear Weapons. And even Israel's "Iron Dome" was found wanting against recent Attacks by by Iran, Hezbollah and Houthis with comparatively basic Missiles and Rockets.
People need to remember that it only takes a few Detonations in an Island as small as ours to wreak havoc and Catastrophe, even if some Missiles might be stopped.
The Russians have several hypersonic Weapons they have used in Ukraine which can be made Nuclear Capable.
3M22 Zircon, Avangard, Kinzhal and Oreshnik.
The Zircon can be launched from a Submarine while the Avangard - thought to be the most dangerous - is launched from Land based Platforms, flies at at least Mach 20 and deemed impossible to intercept.
A conspiracy Theorist could argue that America wasn't going to allow itself to be sidelined by a Deal involving Russia, the EU and Ukraine. Some of the biggest Fuel and Mineral extraction companies were in Ukraine for 2 years before the Maidan Coup that someone contrived. There were also the Stories about Hunter Biden's business interests in Ukraine as Maidan happened when his Father was Vice President. Politicians like Lyndsay Graham were adamant that Ukraine's Resources should not be shared with Russia and China so maybe there was a very misguided Notion that a "proxy War" in Ukraine might topple Putin at first.
ReplyDeleteWhen it was obvious that wasn't going to happen America changed tack and now has the Deal it is arranging with Russia.
A Eurosceptic could argue that the EU was supposed to be a Bloc that would stand up to bigger, more powerful Countries on behalf of their smaller Members so why did they know tow to American foreign Policy in 2013-14? Hardly surprising then former President Obama was so keen on the EU when we were having our Brexit Debates.
Yanukovych could argue in 2013 to the EU during the EU-Ukraine Cooperation Summit; " You expect me to exclude the Russians from this, a People we have a 1100 years of shared History and Culture with, for something started in 1952 that even People within it are sceptical of?"
Once News of the Deal struck with Trump, Putin and a reluctant Zelenskiy filters through the Ranks how much longer will the Ukrainian Army fight once they realise they haven't been fighting for Ukraine at all?
How will the EU and Britain recover from their economic woes when it looks like they've now been sidelined? Nearly 3 years of Sanctions, and Russian contingency against them, have lost them a very lucrative Market, and cheap reliable Fuel while America will have first refusal on anything available since.
A conspiracy Theorist could argue that America wasn't going to allow itself to be sidelined by a Deal involving Russia, the EU and Ukraine. Some of the biggest Fuel and Mineral extraction companies were in Ukraine for 2 years before the Maidan Coup that someone contrived. There were also the Stories about Hunter Biden's business interests in Ukraine as Maidan happened when his Father was Vice President. Politicians like Lyndsay Graham were adamant that Ukraine's Resources should not be shared with Russia and China so maybe there was, at first, a very misguided Notion that a "proxy War" in Ukraine might topple Putin.
ReplyDeleteWhen it was obvious that wasn't going to happen America changed tack and now has the Deal it is arranging with Russia.
A Eurosceptic could argue that the EU was supposed to be a Bloc that would stand up to bigger, more powerful Countries on behalf of their smaller Members, so why did they kow tow to American foreign Policy in 2013-14? Hardly surprising then former President Obama was so keen on the EU when we were having our Brexit Debates.
Yanukovych could argue in 2013 to the EU during the EU-Ukraine Cooperation Summit; " You expect me to exclude the Russians from this, a People we have a 1100 years of shared History and Culture with, for something started in 1952 that even People within it are sceptical of?"
Once News of the Deal struck with Trump, Putin and a reluctant Zelenskiy filters through the Ranks how much longer will the Ukrainian Army fight once they realise they haven't been fighting for Ukraine at all?
How will the EU and Britain recover from their economic woes when it looks like it is they who have now been sidelined? Nearly 3 years of Sanctions, and Russian contingency against them, have lost them a very lucrative Market, and cheap reliable Fuel while America will have first refusal on anything available since.
And how about all that Russian Fuel?
ReplyDeleteEveryone has been watching events in eastern Europe and western Russia without looking further east .......... or west ..... if you happen to be in Alaska.
While President Trump negotiates his Deal on Ukraine's Resources with Russia could a time come when he does the same with the Fuel and Gas that used to flow into Europe? That Pipelines start flowing into Alaska across the very narrow Bering Strait that separates Russia far east from America's 49th State instead?
That President Trump could simultaneously exploit the self inflicted Rift the EU has with Russia and revisit the amicable Relationship the US had with Russia in 1867 when it bought the Territory from Tsar Alexander ll?
What could America do with surplus Oil when it produces more of it now than Saudi Arabia?
Sell it to the EU, when he isn't reducing Gas Prices for American Drivers who have seen them increase during the Biden Era. He might be on first name terms with Mr "Tesla" (Elon Musk) but he has voiced much criticism of the Biden Policy to completely replace Internal Combustion powered Cars with E-Vehicles. Obtaining Russian Fuel would help him roll back that Policy and score two big popularity Points in his America First Manifesto.
It also gives him substantial leverage within OPEC as he could control it's Price to the EU - not lost on anyone who has seen other Oil producers lean towards BRICS and away from the Petro Dollar.
America has directly and indirectly gone to War for that very reason, albeit cloaked in other Motives.
Saddam threatened to abandon the Dollar for Iraqi Oil - using the Iraqi Dinar, and Gadaffy was going to use the Libyan Dinar to underwrite the African Union rather than the Petro Dollar.
What the Ukraine Conflict tragically showed was the inability of EU leaders to reconcile what would have been a free trade Area with Ukraine and Ukraine's commitment to a Customs Union with the Russian CIS. How could that have been beyond them to the point where relations with Russia began to disintegrate?
The EU should also be asked why they were conspicuously indiscreet about who they supported during the Maidan Coup in 2014 - however extreme? People completely anathema to their supposedly internationalist Character?
This did nothing to stave off Criticism by Moscow of Nazification.
Zelenskiys Dilemma .....
ReplyDeleteHaving just watched the astonishing Scenes from what some dubbed "the Fight House" between Volodimir Zelenskiy and President Trump and Vice President Vance I can only say this .....
Zelenskiy might well be rather delusional but even he must realise that if he does agree to the Deal which would forfeit what is left of Ukraine's Resources to America he probably couldn't go back to Ukraine for reasons of his own safety. That he would probably be assassinated by other Ukrainians not happy with the arrangement.
In better days (I'm not sure I can say "happier") he faced death threats from ultra-nationalists when he wanted to roll back some of the more russophobic Legislation. This was before the Conflict that started in February 2022.
That he probably also knows that he is now getting in the way of Americas acquisition of those Resources and the Bullet could come from there as they try to find another 'Leader' who would agree to it.
Or he continues the War and loses more to the Russians who are baring down in his Army everywhere along the Front.
And that this will bring in the Armies of the EU and Britain who have taken it on themselves to continue to support him. This is dangerous -particularly as France's Macron has mentioned his Nuclear Weapons.
That even if he did sign the Deal there could be an insurgency by other Ukrainians against any Forces sent by Trump to guard these Resources subsequently controlled by the Americans.
After all, why would they be in Ukraine if a Deal brokered by them exists with the Russians to stop their War against the Ukraine?
Not to protect Ukraine from the Russians.
I wouldn't be Zelenskiy right now - even if he was the last Man in earth.
The Question here is this......
ReplyDeleteIf America withdraws their Support with no Deal and Ukraine suffers a huge Drop in Supplies, causing military collapse on all fronts, would the French use their Nuclear Weapons on Russia?
How about the UK and theirs?
The War has severely weakened a Europe that - even consolidated as the EU - no longer has the leverage it might once have had, either with Russia or America. Sanctions have forced Russia to enact Contingencies against them - finding alternative Markets and creating the Goods they might have otherwise imported. The Russo-German Nordstream Partnership was destroyed and a rift now exists with Moscow that is highly antagonistic.
They've also lost considerable leverage with America as they are now more dependent on American Fuel and Gas than ever, along with the American Market for anything they do make and export.
Trump knows this, with one Hand on the Faucet, the other a Gun called Taxes and Tariffs.
So what options are left for a Europe made so prostrate?
A huge increase on military spending and mobilisation of Reservists, maybe even Conscription, not that they could afford too much of any of this right now.
Then there's the Nuclear deterrent of Britain and France....... which has terrifying Consequences.
Ending the War in Ukraine should be seen like ending WW2.
ReplyDeleteThe Second World War changed the World so much that those in 1945 effectively did have to start again. The former Axis Countries had to be liberalised and reindustrialised, the former allied Countries rebuilt and rejuvenated. Empires were diminished and much of what existed in the 1930's was gone. A fact of Life, like it or not, was the Soviet controlled region of Europe with Stalin having considerable Authority, given the huge sacrifice the Soviets made defeating the Nazis.
What appeared might not have been the fairest or most just Solution, but in the circumstances it was the most workable and viable.
Zelenskiy has to be made to realise his Folly when he rejected the Istanbul Communique in 2022, and how, like the defeated Germans, territories that were once Ukraine are gone. A considerable amount of Blame rests with other western leaders at that time, and before, who encouraged Ukraine to go to War with the Russians.
If America is sincere about ending the War they should not see it as just another Land Grab or acquisition Scheme. Donald Trump should use his Leverage with Russia to bring about a Ceasefire without the crippling Caveat of 50% of Ukraine's Resources. He needs to look at the disaster at the end of WW1 - which imposed completely unaffordable Reparations on Germany and led to 1939. And how Germany and Japan were rehabilitated after WW2 to become quintessentially successful liberal democracies with very viable economies.
By imposing the Caveat he makes it even more difficult for any Ukrainian Leader to sell the Deal to a People who have fought and died in their thousands for what they do have.
He needs to be more Marshall and MacArthur than those Figures of 1918. There were those at the end of WW1 who warned against what was being proposed in Paris, but they were never heeded.
This War needs to be ended, and ended now. Anything that might come after is purely abstract if it isn't, and any of it isn't worth anything if we are all dead.
It took a Nuclear Strike to end WW2 and bring the World to make the Choices it did make in 1945. Let's hope it won't come to that in 2025, because any Nuclear Conflict now won't be restricted to a few Kilotons and 2 Bombs in the far east.
And even if Ukraine was regarded like it was a WW2 Ally and Zelenskiy was the Chuchilian Character some tried portraying him as imagine if Roosevelt and Truman had imposed a 50% Share of our Resources to pay for Lend Lease in WW2.
ReplyDeleteNot just that, but also made it repayable in 1945 rather than up to the last Lend Lease installment of £43 Million paid in 2006.
What would that have done to us economically and politically?
Clement Atlee, with his electoral Mandate, couldn't even have sold that to a War weary British who hadn't been invaded and whose Economy was in better shape in 1945 than a Ukraine whose Leader has questionable popularity, is not only War weary but was also invaded, and whose Economy is in tatters.
ReplyDeleteTrump and Vance would find it very difficult to find a Ukrainian Leader who could, or at least one that could rule from Kiev.
Here's a Comment I posted on a YouTube Video about France and the rest of the EU including Britain's recent, and very alarming Moves in the last 48 Hours......
ReplyDelete"Has anyone remembered how Russia has had to fight for every Mile of Ukraine and for 3 very long years? So, how are we to believe they might continue into the rest of Europe? It's not like they have blitzkrieged their way through Ukraine like it was France in 1940.
Aren't People getting weary of all this scaremongering?
It should also be remembered that Europe and Britain are looking for ways to boost their Economies, so could be using War as a way of doing it, seeing their civilian Trade with the rest of the World diminish."
As you can see, I'm rather sceptical of it all.
My Point being that Russia hasn't just cut through Ukraine like a hot Knife through Butter, even with support from Iran and North Korea, so how might they continue to march all the way to Portugal?
And that Europe is desperate to compensate for it's losses in civilian economics and is using the War as a pretext to boost it's Economy with increased military spending.
And on the Subject of spending.....
If America applied a Marshall Aid type Program to Ukraine instead of what many have seen as a huge Resource acquisition reminiscent of Reparations inflicted on 1918 Germany, they could do it along with a process of denazification.
Marshall Aid was given to Countries after WW2 to rehabilitate them and prevent them going communist, so why couldn't it be applied to Ukraine to prevent them becoming fascist?
If they could give Moscow assurances they would do this, like they did in Germany from 1947 to 1949, it might help garner trust in Russia.
Also, some have commented on how, during that very tense Press Conference the other day, it was a relief Trump and Vance didn't press Zelenskiy on why he turned down the Istanbul Communique in 2022?
Why? Maybe they should. After all the 100's of Millions of People everywhere whose Governments have been supporting Ukraine, with all the unintended Consequences thereafter, have a right to know why Zelenskiy chose to continue the War?
Particularly as it could very quickly turn Nuclear - with everything that means.
If Zelenskiy was going to use the Situation to try and lobby the President to an Audience of Millions then that Audience also has a right to know how he might justify his Decision 3 years ago.
Maybe they should also have asked about the various Minsk Accords that have now been consigned to diplomatic history.
Meanwhile, a retired German General made a valid Point in a recent Seminar apparently meant to defuse the Scaremonger Arguement that Russia always intended to capture all of Ukraine and then advance into eastern Europe.
ReplyDeleteUkraine is the biggest Country in the Region - apart from Russia itself - and considerably bigger than what used to be the GDR or East Germany. The Soviets garrisoned 300,000 Soldiers in GDR - and that doesn't include the large East Germany Army in support.
So how, with only 190,000 Troops in February 2022, was Russia going to invade and occupy a Country as big as Ukraine? A Country seething with hostiles and no Army in support?
Even more inconceivable would be a continuation into the rest of Europe.
There's a Story circulating the Mill that Plans exist to repair and reopen Nordstream 2.
ReplyDeleteUntil it was destroyed in September 2022 the Pipeline supplied Germany with millions of cubic Meters of natural Gas. It's destruction wrought havoc on the German Economy - which had ramifications for the rest of Europe.
The subsequent enquiry was very dubious, yielding all sorts of supposed 'Conclusions' as to who was responsible.
The current Plan is to revive it with substantial investment by America.
But would this work and have what some hope is the desired effect of also reviving the sagging European Economy?
I'm not sure it will, being just more of the same as Europe is increasingly dependant on America for its Fuel and Gas.
It would if the EU had petitioned Russia to do this instead, something I was hoping for quite a while ago.
The current plan means there would have to be considerable Markup on the Price of Fuel to satisfy American Investors.
And who might they be?
The same Companies who were doing exploratory Work in Ukraine a year before the 2014 Coup perhaps?
As with any subterfuge, obscured in the Mists of Intrigue: sometimes you have to ask.....
Who benefits most from it?
A Conspiracy Theorist might argue that America coveted Nordstream 2 all the time, so destroyed it to end the Russo-German Partnership that controlled it, and now wants to reopen it for themselves.
As yet the Russians haven't confirmed any of this will be happening, or even if it's ever been considered at their end, so it's just Speculation at this stage.
ReplyDeleteBut if it was confirmed, or even just mooted as an Idea, it could prove counterproductive to any Notion of "Peace through Trade", and somewhat skewed and inconsistent.
ReplyDeleteIf the Americans did collaborate with the Russians to reopen Nordstream it could be seen in Europe as further undermining their Sovereignty and independence, either as individual Countries or the EU, and galvanise their Stance with a Ukraine they have very recently pledged to continue supporting.
Despite what might be coming from Washington.
While a very wide and toxic Rift now exists between Europe and Russia, which includes once neutral Scandinavia and Britain, one is also growing with America.
This Idea would do nothing to assuage that and there are already murmurings of a break with the US.
This means any Action from Europe will be at odds with any from America, widening that particular Rift and deepen European involvement in the Ukraine War.
Which means it is no longer a "Proxy War" and becomes a direct Conflict between them and Russia - with potentially terrifying consequences.
So, rather than ending the Conflict as Trump claims it could actually make it far worse.
And given the Weapons involved, of which Britain and France has about 500, he won't be like Roosevelt in the White House, 1000's of miles away from the Wars in Asia and Europe before Pearl Harbour, or Wilson before him pre-1917.
It's also skewed and inconsistent because the Policy that led to it was going to end with a War with Russia.
Even Americas own Diplomatic and Intelligence Communities were warning about this as long ago as the 1990's.
So it isn't like they didn't know it could happen, which doesn't sound very peaceful to anyone!
So, is the Trump Plan like the Marshall Plan?
ReplyDeleteNot really, because even looked at skeptically and less altruistically the Marshall Plan was meant to rehabilitate European Economies after WW2 so post-War America could sell Goods to them.
How can that happen if those same Economies are kept weak and sidelined?
And if this apparent Scheme to revive Nordstream happened it would mean America buys Fuel from Russia wholesale and sells it on to Europe retail. This would make Euro Economies less competitive because of the added Costs in Manufacturing and Distribution.
Something that didn't apply before .
Particularly if Trump uses Taxes and Tariffs as weapons against them.
So, no - what all this means is not like what happened during the late 1940's.
It's Ok, - it's only a limited Nuclear War.......
ReplyDeleteBut is it?
Americans and others on the American Continent might think a 'limited' Nuclear War in Europe wouldn't affect them, like it was WW1 and 2, but here's what experts believe a Nuclear Conflict between India and Pakistan - involving half of those Weapons Britain and France could use against Russia - would do to the rest of the World......
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/03/16/even-limited-india-pakistan-nuclear-war-would-bring-global-famine/
As you can see, those 5000 Miles might have made all the difference during conventional War - even as ferocious as some like Stalingrad or those strategic bombings of British, European and Japanese Cities - but won't protect them if it goes Nuclear.
And, if course that doesn't include the Weapons Russia would use on Britain and Europe.
And if this Nordstream revival goes ahead it shows I was at least half right when I said Trump could do a Deal with Putin that would see a Pipeline sending Fuel to Alaska - where America, who has bought it at wholesale price then sells and ships it to Europe.
ReplyDeleteAn American revived Nordstream would be about the same, except it is sent directly to Europe.
Meanwhile, should we put some of these YouTube commentators in context?
Scott Ritter went on a diatribe, accusing all Europeans of being bloodthirsty Warmongers.
Surely, the Man whose Name became famous during the Iraq War preparations must remember how some European Leaders dared to stand up to GWB? The most prominent was French President Jacques Chirac who got a pummelling for doing so and France was treated like a Pariah.
Then there's Jeffrey Sachs.
If this Man has had such an influence on World Leaders then why doesn't he seem to have influenced any of them at all so they wouldn't have done what they have in recent years?
Then there's Douglas MacGregor.
I was quite surprised when I heard him slagging off our RAF like it was not much more than a few Aircraft and Helicopters. I was surprised because I thought he might be a bit more considered, and while I admit the RAF isn't the vast number of Planes and People it might once have been, it is by no means a spent force and does not deserve the sort of drubbing he has given it of late.
There are others, and while they might give you the minutae of this or that many of them seem to ignore the Nuances of cause and effect that happens in these things.
And before any of them indulge in another round of European bashing maybe all of them should remember that Europe, Scandinavia and to a lesser extent Britain are on the Front lines of a Conflict that was of the Americans making. That they are now left with the mess former President Biden left when his Term ended.
And Donald Trump had 4 years to roll back some of the Policies on Ukraine his predecessor created.
Some of those I feel sorry for most are the Finns and the Swedes who shared Borders with Russia for decades with no problems whatsoever - until America came along and messed it up for them.
ReplyDeleteSomething suspect skulking around the apparent anti-War Narrative is how they've conveniently changed tack and now tell us NATO sabotaged the Istanbul Communique. Which is a convenient deniability and makes no one accountable by blaming a nebulous Organisation rather than any actual Leaders.
Also, closer to home what if we joined the Dots and connected some of these supposed Peacemongers to what has been happening here in the years since the Iraq War started, some of it not very peaceful?
One thing is certain, we've had YouTube for almost the entire Duration and it's Soundbite Diplomacy hasn't prevented anything.
I wasn't aware of any anti-War rallies in the Poacher Car park a few years ago for example!
ReplyDeleteI hope not, because it's been 32 years of those sort of People who've made a horses arse of everything. When we were active that Clock was at 17 Minutes to Midnight. After those Idiots took over it's now at 89 Seconds.
Meanwhile, maybe Jacques Chirac's People should write to Scott Ritter reminding him of the Iraq War Debacle, signing the Letter "Love and Peace, A bloodthirsty Warmonger"
Quote/unquote.
Perhaps the RAF should contact Colonel MacGregor with an Intinary of the Aircraft they do have.
32 years of those culturally Apartheidist Cronyists and they can't blame those "olds".
ReplyDeleteMost of them are now in their early 50's. That's 8-10 years older than JFK when he was President and 15 years older than his brother was as Attorney General.
In 1989-90 the Clock was at 10 Minutes, which went all the way up to 17 Minutes the year after.
32 years of them and it's now 89 Seconds!
Don't get me wrong here .....
ReplyDeleteI'm all for Trump ending the War and renewing Diplomacy with Russia. After 3 years of Neglect Diplomacy with Moscow should never have stopped and might have helped prevent things becoming as bad as they are.
It's this huge appropriation of Resources - some of it way beyond the Borders of Ukraine - that could be very damaging and casts doubt on the Sincerity of its motives.
Now, it seems Polish President Donald Tusk has decided to add to the Russophobic Rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteThis, along with others is a tired Narrative that lost its believability in its own inconsistency.
One moment we are told how little Ukraine is giving the big bad Bear a drubbing, that Russia is compromised by its own Corruption and Incompetence, the next that they are going to march all the way to Portugal.
Given that the Soviet Union needed 300,000 Troops just to garrison East Germany, supported by the GDR's own armed forces, while this was reflected throughout the Warsaw Pact, and how the Army it has now has to fight a War of attrition in Ukraine rather than a blitzkrieg through it, how would they have the necessary force to invade and occupy Europe? Because that is how you defeat an Enemy and Russia does not have that.
Is a lot of this fearmongering because these Leaders have stuffed the civilian economy with their misguided "proxy War" in Ukraine, Sanctions that have backfired, and spiralling trade deficits so have to compensate for it with increased military spending?
Civilian Companies can't trade so sell a War and fund military ones?
And let's clear up an inaccuracy in the Narrative here .....
ReplyDeleteDuring the Cold War Americas presence in Europe wasn't all one way.
That they somehow provided the Shield against the Warsaw Pact should they decide to invade.
Those might have been American Troops and Assets but those other things were our Cities and Towns .......and our Civilians ........ who would have been destroyed and killed in the Conflict. The Set up meant that any War would be fought in Europe and not in America, even if any provocation against the WP and USSR was exclusively American.
Otherwise, any Soviet Missiles would have been fired at American Cities and Towns ...... and American Civilians.
The Munro Doctrine ensured against any destruction being wrought on America at all, unless anyone might have the temerity to win a Latin American Election as a Socialist or Khrushchev put Missiles in Cuba of course.
So let's not allow ourselves be led to believe that the American presence in Europe was purely for our benefit, and completely benificent.
And 9/11 finally revealed Decades of American Hypocrisy .......
ReplyDeleteThat might have been the World Trade Center .....
But it could also have been the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the Brighton Bomb, Enniskillen and a plethora of other American backed Terrorist Incidents in many years.
Except 9/11 horribly showed Americans what Terrorism does - and had been doing - for years elsewhere. So the Munro Doctrine applied to that too - until 2001.
They certainly have with Ukraine.
They knew, that unless pushed to the very edge Russia would not fire ICBM's at America because that would invoke M.A.D and the World is destroyed. But they might, at a push, fire a few conventional Weapons at European Targets. So while the likes of Biden, Harris, Blinken, Nuland ..... and Hillary's Mob .... stir up the War and the Military Companies reap the Profits, they did so knowing that not a single Russian Missile would hit America. They would fight to the very last European.
Meanwhile, I think they've been running a very elaborate and expensive Protection Racket with the World and particularly us since 2014.
A bunch of Hoodlums come along and smash up your Shop. This happens several times.
While you're clearing up the Mess for the umpteenth time someone arrives and looks at the devastation and says calmly and reasonably; "This is awful. Look, pay me £50 a Week and this won't happen again!"
Relieved you give them the Money and they go in their way.
Then one day you're walking past a Side Street and you see the Hoodlums and your calm reasonable Visitor all looking very friendly, celebrating with the Money you just gave him.
One hopes that Trumps Friends in Wall Street don't invest in those same Companies don't we!
The Impression we're given is America is divided into 2 Camps.
ReplyDeleteThere's the pro-War Biden/Clinton Axis and all their Cronies and Associates, and the anti-War Trump Group who are absolutely none of what the others are.
Except, if someone was to profile everyone in each they'd probably find quite a few Overlaps, particularly with investment Portfolio's.
Nordstream 2 wouldn't need American Investment to reopen it if it hadn't been blown up in the first place by 'whoever', while no one would be meeting in Riyadh if People like Victoria Nuland etc had acted differently in 2013/14.
Among some of the other Smirkers and Gloaters on YouTube who gleefully tell us about the impending collapse of Britain, Europe and Scandinavia are former Fox News Anchors - who seem to forget that they were at the forefront of the pro-Iraq War propaganda Campaign.
Another who now seems to delight in slagging off our RAF has also forgotten that he was the Chief of Staff to Colin Powell when he did his WMD conjuring Show to the UN Security Council.
What was it someone said about the Americans; "the United States of Amnesia"?
Some Alliance huh, if this is what they really thought of us, and maybe they should be made to watch the WW2 Information Film "Know your Ally".
So some of the Shambles that afflicts us now can be traced back to some of these People as Colin Powell lied to the UN so America could drag us into their Neocon War in Iraq, with the ripple effect it had elsewhere.
I'd be interested to know what Larry Wilkerson might say when asked about Chirac's Stance against the Iraq War his Boss and his Office campaigned for in 2001-3!
I'd also remind Tulsi Gabbard that our RAF were also in the firing line during "Operation Iraqi Freedom", and not just American Servicemen and Women.
Do they realise how offensive and odious they sound when they talk glibly about something that could devastate and end the Lives of 100's of Millions?
What World are they living in which seems to mean none of it would affect them?
The latest is how Macron wants to use French Nuclear Missiles to shield Europe, except the above applies here too and he wouldn't be pointing them at anyone if those usual suspects had backed off.
Let's not also forget that - whatever anyone might say of him now - Macron worked hard to broker an end to this Crisis before it started with his shuttle Diplomacy between Moscow and Kiev.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/02/07/europe/ukraine-russia-news-monday-intl
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220307-macron-bucks-western-trend-by-keeping-dialogue-open-with-putin
Boris Johnson might have talked Zelenskiy out of the Istanbul Communique, but he did so on behalf of Joe Biden.
So, thanks to American meddling and interference Europe is now ablaze with bitter acrimonies that had either subsided years ago, or have been caused by the last 3 years of American Foreign Policy. Poland's old Grievance with Russia was history as both got on with their Lives until all this. 1812 and the Napoleonic Wars were the Stuff of Classical Music and History Books - while no one would have thought those German Tanks would have rolled into Russia again.
Other Areas that have been turned into Hornets Nests - or potential ones - by the American led Crisis.....
ReplyDeleteBaltic Nationalism - which had begun to subside - has reopened, with WW2 Soviet Monuments being desecrated in Latvia, Romanians and ethnic Russians in Transnistria and Moldova, rediscovering the War of 1991, the difficult ethnic tensions in the Carpathians - caused as the American sponsored Government in Kiev turned them into 2nd class Citizens. The now fractious Borders Sweden and Finland have with Russia and the reopened Crisis of Nagorno-Karabakh.
If Trump isn't careful he could look to the Europeans like Richard Nixon must have looked to the Indo-Chinese about to suffer the Ravages of what came after his "Strategic Withdrawal" from the Region.
Seeing what has happened in recent Days I'm wondering if it's actually worse than it was before.
ReplyDeleteIf that was possible.
That Trump merely wants to disengage with Ukraine and Europe so he can regroup America to begin Work on a Conflict in the South China Sea and China. When he does Europe will continue the War, irrespective of America, so the War doesn't end, it just spreads.
This and the Presidents recent comments on the Middle East. That he could even ramp up the Offensive on Gaza with more direct US assistance to Israel.
And, given that the Euro is about equal to the USD what exactly is this 800 Billion Euro spending Package Ursula Von de Leyen announced going to be used for, and where, if even Chinas annual defence Budget is only $246 Billion? Particularly if China and Russia could outstrip NATO Weapons Manufacturing by more than twice the amount a couple of years ago?
Will the EU and Britain massively ramp up their Defence Industries to supply the Demand?
They'd have to.
The Money will be used during a 4 year period which means the EU and Britain will spend 3 times per capita than the Chinese every year as the Population of the EU and Britain is only 1/3rd that of China.
The other Problem Britain and Europe now has, which is as much a Media one as Military, is how we have spent the last 3 years saturated in pro-War Propaganda. That the Monolith has painted itself into a Corner that it is now finding it difficult to come out of. How can it adjust course after being so intensely fixated for that long?
More importantly, how can it emerge from this with any believability?
Maybe, as a Gesture of Goodwill after the Malta Summit, the Americans should have withdrawn from Europe not long after the Soviets did. Perhaps after helping to supervise German reunification, and reassuring People that the transition was sincere.
ReplyDeleteThis tells the Russian CIS that they are serious about ending the Cold War and maybe an American withdrawal ought to have been built into the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty.
The continued American presence in Europe caused an imbalance, probably fueling skepticism in some Quarters in Moscow, and while they must have correctly wondered if they were there to support any future NATO expansion even American Diplomats and Intelligence People were warning against it.
(Groan) Not again ....
ReplyDeleteIt seems Roger Waters has got a Bee in his Bonnet about Arthur Balfour again.
In a characteristic Tirade he called Balfour "a rabid Anti-Semite".
Incongruous I know, when he's talking about someone who was an associate of Chaim Weizsman, but that's Roger for you.
The other thing he seems to like doing is lumping everyone together.
While I'll agree there were things that weren't too cool about Winston Churchill, who could be for want of a better word, old fashioned and imperialistic, while his attitude about famine struck Indians (Asians not native Americans) was less than desirable you can't say everyone else from his time were the same.
Arthur Balfour, like any other political Figure of the 1st half of the 20th Century was a contemporary of Churchill, but that doesn't mean he agreed with him one everything.
As it seems popular amongst the Protest Lobby to scapegoat Balfour for all the Ills of the Levant, their Narrative ignores several key points.
Balfour might have written his Declaration of a Jewish Homeland in 1917, but there are 2 things they seem to over look.
Firstly, it's commitment to non Jews in Palestine, found in the 2nd half of it.....
"it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"
And how nowhere in it does it mention anything about a Jewish State, or Country called Israel, Judea or anything else that exclusives it to the Jews. He still refers to it as Palestine. Rather like, even after the Romans, Norse, Anglo Saxons and Norman's, Cymry is still called Cymry and Scotland still referred to as Alba - not western or north England.
His vision was a Land where both Jews and Palestinian Arabs could coexist, something even Chaim Weizsman advocated. This is continued to this day as the 2 State Solution is regarded as second best to a unified Country for both.
Unfortunately, much of the current Narrative is derived from the Attitude of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haij Amin Husseini who almost instantly declared War on any newly arrived Jews into Palestine. Ind ed, he even had his own Arab Revolt in the 1930's, during which more Arabs died at the hands of other Arabs than those of either the Jews or the British. They would clear Arab Villages to turn them into Fortifications, and were brutal against any who would be friendly towards non Arabs.
He went even further, being a Nazi Collaborator during the War, doing Broadcasts for them in Arabic and recruiting amongst Moslems in the Levant and even the Balkans.
He was also a Fool, forgetting what would certainly become of him and his once the Nazis had no more use for them. Also not realising that he was nothing more to them than a stepping stone to the Oil Fields in the Region and potentially into Iran.
Rather like the Banderas's of the OUN in Ukraine, who, if the Nazis had defeated the Soviets, would merely become reduced to the Serfs of Lebensraum. They even ended up fighting the Germans once Banderas had fallen out of favour with them.
Waters and his ilk never look at the Declaration in the Context of other things in the Region......
ReplyDeleteThat it was concurrent with what was meant to happen for Faisal after WW1 who would be king of the Hejab, Damascus, and other Areas of what is now Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. He was also a Hashemite - not a Saud - so not a Saudi.
Had this happened a balance would have existed between Arabs and Jews that would have continued to this day.
Also, while William Ormsby-Gore (another Contemporary of Churchill) might have been Minister for the Colonies, he believed the indigenous Peoples of them, or whatever Colour or Creed, would probably be no less capable of running their Affairs than the British.
So not what you might call a typical Colonialist in the stereotypical mould at all.
If Roger Waters wants to tar everyone from the early 20th Century with the same Brush maybe he should look no further than his own former Band instead, as others from Pink Floyd have voiced their disagreement with his Opinions. They might have been in the same Band but the similarity ends there, like those Figures from the 20th Century.
The Anglo-french nuclear Itinerary is no joke ......
ReplyDeleteThose doing the Sergey Lavrov Interview 2 days ago might have sniggered when the Russian foreign minister dismissed France's Nuclear Weapons but while France doesn't have 1000's of them like Russia or America they and Britain do have enough to invoke global Catastrophe.
At the moment France has 290 M51 MIRV Warheads with a yield of 100kt. To put that in context the Hiroshima Bomb was a fraction of that at 15kt. These are submarine based so could be launched before they are detected. Theoretically, that means nearly 300 Bombs - all nearly 6 times bigger than those used in 1945 - could be fired at Russian Cities, Towns and Targets.
Then there are the British Nuclear Weapons ....
The most powerful are carried on the Trident 2 submarine launched Missile.
These are the RV/W88 of which there are 8, each having a yield of 475kt, or 12 RV/W76.0 at 100kt and 12 RV/76.1 at 90kt.
Britain doesn't currently have the W88, but as things ramp up and Relations with America becomes uncertain it isn't unfeasible that one day they might.
At the moment our total itinerary amounts to an estimated 260 Weapons.
These 2 combined could devastate Russia, while the psychological impact - given that of 1945 on the Japanese - is incalculable.
But the effect would be devastating and felt globally .....
According to this Article the impact on world Famine caused by a "limited Nuclear War" between India and Pakistan involving far fewer Weapons would be catastrophic.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/03/16/even-limited-india-pakistan-nuclear-war-would-bring-global-famine/
Given the already fractious and fragile Geopolitical Situation can you imagine how devastating this would be for the World and it's Population?
And, of course, none of this includes the Weapons used by Russia's default Response which would similarly devastate Britain and most of Europe.
The 15kt Hiroshima Bomb destroyed everything to a Radius of 1 Mile from it's epicenter. That was on a City of low density single and two storey Houses. So what would a similar Explosion with a diameter of 2 Miles do to a City like Moscow or St Petersburg with high density multi storey Apartments?
ReplyDeleteAnd Britain potentially has Weapons with 32 times that power, launched from undetectable Submarines.
1x Trident 2 Missile x 8 RV/W88 = 253 Hiroshima Bombs.
The lessons learnt from the Cuban Missile Crisis included empathy with the Opposition and to understand why they acted like they did. (Namely Khrushchev's deployment of Missiles and why Kennedy responded like he did),
............. and not to underestimate their capabilities.
Britain and France have about 110 Megatonnes of Nuclear Weapon capability divided up into approximately 550 Weapons. Look at a Map of Russia and count 550 Cities, Towns and Targets and you aren't left with much except the vast plains and mountains of Siberia.
Except the firestorms that would be created would incinerate most of what lies between and would be completely untackled.
Russia would destroy most of Europe and the same thing happen there, but the big mistake either side would make is to think themselves somehow immune.
What would 1 Trident 2 Missile with 8 x 475 Kiloton Weapons do to 8 Russian Cities - given what 15 Kilotons did to Hiroshima? And each Submarine has 16 of them.
So I wouldn't have thought apparently informed People like Mario Nawfal, Larry C Johnson and Andrew Napolitano would see the Joke at the prospect of these Weapons being used.
If it was a proper interview then either of these might have mentioned some of this to the Russian Foreign Minister and invited his Comment.
I hope Lavrov noted the Interviewers trite Response to his Quip about something that could kill Millions of Russians.
Their Response should have been to put the Facts to him "with all due respect" and invite his Comment.
I'd be interested to hear what he and Maria Zakharova said to each other after they'd left the Room.
Things are further deteriorating........
Meanwhile, in the Book of How to make Friends and influence People I'm not sure using the same Jargon used by Hutu Propaganda during the Rwandan Genocide is recommended.
I also hope Lavrov rebuked his Representative for using such Jargon in the UN.
"This is not the Russia we want to promote" etc he should say.
Russophobia is a horrible, and completely incomprehensible phenomenon, but to anyone who remembers the Rwandan Tragedy the Russian Ambassador to the UN using the Word "Cockroaches" sounds a bit too ominous.
But then, the Tide of anti-Russianism that has engulfed Europe - particularly Areas directly affected by recent History is due to western Foreign Policy that has deliberately opened old Wounds that might otherwise have healed.
In a twist of Irony, during the 1991 Transnistria War Russians and recently independent Ukrainians were allied against the Romanian Moldovans. That unity has been fractured by the current Policy as well as many other Areas of Europe and Scandinavia. Finland - who enjoyed Decades of Neutrality with it's Russian Border - is being deliberately prepared for War. The Finnish Media saturate the People with anti-Russianism and I wouldn't be surprised if they start writing about Mannerheim again.
Peace through Strength?
ReplyDeleteMaybe President Trump should revisit his political Influence and see that Ronald Reagan began to realise that his "Peace through Strength" doctrine was counter productive.
Reagan began his Era in the Whitehouse believing that he had to create a Weapons overmatch to thwart and defeat the Soviet Union in the Cold War.
This led to a deepening of the Crisis until the situation was at the worst it had been since the Berlin Crisis and Cuban Missile Debacle.
He finally relented and began his policy of Rapprochment and called for a Series of Summits that continued with his Successor GWHB.
Thus, the Cold War that threatened the Worlds very existence was brought to an end.
I say this because, rather than end the pointless flow of Weapons to a dying Ukraine, he has decided to do a huge Uturn by increasing the Supply of Arms.
This merely escalates a Conflict akin to pushing an already dazed half comatose and punch-drunk Boxer back into the Ring for yet another pummeling rather than ending the Fight for humane reasons. That it further enrages an already fractious Europe and Russia and widens the Rift that stops proper Negotiations.
He might think the last Week of Diplomacy has been difficult. The result of this latest Action will make it near impossible.
Protest and survive .......
ReplyDeleteThe other thing that finally drove Reagan to the Negotiating Table were the huge Protests organised by CND and other pacifist Groups.
These were happening across Europe - particularly in Countries like Britain and Germany where many of Americas short and medium range Missiles were based. People realised that these made them a Target and the Soviet Response would have reduced Germany to radioactive Ash and sank the "unsinkable Aircraft Carrier" Great Britain.
The Protestors were also rightly sceptical of the Government Information Media Advice about what to do in the event of Nuclear War. Woefully inadequate Shelters made from Doors and Luggage, and a plethora of other feeble Precautions that would do very little at the most to save you should the unthinkable happen.
There was no "duck and cover" with the Protestors whose aim was to prevent rather than react. CND founder Bruce Kent was asked what his ultimate Aim was and he said; "to disband CND because all it's aims had been achieved!"
Even Hollywood played it's part....
President Reagan watched the Film "The Day after" about the aftermath of a Nuclear War in Omaha Nebraska and felt so depressed he had to do something about it.
In Britain one of the most harrowing Films ever made came out. "Threads" paints a very bleak picture indeed of a Nuclear War and chronicles the 13 years after it with the main Character Ruth.
Nothing prepares you for either, but even these were described as optimistic by People working in the Field of Nuclear Weapons and War.
Very recently the Film "Oppenheimer" comes with a Q&A session with the film makers and current Weapons Scientists and Boss of Los Alamos. In it they tell us how close - in 2023 - we are to Nuclear Conflict.
These are the People, along with others like those at Aldermaston, Britain who set the Doomsday Clock every year.
It is at the closest it has ever been - 89 Seconds to Midnight. Closer than it was in 1953 when the Americans began Hydrogen Bomb testing, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Nadir of the early 1980's.
The Ukraine Peace Plan....?
ReplyDeleteThis has several Problems....
The "Coalition of the Willing" (where have we heard that before?) coordinated by Kier Starmer might call itself a Peacekeeping Force, but will be seen as NATO expansion by another Name. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said as much - regardless of what any Coalition Troops might have on their Sleeves.
And the Area being so fractious how long might it be before someone fires at someone?
If that happens and it involves anyone in NATO would this invoke Article 5? This is why People were reluctant to declare Ukraine a No Fly Zone - because to enforce it put NATO Planes too close to the proverbial Trip Wire.
It does seem incongruous to have Combatants acting as "Peacekeepers" because Proxy War is a two way process and Ukraine has been a Proxy of those who will be deployed. You can understand Russian reservations about this and why they want any Peacekeepers to be from neutral Countries.
To put it crudely; the current Plan is a bit like Charlie Wilson and Zbigniew Brzezinski going to 1980's Afghanistan as Peacekeepers.
And while President Reagan watched "The Day after" and was so affected he began a Series of Summits that led to substantial Nuclear Disarmament might I suggest President Trump see "Countdown to looking Glass" a Film about the last Days before Nuclear War - which starts with a Skirmish in the Gulf of Oman and Omani Gun Boats.
ReplyDeleteScenes very familiar to what we have seen recently, and in the Context of a potential War with Iran, very worrying!
Why is the American intention to increase pressure on Iran cause for concern?
ReplyDeleteHere's what has been happening in the Gulf of Oman in the last week......
https://news.usni.org/2025/03/12/russia-china-and-iranian-warships-drilling-together-in-gulf-of-oman
Suffice to say the Russians and Chinese weren't there to enjoy a Cruise in the warm Arabic Seas.
You also have to ask if any Submarines were involved but couldn't be seen?
Also, here's a Muscovite who doesn't share the Joke about the Anglo-French Nuclear Itinerary.....
https://youtu.be/BWgnzsq3Hds?si=j1I51_kG5UTXDthC
As you can see, Russians not only do not dismiss the Anglo-French Weapons, they also feel something should be done about them.
Both Starmer and Macron are pushing us closer to the edge than we have ever been.
And it looks like former Russian President Medvedev has weighed in on Starmer and Macron - warning them against sending Troops to Ukraine, saying it would invoke a War with NATO, and telling them to consult with Trump.
ReplyDeleteAnyone with an ounce of understanding on Diplomacy would tell you that sending British and French Troops to a Country they have been supplying Weapons and Money to is not conducive with "Peacekeeping". It's like sending Charlie Wilson and Zbigniew Brzezinski to Afghanistan as Peacekeepers after they'd supplied the Moujehedin to fight the Soviet Union.
Any Peacekeepers there to monitor any transition to Peace would have to be neutral.
It's not like the end of WW2 when Allied and Soviet Troops occupied a defeated Germany both had fought. None of the Allied Countries that had defeated Germany had been supplying it.
Also, hasn't the EU signed it's own Death Certificate?
Individual Leaders in it seem to have become the opposite of what they were in 2022 - like Emmanuel Macron who has gone from being the Politician trying to prevent the Conflict in Ukraine, even being the only one still communicating with Putin for a while after the SMO started, to wanting to deploy Troops and threatening to nuke Russia, or Olaf Scholtz, who was initially skeptical of supporting Ukraine to the first German Leader to send Tanks into the former Soviet Union since Adolf Hitler.
The EU itself has gone from Welfare to Warfare.
Robert Schuman would turn in his Grave if he saw the likes of Ursula Von De Leyen chomping on the bit to turn the EU into a military Bloc. Or plans to introduce CBCD's that could gain EU access to People's Savings and use them to buy Weapons for the EU.
Like our Arguements about the Euro weren't fraught enough.
The EU has gone from being the Organisation meant to prevent War in Europe to promoting it.
And while President Trump and Vladimir Putin divide up the Spoils of the Ukraine War and Britain, the EU and Scandinavia are left bruised, battered and squabbling - all with declining Economies - serious Questions need to be asked of the EU Negotiators who worked on the Ukraine EU Association Agreement in 2013.
ReplyDeleteHow could they not resolve what amounted to a Deal based on the Eastern Partnership which would have brought Ukraine into a Free Trade Area and a Customs Union with the CIS?
Before the Agreement Ukraine was part of the CIS Customs Union which meant Goods and Trade could move to and from member States without Taxes and Import Duty. After it these would also have moved to and from the EU in a similar manner.
This would have turned Ukraine into a Conduit where Goods would have gone through to both the EU and CIS with no Tariffs at all which would have caused mutual damage to both, particularly Russia.
This was why the Russians raised concerns about it, worried that they would be flooded with cheap Duty free EU imports and damaging their Economy in the process. They would suddenly have to compete with Countries like Germany - then the 4th most powerful in the World - without any protection at all.
So they insisted on being involved in the Negotiations for quite understandable reasons, but this was dismissed by the EU Council and Commission.
Looking at the Wreckage caused by all this shouldn't those responsible have acted differently, holding tripartite Negotiations involving Russia, the Ukraine and EU instead?
.................
Meanwhile, just when you thought the War Virus couldn't spread any further the Balkans are stirring again.
Those of us who remember the Death of Yugoslavia and how Milosovich's JNA fought to prevent it's break-up will see the Irony as Bosnian Serbs want to break away from the Bosnian Federation formed by the Dayton Accords.
We should watch events in the Region to see how all that heaves to and fro - threatening to plunge into yet another War.
NATO has been surrounding Serbia for the last 20 years while Kosovo still gives them cause for concern a quarter of a Century after the Conflict ended in 1999.
Why would the Bosnian Serbs secession from Sarajevo be a bad Idea?
The Government in Belgrade should be advising the Bosnian Serbs not to break away from the Government in Sarajevo.
Serbia is almost completely surrounded by NATO Countries, apart from via Bosnia which has a very small strip of Coast on the Adriatic. By being in the Bosnian Federation the Bosnian Serbs provide a conduit to that Coast and Airspace to the outside world for Serbian Planes that isn't NATO.
Thus, it would be in their interests to retain their Position to prevent Serbia being completely surrounded.
This doesn't only honour the Dayton Accords which have kept the Peace in Bosnia since the 1990's - albeit an uneasy one - it also prevents the Temptation to provoke a Conflict between Serbia - Russia's Ally - and any or all of those NATO Countries.
That kind of War could be very dangerous and have ominous resonances with what happened in 1914.
Those "Guns of August" Barbara Tuchman's excellent Book about the sequence of Events, Alliances, and Squabbles that led to WW1.
Serbian Nationalists kill the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Ferdinand and his Wife in Sarajevo and Vienna declared War on the Serbs. Serbia's Ally Russia feels obliged to support their southern Slav Brothers while Germany sides with the Austro-Hungarians. France supports Russia along with Britain and WW1 begins.
Thus, any NATO War with Serbia could start something very similar - another War with Russia, which not only escalates an already dangerous Conflict, but also has the potential to spread very very quickly.
So, hopefully Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic should be urging the Bosnian Serbs to resist the temptation to secede from Bosnia - not only for strategic Reasons, but also to keep the Peace in the Region.
Meanwhile, it seems People are starting to ask if Trump is just more of the same, but is concealing it all behind a veil of Chaos.
ReplyDeleteThat he puts up a near impenetrable Smokescreen of Bombast, lots of political Manuveres and Statements, but in the end it's just business as usual.
No-one with any nous was going to fall for his electioneering Claim that he would "end the War in Ukraine in 24 Hours of becoming President" and they have been right to do so as we are 2 Months into his Term and the War goes on.
The sleight of Hand that went with this raised similar skepticism as there would be no ending a "proxy War" with Russia if you have a concurrent Conflict with China.
The Shroud of Ambiguity about Gaza had finally slipped when Israel violated the Ceasefire with his approval
When is either Trump, Putin, Xi or Modi going to say enough is enough and that brutal, bloody Slaughter must end and end now?
.........And the Situation continues to deteriorate with Iran.
That, in the end, the Pitch might be different, the Volume increased - but the Song remains the same!
According to Ukraine the Russians have just blown up the Gas Metering Station in the Town of Sudzha in Kursk.
ReplyDeleteThey claim it was to scupper any Ceasefire that might emerge from Talks between them, the US and Russia.
I'm not sure that can be right and that maybe it was a scorched earth Move by Ukraine as they withdraw from the Town in recent days.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAttitudes that have emerged in recent years are very different to the Cold War, particularly during and after the Missile Crisis.
ReplyDeleteMacron decides to issue thinly veiled Threats to Russia, Russia has mentioned their Nuclear Weapons several times, while the whole bloody Mess we're in is partially because of one gradual, sublime and large Provocation - the encroachment of NATO. That and the confrontational Attitude by the EU in 2013.
The lesson learned from the 1962 Missile Crisis was to be as unprovocative as possible, in Word and Deed.
The Soviet Missiles in Cuba were seen as too provocative by America, but the American Missiles in Turkey were seen as same by Moscow.
Each side had to learn to trust the other before backing down and withdrawing.
In an Act of faith that's what Kennedy and Khrushchev finally did as each withdrew their Missiles.
Kennedy instructed the American Media not to use provocative Words like "Retreated" or "Backed off" in their Reportage of the Crisis while he got assurances from Khrushchev that no Soviet Grandstanding would happen at the Withdrawal of Jupiter Missiles from Turkey.
Even right up to the end of the Cold War GWHB very wisely declined the Temptation to gloat at the end of the Soviet era in Eastern Europe. There'd be no dancing on the Berlin Wall, cocking a snoop at the Kremlin.
Then it all began to go wrong as the West - drunk in it's 'success' at supposedly 'winning' the Cold War - began to do exactly that. Gradually at first, by use of a new Rhetoric, then doing the very thing it said it wouldn't do in 1989-91 - move NATO eastwards.
Even former Warsaw Pact Countries began feeling colonised by these new Masters.
I remember meeting Poles who were rather miffed because there didn't seem to be very much Polski on MTV Polska, the Woman in Hungary who exasperatedly pointed out to me the Coca Cola, McDonalds and other western Brand Names that boomed out from Hoardings in Budapest.
Now, the Brew has become very toxic as European after European seems to compete to see who can poke the Russian Bear hardest, while even Russia's most diplomatic are finding it increasingly difficult to retain the Decorum at such an Irritation.
So, while we were brought to the safest the modern World had ever been in 1989-91 by the Policy of non-Provocation the years since have been doing the opposite - with very different effects.
And in the Balkans ......
ReplyDeleteWhy am I against the Secession of Respublika Serbska from Bosnia Herzegovina?
Certainly not through any desire to keep them involuntarily entwined with Sarajevo.
Or just because it would mean the Serbs would be completely cut off from the outside world if they do.
It's because it could be very dangerous to the World.
If they did secede Bosnia could join NATO and the latter would become possible.
If that happens, given the deteriorating Situation with Russia and the growing bellicoseness in Europe, and particularly the very recent History in the Region, what's to prevent the EU declaring War on Russia's Balkan Ally, and Russia feeling obliged to support the Serbs like they did in 1914?
As I've mentioned before the current Policies have deliberately reopened old Wounds and stirred up several Hornets Nests elsewhere.
Also given the apparent determination to lay Trip Wires in front of Russia by sending so called "Peacekeepers" into Ukraine, hoping it could provoke them into conflict, why not use Serbia to the same end?
This is why the Serbs in RS are better off in their current Situation, something obviously not lost on the Architects of the Dayton Accords, and more beneficial to their fellow Serbs in Serbia than they would be otherwise, so if they did decide to break away from the Bosnian Federation it could bring the World closer to the Abyss than it is already.
The changing attitude towards the Bomb.....
ReplyDeleteI might be missing something here but have attitudes changed about Nuclear Weapons?
During the Cold War everyone feared them, but most people felt that they knew they were there, but wished they weren't.
Now, it's like they know and are glad they are, and are very keen to ensure the opposition knows too. They also don't seem to fear it either.
That during those terrifying 40 years since the USSR detonated it's first Bomb in 1949, beginning the Nuclear Arms Race - and when the 1962 Missile Crisis finally prompted everyone to start finding ways of deescalating and climbing down - they wanted to somehow get rid of them.
Now, the approach seems to be the opposite, and everyone can't swagger enough. No French President has ever threatened Russia with Nuclear War until Macron swaggered like he did. Before, France had them, but it was always enough to just know they did. No Soviet or Russian made light of them either until recently, while everyone seems to have lost sight of how even the use of one comparatively small Weapon would invoke use of all of them.
WW1 was started by a single Shot from a Revolver in Sarajevo by an enraged Teenager, which unleashed the full industrial Might of Krupp and everyone else making Weapons of War.
While I agree Articles should finally be published in mainstream Media about what Nuclear War could mean, or what our Weapons could do to Russia, it isn't just Putin who should fear them like they were written with a hefty dollop of Swagger.
We all should!
One question I have and am very surprised no one seems to have asked any Politicians involved in this Mess is; while we are hearing how Trump wants to send American Soldiers to "Guard" the mineral resources Zelenskiy could sign over to them, and the likes of Macron and Starmer want to send "Peacekeeping" Troops to Ukraine, no one is mentioning anyone sent to Ukraine to gather the vast amounts of Weapons that have been sent there in 3 years.
ReplyDeleteThese are far more numerous, meant to equip regular Armies, Air-forces and Navies, sophisticated and powerful than anything sent to Afghanistan in the 1980's.
Given what the Afghanis did with those after the Soviets left, years of Civil War that turned Cities to Rubble, and how Weapons meant for Ukraine have appeared everywhere from Africa to Kosovo and supplying the HTS in Syria, what will happen with them if or when the War ends?
Sleight of Hand in Kiev?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Kyiv Independent Zelenskiy won't sign Mineral Deals with America if it threatens EU Membership.
Let's stand back and unpack that a bit shall we?
Given the EU's intention to 'raise' and 'spend' €800 Billion on Weapons which - per capita - is more Money than China spends when divided up into its 4 year schedule, and the amount of Weapons that are already in the Ukraine, Kiev won't need to join NATO to become part of a military Bloc deployed against Russia.
What might Brussels call this new Bloc? EUTO, with Ukraine becoming a default Member should it join the EU?
No wonder Zelenskiy was so keen to establish a "European Army" should any potential NATO membership fall through.
No wonder also then the Russians aren't too readily playing this Game in the tussle and clatter of recent Political Activity. They see it as Ukraine in NATO by another name, but not like what was planned in 2022 which had Russian involvement built in.
Thus, a lot of these new 'Peace Plans" aren't really peaceful at all.
Meanwhile, the biggest Threat - which is very real and not the imagined Russian Invasion - to Countries bordering Ukraine's West is this ......
You are going to have a Country saturated in redundant Weapons accessed by a People who already have a propensity for Criminality and Corruption, desperate for Money as their legal economy is in tatters. What more effective way of making Money than selling these Weapons to the Criminal Gangs of Eastern Europe?
That these Gangs can go to Ukraine and buy some of the most advanced Weapons the West has been supplying them with.
Suddenly a whole Region of eastern Europe, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Moldova, becomes steeped in Weapons in the Hands of People with very little moral Compass.
Given the animosity some of those Countries in that Region have for Russia and shown it with recent Policies would the Russians cooperate in any attempts to curb this Activity?
And I don't buy the Idea put forward by Zelenskiy at the so called meeting of the "Coalition of the Willing" that Russia is attempting to derail any path to Peace.
ReplyDeleteParticularly not in light of Vladimir Putin's suggestion that a transition supervised by the UN should happen in Ukraine towards the establishment of a Government in Kiev that could bring about an end to the War.
It's patently obvious to anyone that Zelenskiy is the main obstruction to this as the Kiev Regime has everything to lose at Ukraine's expense should this happen.
Zelenskiy even appearing at that Meeting is an Act of War. After all, how can the "Coalition" be anything if it isn't pitched against Russia?
And what is he and his Cronies in Kiev afraid of if the Transition is supervised by the UN?
So, while everyone is going on about (not so) Peacekeepers, Garrisons to "guard" Mineral Resources (from whom I wonder?) and whether or not Ukraine should join the EU, no one is mentioning any Task Force to disarm Ukraine of the vast amount of Weaponry it has received before and after February 2022.
ReplyDeleteNot only could a lot of this end up in the Hands of Criminal Gangs beyond the Borders of Ukraine, there's also the potential for huge disruptions at any of the Border Crossings.
In far more peaceful times, coming back from Poland into Germany - traveling back to Bristol - the Border Crossing was gridlocked with Traffic, Cars, Buses, Trucks, trailing back about 5 Miles and we were delayed by about 6 Hours because it was rumoured Drugs or Weapons were being smuggled west from somewhere further east.
And that was 24 years ago, long before any of this, and when any War in eastern Europe was inconceivable. And all based on nothing more than a Rumour.
And it isn't just Criminal Gangs who might acquire them.
People, including myself, have been warning about Weapons falling into the Hands of Neo-Nazi Groups. Previously unarmed Groups in Germany, Benelux, Scandinavia and elsewhere could access Weapons designed to fight a War.
Combat 18 with hand held Missile and Grenade Launchers!!!!! Others suddenly armed with the sort of Stuff some Nazi Groups in America have had.
All at a time of parlous Stability across the Continent.
And the Corruption in Ukraine shouldn't be underestimated.
ReplyDeleteProbably at about the same time we were traveling from Poland back to Bristol via Europe People from Poland I met a few years later told me that they would cross the Border into Ukraine and saw evidence of Corruption with the Ukrainian Border Guards.
Suffice to say the Salary for the Job must have been extraordinary if it extended to the BMW's, Audi's and Mercedes they had in the Car Park or all the Bling and Watches they seemed to wear.
Imagine those same Border Guards 20 years later. Approaching retirement with very uncertain Prospects of a Pension, and whose Savings have been devalued by spiralling Inflation and having to pay other corrupt People black market Prices for things.
They now have to face dealing with younger, far more aggressive People, many War Veterans, also desperate for Money, running Guns and other Weapons across the Borders into eastern Europe, and others waving bundles of Euros around like Monopoly Money.
You don't need a Degree in Criminology to figure out what would happen.
And how did Zelenskiy become a Billionaire?
Before becoming President of Ukraine he was a Media Personality, Comedian and Dancer - a big Star in a rather small Pond, so his Audience would have been somewhat limited.
He's not Paul McCartney - co-writing some of the most successful Songs ever, or James Cameron making vast Hollywood blockbusting Epics.
So the Salary for the President of Ukraine must also be extraordinary for him to suddenly own Casinos in Monte Carlo, extensive Property everywhere and huge Bank balances.
With such a lucrative Gravy Train it's hardly surprising that he and others in the Regime seem to filibuster any end to the War or allow an Election that could see the Actor face a closing Credit Sequence with no Option of a Sequel.
It isn't M.A.D - it's insane.
ReplyDeleteI'm not even sure we are mired in another "Cold War" either.
During the actual Cold War when the Policy of Mutually Assured Destruction was pursued by both sides, neither mocked the others Potential to destroy them. This included the Nuclear Weapons of Britain and France.
In recent years, and certainly during the Ukraine Conflict, this hasn't applied as both sides have made disparaging Comments about the others Weapons.
We were told that the Russian Military was weak, incompetent and corrupt. Antiquated Weapons, rusty and using cheap Components, Rations that were barely edible and so on.
All this ignored the devastating potential of Oreshnik Missiles and the multi-Warhead Sarmat Systems that could reduce Europe to Ashes. These and other Russian Weapons that have caught up with NATO Technology as we have seen in Ukraine.
Russia in turn has mocked British and French Nuclear Weapons, even though these could kill Millions of Russians in more than 500 Cities and Towns.
So, certainly not like those years before 1989 when there might have been a Stand-off, but while there was M.A.D there was also mutual Respect for what the other could do.
There was also none of the Sabre Rattling we have seen in the last 3 years. It was enough to know the potential of the other and no-one traded Insults like we have now. Suffice to say, if the Words were Weapons we'd have all died years ago, so it isn't a particularly "Cold War" either.
Made more poignant by how one Antagonist is directly involved in actual Conflict.
That is why the current Situation is more dangerous than the years up to 1989.