And translating into an excuse for higher prices to consumer of flours and wheat and corn products globally as the retailers scream "war in Ukraine" again. The farmers have already been buckling under due to fertilisers increasing still, so they have already as of last year, reduced plantings, which has already increased demand. But yep, here we go again. Boy! If someone really was trying to cripple the agricultural industry and drown the consumer in inflationary cost of living, for reasons of their own, then they'd be doing a really good job.
Oh and I wish someone would check Zalensky's investment portfolio for wheat...🤔🤔😐🤨
Of course they have. The longer Russia remains locked in a war of attrition in Ukraine the weaker they become, militarily. Even with a conservative estimate of Russian casualties, nearly all of Russia's initial invasion force has been attrited. And by even a generous reading of the economic data, Russia's military industrial complex is not able to keep Russia's troops in Ukraine adequately supplied.
Meanwhile, neither US nor NATO formations are being degraded. And Poland is steadily building up its military capacity.
So long as Russia doesn't draw NATO directly into the war, this war ends with an effectively demilitarized Russia spiraling down into demographic and economic collapse.
It's an appallingly cynical strategy worthy of Henry Kissinger himself... and it may very well succeed.
Add the dam, the nuclear plant, the flooded towns and that many more ruined lives to your victory over Russia, Obviously, they never intended to fight a conventional war with NATO, now, they don't even have an army to take the ground (that will be glowing in the dark) after their big victory.
Unless NATO is drawn into combat directly, there is minimal likelihood of a nuclear exchange.
Tactical weapons only make tactical sense as a means of creating a barrier across otherwise indefensible territory. Strategic weapons only make sense as a deterrent or as a last resort.
Without direct NATO engagement, the conditions which would make nuclear weapons even momentarily plausible do not arise.
Yes. When this war first started, I didn’t pay much attention to it, because I thought someone would surely assassinate Putin and end the situation quickly. There are people in the old KGB who would benefit, Russian oligarchs, everyone in Ukraine, and probably in the CIA.
"Both sides will press for more war. Both sides will achieve only more death and more destruction by so doing. Neither side will achieve victory." I suspect destruction and confusion may be a feature, not a bug.
And translating into an excuse for higher prices to consumer of flours and wheat and corn products globally as the retailers scream "war in Ukraine" again. The farmers have already been buckling under due to fertilisers increasing still, so they have already as of last year, reduced plantings, which has already increased demand. But yep, here we go again. Boy! If someone really was trying to cripple the agricultural industry and drown the consumer in inflationary cost of living, for reasons of their own, then they'd be doing a really good job.
Oh and I wish someone would check Zalensky's investment portfolio for wheat...🤔🤔😐🤨
One major problem is that the self-proclaimed “world policeman” wants the bloodbath to continue. The US has repeatedly derailed all talk of peace.
https://open.substack.com/pub/seymourhersh/p/blinkens-battle-hymn
Of course they have. The longer Russia remains locked in a war of attrition in Ukraine the weaker they become, militarily. Even with a conservative estimate of Russian casualties, nearly all of Russia's initial invasion force has been attrited. And by even a generous reading of the economic data, Russia's military industrial complex is not able to keep Russia's troops in Ukraine adequately supplied.
Meanwhile, neither US nor NATO formations are being degraded. And Poland is steadily building up its military capacity.
So long as Russia doesn't draw NATO directly into the war, this war ends with an effectively demilitarized Russia spiraling down into demographic and economic collapse.
It's an appallingly cynical strategy worthy of Henry Kissinger himself... and it may very well succeed.
Or result in nuclear destruction!
This whole damn episode has gone on long enough.
Add the dam, the nuclear plant, the flooded towns and that many more ruined lives to your victory over Russia, Obviously, they never intended to fight a conventional war with NATO, now, they don't even have an army to take the ground (that will be glowing in the dark) after their big victory.
What a f-cking mess.
Unless NATO is drawn into combat directly, there is minimal likelihood of a nuclear exchange.
Tactical weapons only make tactical sense as a means of creating a barrier across otherwise indefensible territory. Strategic weapons only make sense as a deterrent or as a last resort.
Without direct NATO engagement, the conditions which would make nuclear weapons even momentarily plausible do not arise.
Obviously, you never read anything written by the late Peter Pry.
Madness. I have been asking since day one why doesn’t someone take out Putin ? He is responsible.
Yes. When this war first started, I didn’t pay much attention to it, because I thought someone would surely assassinate Putin and end the situation quickly. There are people in the old KGB who would benefit, Russian oligarchs, everyone in Ukraine, and probably in the CIA.
The fact that he's still alive makes me think someone wants him to stay alive and this war to continue.
There's little doubt but that NATO's strategy is to grind up Russia's military using Ukrainian troops as the cannon fodder.
But why? Are they scared of Russia?
"Both sides will press for more war. Both sides will achieve only more death and more destruction by so doing. Neither side will achieve victory." I suspect destruction and confusion may be a feature, not a bug.
It's certainly hard to argue otherwise.