Ukraine war - what next?

 

More than 500,000 Ukrainian troops have been killed during the ill-fated US-UK-NATO proxy war on Russia. Huge numbers of wounded are also frequently left on the battlefield to perish as Kiev does not have the will or the capability to medically treat their own soldiers.

About 10,000 of Kiev’s forces have surrendered in recent weeks, using a special radio channel to contact the Russian military. The soldiers understand that Kiev has lost but the US pushes them onward to certain death.

Recent statements from the UK leadership that they should send 'advisers' and warships directly into Ukraine eerily reminds of Washington stepping deeper into the Vietnam war quagmire.

One must wonder if the western war-mongers are either completely stupid or pathologically suicidal?

Zelensky's army has been thoroughly defeated and replacements are beyond scarce. Is the Pentagon now ready to suggest a similar crazy strategy as the Brits and prepare to ramp up US advisers as 'boots on the ground'? 

Will reinstate of the 'Draft' in the US be used as a way to fill up its declining military ranks?

A new report by the Rand Corporation (chief Pentagon funded think-tank) reports:

 

Types of Potential Escalation in Conflict

Type of Escalation	Definition	Example
Deliberate	One side escalates purposefully to prevent defeat or gain an operational advantage	A state decides to use nuclear weapons to eliminate a conventional capability of its adversary
Inadvertent	One side takes an action it does not perceive as escalatory but its opponent interprets it as such	A state undertakes a conventional strike that inadvertently damages its adversary's nuclear command and control systems; the adversary interprets this action as intentional targeting of these systems
Accidental	Unintended action or mistake	A communications failure in a nuclear missile silo leads to a launch that was not authorized by the state's leadership

 

Washington's neo-con led government appears to be inching toward a desperate plan that includes sending Kiev long-range missiles from the US and Germany that can strike deep into Russian territory. These terrorist attacks would not change the outcome on the battlefield but would be intended to (according to Rand’s assessment) 'put political pressure on Russian leadership'.

That is the best Washington-London-Brussels can hope for at this point. 

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s response is as follows:

    The number of leadership idiots in NATO countries is growing.

    One newfangled cretin - the British defense minister - has decided to move British training courses for Ukrainian soldiers to the territory of Ukraine itself. That is, to turn their instructors into a legal target for our Armed Forces. Realizing perfectly well that they will be ruthlessly destroyed. And not as mercenaries, but as British NATO specialists.

    Another fool - the head of the Defense Committee of the Federal Republic of Germany with a hard-to-pronounce surname - demands to immediately supply the Khokhobanderites with Taurus missiles, so that the Kiev regime can strike at the territory of Russia to weaken the supply of our army. They say this is in accordance with international law. Well, in that case, strikes on German factories where these missiles are made would also be in full compliance with international law.

    After all, these morons are actively pushing us towards World War III....

 

 

Maybe a strike against the UK or Germany is just what the west wants Russia to do. It might very well then give NATO the 'duty' to go full-bore against Mowcow. It often appears the west is crazy enough to step that far. After all, US-NATO are currently rounding up allies in the Pacific to have a go against China. 

But can the Americans and Europe actually handle war with both Russia and China or is the goal sort of a replay of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan? It's called 'Chaos theory'. Turn them into rubble in another 20-year war that destroys the economies in Russia and China and ultimately forces regime change. Then the west declares victory as they stand depleted inside their own hollowed out economies from boomeranged sanctions and endless war spending.

In order to pull all this off the US-UK-NATO must convince their own populations that sustained spending on war with Russia and China is a priority. Increased propaganda and censorship appears to be the preferred strategy for the western 'democracies' goal to reign in growing anti-war sentiments. 

Recent polls in the US show that 55% of the public now want to end support for Ukraine. The US is currently paying for more than 50,000 bureaucrats in Kiev and Ukraine's Social Security system. If the American people knew those facts they'd shit a brick.

Inside of the Republican party there is currently a revolt of their Libertarian caucus against more war funding. RFK Jr.'s apparent decision to leave the Democrats and run for president as an Independent further complicates the 2024 national election for the two war-mongering political parties.

So despite the expensive new Rand Corporation study there are few good options available to the west. Rather than admit defeat I believe we can count on the mad-hatters in US-UK-NATO to find dirty ways to keep the war going until the public eventually forces them to quit.

In the end it is up to us, the great unwashed, to mobilize inside our beleaguered countries in order to build the movements needed to sink this evil war plan before our sacred Mother Earth erupts in nuclear Armageddon.

Conservative estimates reveal that at least one billion people would die in a nuclear war. Then comes nuclear winter and global starvation. Isn't it time to reject western corporate dominated political leadership?

Keep paddling - now more than ever.

Bruce