At 70+ years & small old lady, I won't be recruited by anyone. More likely murdered & robbed. In the event of nuclear attack, it dawned on me that I have enough ace promazine on hand to knock out my 2 rescue ponies & my 2 dogs; a hunting knife to the carotid can then euthanize.
I expect by 2030, the majority of the US population will have been pacified via the FDA & its contaminated food, drugs & water. Eg, a significant percentage of people I know are already seriously damaged by the clot shots that their employers required or pastors encouraged.
I wouldn't want to be in or near any major cities, though. I see riots more likely than organized resistance for a couple reasons. 1. New Englanders already hate everyone including each other & 2. Massive surveillance will prevent organizing
I do agree it could get to the point of russia nuking all nato installations in Europe. This could be done with a clear statement to the usa any escalation will mean all out strike on the usa.
1. They could accomplish much the same with hypersonics
2. Long term they want Europe to escape USUK & join BRICS. Nukes would end that before it started
3. Nukes risk contaminating Black, Baltic & Barents Seas & potential fallout. No telling how a concentration of that much force would impact local microclimate
4. They blame USUK, not Europe. They will ultimately strike perps, not hostages. They may already be asymmetrically attacking, with recent fires at various arms manufacturers
You are exaggerating the demographic cost to Russia of this war. If the West has temporarily 'solved its demographic problems' with the influx of Ukrainians, then the same goes for Russia, which has received the largest number of Ukrainian refugees of any single state. Moreover, it has also gained millions still living in the new Russian oblasts (Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaparozhye, Kherson). Most importantly, as we have known for some time, most of the fighting so far has not been done by the actual Russian army. Therefore, a huge proportion of 'Russian' dead were either prisoners fighting for Wagner - not the most reliable male role-models for children last time I looked - Chechyens who as Muslims have a higher fertility rate than ethnic Russians and therefore probably did leave offspring, and people from the Donbass who were not classed as Russian until fairly recently.
It is never about the size of a population but about the demographic structure.
You are from Germany, so you should know this as well.
You don't have a small population but still face major problems with your social insurance system and workforce.
Essentially, because you have relatively too many old people and too few young people.
Yes, Russia has a huge population and it gained another few million people. But it is always about the demographic structure—the share of young people in comparison to the older population.
And young people are the ones who are dying on the frontlines. If they die without having children, then it ensures that another child or more will never be born.
However, you are right. I should have explained my example better by introducing the demographic structure instead of only talking about demographics!
I'm honoured to have a reply from the author! Thank you for taking the time. Btw, I'm British, not German - although Britain's demographic problems are of a similar kind to Germany's.
I appreciate that the loss of men of childbearing age is concerning for any society, but there is still the matter to be addressed that losses of non-criminal, ethnic Russians from pre-war Russia proper have been remarkably light hitherto. Of course, the longer the war goes on, the losses will mount, but even the hostile Mediazona have had to admit that the rate of Russian losses has been dwindling to ever lower numbers. The fact that they have announced that they will be changing their methodology in order to artificially inflate numbers of Russian losses is a sign that the numbers of Russian dead leave much to be desired, from the Western standpoint.
Your argument would have some merit if it could be shown that the Ukrainian refugees that fled to the West are younger and more fertile than those who fled to Russia, or those who still reside in the Donbass. However, there is no indication that that is the case. Moreover, as non-criminal, ethnic Russian losses are a few tens of thousands at the very most, and the numbers gained are in the millions, Russia will still emerge from the war with a demographic gain in that crucial child-bearing portion of the population, unless there is a dramatic escalation in losses, which is highly unlikely.
There is also the matter of quality, as opposed to quantity. Donbass has historically been an industrial stronghold full of highly skilled people, and they will take their mentality and training with them into the Russian Federation. Most of the people who fled to the West were prosperous females from Western Ukraine, with relatively few of the skills that the West is desperately short of, and an abundance of those that it has a surfeit of already. The babies that they have (and Ukrainian fertility rates are lower than in Russia) will go through the increasingly dumbed-down and degraded Western education system, with its poor record in STEM subjects, rather than the Eastern European education system which is vastly superior and still produces far higher numbers of STEM graduates as proof. I have had experience of both, as I have taught both British and Eastern European students, both at universities, and in a private capacity as a coach. Students who have been through Eastern European educational institutions knock spots off British students.
There is also the matter of social cohesion. As I am sure that every reader of this blog knows, Western Europe is trying to solve its demographic problems by importing people who are failing to integrate successfully into their new countries. Many of them are already a tremendous financial drain on their new societies, and the social problems from their burgeoning numbers are also mounting. Russia has its own migration problems, but they won't stem from their new oblasts, who will slot into existing Russian society with alacrity.
Anna, I specifically noted your comment for a response :)
As always, I appreciate your precise and detailed comments. I tend to agree with most of the points you made. However, they are centered around the demands of pre-war Russia.
That's why I would like to ask you the following. If we assume that:
The majority of Ukraine will be incorporated into Russia after the war.
The demography in the new Russian regions (formerly Ukraine) will be catastrophic due to casualties and emigration, even if some refugees return.
Russia's economy, particularly the industry, is running hot and needs far more workforce than is currently available, even with these additional people. This is true even today.
The demand for workforce will rise exponentially after the war, especially for rebuilding the country. This is considering the possibility that hundreds of thousands of North Koreans might be employed. (I'm not certain whether Russia will grant access to BRICS partners for rebuilding Ukraine, but it's possible.)
The burden on the social system will be much higher after the war due to the number of widows, orphans, wounded/crippled individuals, and pensioners (from Ukraine).
Increasing the birth rate (a personal project of President Putin, since the demographic structure in Russia is in poor shape) will require women/mothers to reduce their availability in the workforce.
Don't get me wrong; I have a lot of answers to these questions, but we should be able to understand that if Russian losses reach, for example, 300,000 dead (which I believe is highly unlikely and we are far from these numbers), it would certainly be a major burden.
I should also mention, if you have read my previous articles, that I firmly do NOT believe we will ever reach a situation where Russia has to cope with catastrophic losses. I don't think this war will last much longer.
However, labeling the situation around the demographic structure as non-problematic or even improving is not the scenario I believe in. What I am willing to accept, and we know this from post-WW2 German/Soviet/Yugoslav populations, is that if the aftermath of such events is managed "efficiently," it can turn positive over time.
I agree with all your points, which are as always very well made! Maybe the only (slight) difference between us is one of emphasis. If I sound more sanguine it is mainly because I think that the nature of life is struggle and difficulty, and if it doesn't arise in one form, it will in another. Of course post-war Russia will have problems to overcome, not least from the aftermath of the death and suffering that took place. Nonetheless, these will be trifling compared to those it has faced in the past, and indeed, any problems it has will be dwarfed by those facing the EU countries, which have far less hope of actually resolving them, if only because all of the social, political and economic structures will militate against their resolution. So, in a world of dirty shirts, Russia's will still be the cleanest. On that note, I was gladdened to read this from Karl Sanchez's substack earlier today:
"Blast furnace No. 5 has been put into operation at the Yenakiieve Steel Plant in the Donetsk People's Republic after major repairs. Its launch will allow melting more than one million tons of steel per year. Yenakiyevsky Plant is a full-cycle metallurgical enterprise that produces rebar, rolled metal products, including those for shipbuilding, and commercial pig iron."
Life goes on, and Donetsk (and Russia) will recover.
Incidentally, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that, post-war, there might be a rise in the birth rate. This happened after WW2, and spawned the infamous boomer generation. I would not be surprised if a similar thing happened in Russia.
I fully agree. (Excuse my very short answer, but it is what it is.)
If you are interested to write a guest article on BMA anytime going forward, write me a mail. If it fits to BMA, you'll be invited to release it on BMA.
(You can write me a private message on Substack in this case).
Thank you so much - I would be honoured. It may take me a little while to take you up on that, as I'm in the process of organising a move to Belarus! But I would love to write something.
Boris Johnson persuaded our illegitimate demented woke "president" into provoking Russia to attack Ukraine because he thought that Germany was getting to close to Russia. According to him a Russian - German alliance would have disrupted EU's hegemony
Russia CAN win THE Nuclear War with the United States/NATO... and Survive !
Russia not only has more modern nuclear weapons:
Russia has the BEST way to deliver them, something USA/NATO are just dreaming of having: UNSTOPPABLE hypersonic missiles, launched from many sources, land, air, submarine based... with several models (Avangard, Iskander, Kinzhal, Tsirkon) including the NEW monster, the also hypersonic RS-28, Yars, Sarmat-2 (Satan) ICBM with up to 15 MIRVs...
AND, to top it, and to demonstrate that Russia could evaporate ALL NATO cities, right now, with near total IMPUNITY (no more MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction Concept, rendered obsolete in fact by Russia with all these advanced military technologies pushed by Putin) is the coverage (I of course ignore the quantities and deployments), PROTECTION provided by its highly advanced, sophisticated S400s, S500s (and S550 designed to take down satellites) designed to TAKE DOWN any incoming missile/ICBM, which imho guarantees Russia would SURVIVE a full nuclear war !!!
BUT Russia WILL NEVER do it !
Russia, according to President Putin, will NEVER strike FIRST !
Why? Because Russia HAS MORAL VALUES.
If the reverse would be happening, you can be sure that the Evil United States Neocon Leaders, which have NO moral values whatsoever (obsessed with money), would have already obliterated, without any feeling of remorse, all Russian Cities... 😱
All told the USA and allies have around 5500 nukes. Say only half of those are operable, say again a first strike from Russia removes half of the remaining 2750, so roughly 1375 gey launched,say agsin russia had a 95% interceotion rate, that still leaves 119 nukes exploding on russuan territory, enough to ensure evrry single major russian city is gone, given that eveey nuckear power plant would akso be a high priority tsrget then you czn factor in another 11 nuclear reactor meltdowns.
Would Russia survive, well remote villages would indeed survive, but every significant city and town would be gone and the vast majority of the country would be irradiated for centuries.
Ofc the same situation would be true in the USA as in Russia, remote communities and small towns would survive the initial weeks, Europe of course with a compacted territory would be simply gone forever.
Anybody thinking that a full nuclear exchange is dimmable by anybody simply is MAD (pun intended)
Given both the rate of failure, rate of the effects of a first launch strike and the interceot rate are all high estimates in terms of best case scenario.
The Biden Junta , determined to prevent President Trump from negotiating a peace treaty in Ukraine, has delivered F16s to that CIA Colony. The Biden Junta wants a World War III to be ongoing and unstoppable at the time President Trump is sworn in.
I believe WW3, yes likely started by the Arrogant and Ignorant Biden Junta would last just a few hours... And with end result: ALL of NATO countries totally destroyed, several Russian cities also, but basically Russia surviving...
The West is not sleeping. In several months or an your they will also have hyper sonic weapons. The window of opportunity for Russia is closing thanks to Putin's weakness.
They won't, the US has been trying for years to develop them without success, I believe they've scrapped 4 programs so far.
The only three countries believed to us evtbdm are Russia, North Korea and Iran, the latter two both obviously 'aided' by Russia to do so, quite obviously
Nuclear weapons are doomsday devices. They are ready for NOT being delivered. The West can destroy the human race but cannot win a nuclear war.
And the West cannot fight a conventional war either, because there is no reason to fight for hetero men - and unicorn identity idiots don't want to fight and btw, wouldn't survive a single day in combat. So without "nationalism" or a strong ideology there is no way to fight a large conventional war. The West has to give a reason, first. I personally don't have a reason (hetero white man with liberterian mindset).
You’re right. All of this is nonsense at the end. Why the vacillation of the Russians? Why they don’t make a formal declaration of war and stop the farce of SMO? Just go to destroy the Ukraine state apparatus. Real war. It’s not necessary to attack NATO countries for now, just as you say to stop Putin cowardice and indecisions.
The UK-US-France propaganda painted Putin as a tyrannical madman determined to take over Europe,
UNBELIEVABLY , That bullshit worked because it convinced Sweden and Findland to join NATO.
After Obama deposed Ukraine's duly elected president , Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014 - Putin demanded FOR EIGHT YEARS that the Minsk 1&2 Agreements be enforced. But we heard CIA Agent Victoria Nuland stating on a tapped telephone call " Fuck the Minsk agreement , the US is not a signatory".
Russia would have no problem destroying Ukraine . But Putin knows that most Ukranians have no idea that the CIA , MI6 and DGSE are using Ukranians and puppet Zelenskyy as peons , a battering ram against Russia
This article is why two years ago in May 2022 after the Istanbul agreement was trashed I asked the question (not here) why the west is doing this? It really only leads to the west losing either way.
Obama also understood this. He understood that Russia has escalation dominance and understood Russia’s nuclear doctrine. Which is why he didn’t supply Ukraine with offensive weapons.
Aleks, I think it’s my turn to be the optimist here since I’m usually the one giving WW3 50/50 😜. For various reasons, I think we have another cycle or two before “The End”.
When I look at Europe now I don’t know the path it will take to that change. The latest elections, even if you drill down to popular votes, changed nothing. As much as I would like to see Europe wake up and decolonize itself I don’t see “how” that will happen. The worst case scenario is they turn into museums with US military bases attached to them - but I don’t think the status quo will last long enough for that to happen.
I have zero hope for the UK. They are doomed and there is no good way out for them. Mainland Europe is another matter and they should cut them off entirely. They’ve been nothing but trouble for almost two centuries now (even though I love British culture and the English language). As for Germany … it’s complicated. Germany can turn very suddenly. Currently they are in a pressure cooker but I don’t see it bursting imminently. France does what it does best … rebel.
Also, I cannot see any EU state being a part of the BRICS. They are mutually exclusive and at some point states will have to choose. Much easier for those closer to Asia or Russia. All it takes is for one country that uses the EUR to leave and the whole EU starts to wobble. A non-EUR country will have some but minimal effect especially if it has been problematic (like Hungary).
The best outcome is for a sudden and severe economic collapse - which I don’t discount - causing mass civil upheavals and a complete reorganization of political power. It’s not the only way for things to change in Europe but the best and fastest with least pain. But again, I don’t know the path to that change.
My best estimate is it will be a gradual unraveling with LIFO order. The EU will seize to exist in the near future probably once Germany declines precipitously (on its way FAST right now) and the whole structure becomes a heavy burden with little to no benefit, rendering it unsustainable. NATO will follow but will take a little longer.
The reality is, the US without Europe is just an island state. It has very little political power projection (at best) outside its hemisphere, and when an Eurasian trade and security architecture is setup they will be fully contained. Funny how the US is trying to contain Russia and China and it’s them that end up isolated?
As a final note, I don’t discount a kinetic conflict around China, possibly overlapping with Ukraine. Seems foolish from the US but then again so was Ukraine, and if it does, it will end very quickly and concurrently with Ukraine (if it is still going on).
Either way, EU will be broken up and back to individual countries. Some well run, some in shit, as always. In a nuclear exchange, or even just a "partial" nuclear exchange, the damage to the atmosphere and ocean will make the pain feel like a total war. IMHO, usage of nukes is inevitable. The only salvation we have is a quick drop of tempo due to some unseen factor. I only do "prepping" to a minor extent (USA local chaos and social decadence) but the chance for me to survive WW3 is next to zero.
Only about 10-15% of Jews globally follow The Talmud; but it's still too many.
As for the NAZIs, surely they were/are a hoax/psyop created by, for and on behalf of Zionists on Wall Street and in The Corporation of The City of London? Zionists are already in full control of the NATO/Five-Eyes countries, Israel and - of course - Ukraine.
I like your ideas for holding The West accountable; but I suspect the relevant criminals will be dead before it is possible to implement them.
There was a saying in the United States in the Cold War era - "Better Dead than Red". That's how many Americans felt about Soviet Communism. These people were "dead" serious, I can tell you - I was there.
Today, I believe we may see a repeat of that slogan in a slightly different form - "Better Dead than Build Back Better". I for one subscribe to this idea.
The future which the West's oligarchic cabal are creating is an Orwellian totalitarian nightmare. And that is no way to live as a human being. So, I'd rather take my "Get Out of Jail Free Card" and exit stage right. And, as we say in Texas, "Let Hell Take the Hindmost!".
Well it is having its problems regarding the reason Texas was created - LIBERTY - from the influx of leftists fleeing their former homes, now turned into New World Order hellholes. Still, all those Texas metro areas where these globalist lovers moved to (I guess to feel more at home, like back home in Los Angeles), are surrounded by a sea of good folks who are still beholden to the Constitution of the United States of America (1789).
It's impossible to understand the "Better Dead than Red" attitude unless you realise that most of those people were (and are) fundamentalist Christians. They believed that, come the Final Battle aka Armageddon, they would instantly be snatched up into Heaven.
I have studied nuclear scenarios. A total exchange of all current USA and Russia stocks will not result in the deaths of all of us. It will kill those near the impact points and these constitute less than 0.2 percent of Russia and 0.4 percent of USA land area. If they deploy the new neutron cold fusion warheads buildings will be largely intact. So those ordering up this party can sit underground for a month and business as usual commences, but with a lot less people. Nuclear winter is a children's scare story with little basis in science, invented at the time of Andropov and Reagan. This is the real scare story. They can do it........
The % of total land area exposed to lethal radiation, shock wave and thermal damages/fire storms is not the point. What is LOCATED on that small % is a majority of population, most transport hub infrastructure, nearly all of the industrial production infrastructure and related workers. Fallout is not a risk to be sneered at either. All of that coupled with a year or two of decreased temperatures in northern hemisphere temperate zones from inevitable dust, soot & etc. will cause a famine sufficient to kill off a large % of us, these conditions would prevail longer than "a month", see "the year without a summer" after Mount Tambora blew itself apart in 1815. So damn the difference anyhow.
I am not disagreeing with that. What I am saying is that the powerful who control the use of the bomb know that they can use it without the end of the world scenario that is peddled. Of course, in a city (and thats where the bombs will fall mainly) the population will be killed. But these people dont care about that, and your infrastructure points either: let them eat cake. Fallout will, of course, kill and cause genetic damage, as it already has from the nuclear tests, fertility will further collapse after such a big exchange. But as Stalin said: no men no problem, нет мужчин, нет проблем. Right now, the West has the increasing debt and decreasing resource problem. A nuclear war will solve all that.
I also agree that a full nuclear exchange would not kill humankind instantly.
However, one must ask whether anyone would want to live in what would follow, especially if you have children and need to take care of and protect them against... well.
I have serious doubts whether the few remaining months or years would be desirable at all, before you eventually either get killed or die from whatever consequences.
That is the big question. Everyone needs to answer that for themselves.
Regardless of the climate effect severity having (perhaps) gone down with the retirement of the megaton range warheads used by the first generations of (rather inaccurate) ICBMs, the famous statement "The living would envy the dead" still would likely hold true for most of us without access to The Billionaire Bunker(™).
Interesting point of view. I'd say that the current state of the affairs resembles the infamous "chicken game" for the hot - headed American elite. Unfortunately, the people in position to "make" decisions for the US are puppets and not politicians of the JFK magnitude. So, the Russians have few options to end the war decisively: A. Smack Poland hard or one of the Baltics, in the next "major" step towards escalation. The Western Elites get the chance to see how an expendable Slavic(Polish) or North Germanoslavic (Baltic) elite gets wiped out with conventional hits, rather than nukes, and how easily this could be done by the Russians, and then they will decide whether they would like to have some of the same treatment. B. The Russians - BRICKS continue the bleeding war of attrition in all fronts. Plus, agree on a fast track dedollarization, which defaults US in the span of 6 months and ignites a new civil war.
I don't see a quick decision to resort to nukes from either side for a bunch of reasons - mostly the fact that Western Elites know they'd lose the nuke game due to the Russian superiority in hypersonic missiles technology. The Western Elites would probably bend under such pressure and would decide to allow Russia a win this time, like they did in WWII with the hope of a more favorable opportunity in the future.
Nonsense. Just destroy the government in Kiev! Go for the jugular! Destroy the whole electrical infrastructure, all the command centres, go to a real war and not this fucking Putin vacillations and delays which could cost the nuclear war at the end because cowardice.
Over simplistic approach ignoring the... Hydra paradigm. In essence, you won't kill the Hydra by just severing one of the heads of the beast. The Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev will do their best to cling on power, regardless of the war cost and blood toll for Ukraine. For the Russians, this is a civil war and the best way to minimize the damage on both mations is exactly the way they conduct the war currently.
1 Western hegemoniacs instigate the toxic social institution of ‘blood-feud’ in order to rule in foreign polities. Blood-feud is the compulsive interminable exchange of atrocities, both rhetorical and actual. Hence ‘divide-and-rule’ and wars of conquest. Western commercial practice, competitive capitalism, resembles blood-feud.
Mutualist international co-operators seek to disengage from blood-feud in all aspects of international societies. Being trapped in blood-feud is to both win and lose at the same time, alternately, belligerent tit-for-tat. If it were a game, it would be ‘lose-lose’.
Holding a party responsible for atrocities is another move in the game of blood-feud.
2 “Russia is currently setting up tribunals to be held after the war.” These would only be outside blood-feud if they followed the model of Mandela’s South African ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ for restorative justice. Punishment and revenge are initiatives in blood-feud.
3 It would be helpful to have a map of Ukraine showing the territories whose inhabitants will fall under the national guardianship of the various Nationalist players, Russia, Poland, Hungary, Romania. Each nation would be responsible for funding and executing restorative reconstruction of the territory, and for the inhabitants, whom it guards, including providing for people disabled by the conflict.
It would show the remainder of Ukraine, a relatively small self-governed area. Nazism essentially has the social structure and dynamic of superhumans ruling and oppressing subhumans. A Nazi regime would have problems identifying the subhumans in its remaining manor. Perhaps it would ideologically and politically implode, thereby achieving the Russian goal of deNazification. One can but hope.
4 Putin doesn’t need to nuke Europe, only drop a Kinzhal on a few NATO bases.
I think this analysis is too pessimistic, Russia has shown that it has very strong nerves and complete control of the escalation. Some analysts have hypothesized that there are secret negotiations underway between emissaries of Moscow and Trump and it seems that the demands of the Trump's emissaries are to slow the advance of the Russian army until the US election day in November so that Trump can take credit for forcing the Kiev puppet to surrender and Putin in return would receive a partial easing of sanctions and the recognition of the 4 Ukrainian regions conquered so far.
Actually not. Hope you’re right, but what I see is the indecision of Putin closing the opportunities windows. Russia had to destroy the Ukrainian state long ago and go to a real war not these smo that is looking more and more like a joke. And also, it’s a bloody euphemism. It’s a war. Just declare it formally and go to win.
The Biden Junta determined to prevent President Trump from negotiating a peace treaty in Ukraine has delivered F16 to that CIA Colony. The Biden Junta wants a World War III to be ongoing and unstoppable at the time President Trump is sworn in.
The f16 won't change a danned thing, it's only being given as the Ukrainian air force has ran out of planes almost.
Ignore the bs about these planes adding to Ukraine's capabilities, they are simply arriving to replace stuff they had and lost and which ultimately made little difference whilst they had them,
You said..."If Russia wins, Russia loses. If Russia loses, Russia (obviously) also loses...".
On the contrary... Russia has finally endeavor to cure its Ukranian thorn in the side and it is about to fix it for the next century at least, which repressents a colossal and unprecedented triumph the west wants to avoid at all cost. It couldnt be done before, due to the vast infiltration of western assets inside Russia. But the martyrdom of the Donbass population acted as a historical detonator.
Fascism and colonialism are well alive in the west and sure they arent going to give up... But, do they have the means to do so? I dont think so. The Ukraine was a big loot both for the Poles, the Sweedish, the Germans, French, Italians and of course the anglosaxons, following the usual vassal scheme they share since the conquest of Irak in which the latter keep the hard assets as a long term financial rent and the former keep the retail market. But because of their genetic fascism they went too far too fast. And they failed catastrophically.
Now sure they will try to stain and terrorize every little development the Russians are possibly able to in Ukraine. But thats not a defeat. Thats a long reconstructing recivilization mission for the wasted swamp fascist west had turned those lands into.
Alex rightly so believes what he says about Russia losing either way, due to it being essentially a civil war, where every dead (or the majority) of Ukrainians are essentially russian, so to win means killing a huge amount of what should be Russian people, post war we will have the territory but we won't have the young people, most will have fled west or sadly be dead.
Demographically we will inherit a large amount of older people who will need taking care off, a large amount of territory which will have a very old and very sparse population also.
To win we need to increase the Russian birth rate (not by immigration or by the Muslim areas either) but by convincing white Russians to have much much larger families.
"...to win means killing a huge amount of what should be Russian people, post war we will have the territory but we won't have the young people, most will have fled west or sadly be dead". No, those who fled west will return when the Ukraine is once again sane, being rebuilt, and better in the long run than Germany or the UK, or even France.
Where is the fascism alive in the west? Do you call the woke homo degenerates globalist pro great replacement fascists? I’m tired of people using the word fascism like a per word. If we had real fascism here, Mussolini types, none of the degeneracy and madness of the modern west would be happening. What we have is a neo communism instead.
The idea of the west being ruled by communists is a product of the cold war and the people of Q or Bannon. The spent their lives slandering and lying about communism and kept on going when communism disappeared. When somebody challenged the western global explotation system in Africa, LatAm or even inside the west, he was automatically labelled "communist". But no, there are people just trying to bring back some sovereignty out of the hands of corporations. When I say that the west is a fascist organisation is because Nato and the EU integrated thousands of nazis not only from Germany, but from Italy, Greece, Spain or Ukraine too. They sheltered them for decades, used them to build Nato hidden terrorist armies like the Gladio Network. The result is than Nato and the west are the historical heirs of fascism.
Yup. Howl. Hum. Well, I am on shelf life. I would prefer to emigrate to Russia💙🇷🇺❤️; I ponder this, often. A young girl’s fantasy, yet I am, an old woman, of a certain age. Howl, real loudly. My remote viewing skills are honed as I read your stack, repeatedly, thank you, kindly. As for my community, yup. The hallowed shells of former Spirt/Souls. Most have no far~see vision, and are quite distorted in their thinking, or not thinking, due to the labors of survival. Very few Remember…The…Great…Work, yet apply the values of God/Christ Consciousness. Rest easy, I pray, yet this equilibrium is difficult at best to hold in the light, of such darkness.❤️🐈⬛
The Ukraine army is close to total collapse, while a new Maidan 2 will soon occur & hopefully elensky will be swinging from a lamppost naked with his own excrement running down his leg with the rest of his corrupt acolytes who did not manage to escape to the west next to him. Ukraine manpower is dwindling rapidly as is the NATO capacity to send arms. All while western economies are in free fall, consumed with trillions of debt, enjoying the benefits of ill thought out boomerang sanctions.
They are steadily losing ground actually, and the line as is being held is at the huge cost of the most valuable resource, people.
At a certain point reserves run out, morale starts to break and a cascade effect occurs, how close to that point the Ukraine is we will see, but by winter when the true effects of the power situation hits home, that will be the possible tipping point (if not earlier)
Just because the nazi regime does not negotiate, doesn't mean the country itself wouldn't be collapsing or literally disappearing. IT IS. There are a gazillion videos of mobilization taking place in Ukraine. Let me tell you, kidnapping people which constitutes 90% of all new recruits is NOT sustainable, and you see the consequence in continuously abandoned positions. Whereas foreign nazi mercs are shooting them in the back to try to stem that.
The issue is the war continues because NATO bribed all Rada deputies who keep the forced mobilization going in exchange for bribes. Were the money spigot to stop, the motivation for mobilization immediately disappears. As Zelensky himself said, the west is paying 'rent' for war. No rent, no war.
The Biden Junta determined to prevent President Trump from negotiating a peace treaty in Ukraine has delivered F16 to that CIA Colony. The Biden Junta wants a World War III to be ongoing and unstoppable at the time President Trump is sworn in.
But I still have hope: I wish to see the people reaction here in the MSM if "somehow" some untouchable would suddenly fall from the sky... just to say.
But one life is worth one life in my ethic... so the life of a Klaus, a Georgyi or a Bill should be as worthless as the one of any one of us pebbles or Ukr forced mobilized guy...
They are cockroaches, so they will sh... their pants as soon as they will start to feel their impunity has expired...
I have to agree with the fact that Ukraine won’t exist after the war. The western part will be absorbed by surrounding eu countries. This makes the most sense.
I’m really curious if nato puts troops in western Ukraine as “peacekeepers”, will Russia bomb them? If yes, then western Ukraine becomes another front as far as missiles are concerned. NATO probably needs troops there to secure the western parts for takeover by the eu neighbors once Ukraine collapses.
Western Ukraine eont alter the strategic threat to Russia much at all if it's limited to Galicia and the Hungarian and Romanian parts of what would then be the former Ukraine.
Can't look it up right now, but the distance this time of launch to impact would change little over it coming from Poland or the Baltics for example and a huge lot longer than from say Finland.
That if NATO put troops into western Ukraine we won't bomb them so long as it's clearly a way to incorporate the western part of the Ukraine into the countries who historically those lands were.
The russian reaction will make it clear if essentially they and those countries have reached an agreement by which the likes of Galicia returns to Poland for example.
At 70+ years & small old lady, I won't be recruited by anyone. More likely murdered & robbed. In the event of nuclear attack, it dawned on me that I have enough ace promazine on hand to knock out my 2 rescue ponies & my 2 dogs; a hunting knife to the carotid can then euthanize.
I expect by 2030, the majority of the US population will have been pacified via the FDA & its contaminated food, drugs & water. Eg, a significant percentage of people I know are already seriously damaged by the clot shots that their employers required or pastors encouraged.
I wouldn't want to be in or near any major cities, though. I see riots more likely than organized resistance for a couple reasons. 1. New Englanders already hate everyone including each other & 2. Massive surveillance will prevent organizing
You're right, Mary, and I hope we will never come in the situation to experience such horrors.
Based on my life experience, as long as I'm planning for it to happen, it won't.
When I stop planning because I think it's all clear, duck & cover.
I do agree it could get to the point of russia nuking all nato installations in Europe. This could be done with a clear statement to the usa any escalation will mean all out strike on the usa.
I don't think they would for a couple reasons:
1. They could accomplish much the same with hypersonics
2. Long term they want Europe to escape USUK & join BRICS. Nukes would end that before it started
3. Nukes risk contaminating Black, Baltic & Barents Seas & potential fallout. No telling how a concentration of that much force would impact local microclimate
4. They blame USUK, not Europe. They will ultimately strike perps, not hostages. They may already be asymmetrically attacking, with recent fires at various arms manufacturers
You are exaggerating the demographic cost to Russia of this war. If the West has temporarily 'solved its demographic problems' with the influx of Ukrainians, then the same goes for Russia, which has received the largest number of Ukrainian refugees of any single state. Moreover, it has also gained millions still living in the new Russian oblasts (Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaparozhye, Kherson). Most importantly, as we have known for some time, most of the fighting so far has not been done by the actual Russian army. Therefore, a huge proportion of 'Russian' dead were either prisoners fighting for Wagner - not the most reliable male role-models for children last time I looked - Chechyens who as Muslims have a higher fertility rate than ethnic Russians and therefore probably did leave offspring, and people from the Donbass who were not classed as Russian until fairly recently.
Hi Anna,
Here is the problem:
It is never about the size of a population but about the demographic structure.
You are from Germany, so you should know this as well.
You don't have a small population but still face major problems with your social insurance system and workforce.
Essentially, because you have relatively too many old people and too few young people.
Yes, Russia has a huge population and it gained another few million people. But it is always about the demographic structure—the share of young people in comparison to the older population.
And young people are the ones who are dying on the frontlines. If they die without having children, then it ensures that another child or more will never be born.
However, you are right. I should have explained my example better by introducing the demographic structure instead of only talking about demographics!
Thank you for that hint!
I'm honoured to have a reply from the author! Thank you for taking the time. Btw, I'm British, not German - although Britain's demographic problems are of a similar kind to Germany's.
I appreciate that the loss of men of childbearing age is concerning for any society, but there is still the matter to be addressed that losses of non-criminal, ethnic Russians from pre-war Russia proper have been remarkably light hitherto. Of course, the longer the war goes on, the losses will mount, but even the hostile Mediazona have had to admit that the rate of Russian losses has been dwindling to ever lower numbers. The fact that they have announced that they will be changing their methodology in order to artificially inflate numbers of Russian losses is a sign that the numbers of Russian dead leave much to be desired, from the Western standpoint.
Your argument would have some merit if it could be shown that the Ukrainian refugees that fled to the West are younger and more fertile than those who fled to Russia, or those who still reside in the Donbass. However, there is no indication that that is the case. Moreover, as non-criminal, ethnic Russian losses are a few tens of thousands at the very most, and the numbers gained are in the millions, Russia will still emerge from the war with a demographic gain in that crucial child-bearing portion of the population, unless there is a dramatic escalation in losses, which is highly unlikely.
There is also the matter of quality, as opposed to quantity. Donbass has historically been an industrial stronghold full of highly skilled people, and they will take their mentality and training with them into the Russian Federation. Most of the people who fled to the West were prosperous females from Western Ukraine, with relatively few of the skills that the West is desperately short of, and an abundance of those that it has a surfeit of already. The babies that they have (and Ukrainian fertility rates are lower than in Russia) will go through the increasingly dumbed-down and degraded Western education system, with its poor record in STEM subjects, rather than the Eastern European education system which is vastly superior and still produces far higher numbers of STEM graduates as proof. I have had experience of both, as I have taught both British and Eastern European students, both at universities, and in a private capacity as a coach. Students who have been through Eastern European educational institutions knock spots off British students.
There is also the matter of social cohesion. As I am sure that every reader of this blog knows, Western Europe is trying to solve its demographic problems by importing people who are failing to integrate successfully into their new countries. Many of them are already a tremendous financial drain on their new societies, and the social problems from their burgeoning numbers are also mounting. Russia has its own migration problems, but they won't stem from their new oblasts, who will slot into existing Russian society with alacrity.
Anna, I specifically noted your comment for a response :)
As always, I appreciate your precise and detailed comments. I tend to agree with most of the points you made. However, they are centered around the demands of pre-war Russia.
That's why I would like to ask you the following. If we assume that:
The majority of Ukraine will be incorporated into Russia after the war.
The demography in the new Russian regions (formerly Ukraine) will be catastrophic due to casualties and emigration, even if some refugees return.
Russia's economy, particularly the industry, is running hot and needs far more workforce than is currently available, even with these additional people. This is true even today.
The demand for workforce will rise exponentially after the war, especially for rebuilding the country. This is considering the possibility that hundreds of thousands of North Koreans might be employed. (I'm not certain whether Russia will grant access to BRICS partners for rebuilding Ukraine, but it's possible.)
The burden on the social system will be much higher after the war due to the number of widows, orphans, wounded/crippled individuals, and pensioners (from Ukraine).
Increasing the birth rate (a personal project of President Putin, since the demographic structure in Russia is in poor shape) will require women/mothers to reduce their availability in the workforce.
Don't get me wrong; I have a lot of answers to these questions, but we should be able to understand that if Russian losses reach, for example, 300,000 dead (which I believe is highly unlikely and we are far from these numbers), it would certainly be a major burden.
I should also mention, if you have read my previous articles, that I firmly do NOT believe we will ever reach a situation where Russia has to cope with catastrophic losses. I don't think this war will last much longer.
However, labeling the situation around the demographic structure as non-problematic or even improving is not the scenario I believe in. What I am willing to accept, and we know this from post-WW2 German/Soviet/Yugoslav populations, is that if the aftermath of such events is managed "efficiently," it can turn positive over time.
I agree with all your points, which are as always very well made! Maybe the only (slight) difference between us is one of emphasis. If I sound more sanguine it is mainly because I think that the nature of life is struggle and difficulty, and if it doesn't arise in one form, it will in another. Of course post-war Russia will have problems to overcome, not least from the aftermath of the death and suffering that took place. Nonetheless, these will be trifling compared to those it has faced in the past, and indeed, any problems it has will be dwarfed by those facing the EU countries, which have far less hope of actually resolving them, if only because all of the social, political and economic structures will militate against their resolution. So, in a world of dirty shirts, Russia's will still be the cleanest. On that note, I was gladdened to read this from Karl Sanchez's substack earlier today:
"Blast furnace No. 5 has been put into operation at the Yenakiieve Steel Plant in the Donetsk People's Republic after major repairs. Its launch will allow melting more than one million tons of steel per year. Yenakiyevsky Plant is a full-cycle metallurgical enterprise that produces rebar, rolled metal products, including those for shipbuilding, and commercial pig iron."
Life goes on, and Donetsk (and Russia) will recover.
Incidentally, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that, post-war, there might be a rise in the birth rate. This happened after WW2, and spawned the infamous boomer generation. I would not be surprised if a similar thing happened in Russia.
I fully agree. (Excuse my very short answer, but it is what it is.)
If you are interested to write a guest article on BMA anytime going forward, write me a mail. If it fits to BMA, you'll be invited to release it on BMA.
(You can write me a private message on Substack in this case).
Thank you so much - I would be honoured. It may take me a little while to take you up on that, as I'm in the process of organising a move to Belarus! But I would love to write something.
An excellent point of view from a former educator. God bless you.
That's very kind of you - and may He bless you too.
I fully agree ;)
Brava Anna! Well reasoned.
[curtsey]
Boris Johnson persuaded our illegitimate demented woke "president" into provoking Russia to attack Ukraine because he thought that Germany was getting to close to Russia. According to him a Russian - German alliance would have disrupted EU's hegemony
Russia CAN win THE Nuclear War with the United States/NATO... and Survive !
Russia not only has more modern nuclear weapons:
Russia has the BEST way to deliver them, something USA/NATO are just dreaming of having: UNSTOPPABLE hypersonic missiles, launched from many sources, land, air, submarine based... with several models (Avangard, Iskander, Kinzhal, Tsirkon) including the NEW monster, the also hypersonic RS-28, Yars, Sarmat-2 (Satan) ICBM with up to 15 MIRVs...
AND, to top it, and to demonstrate that Russia could evaporate ALL NATO cities, right now, with near total IMPUNITY (no more MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction Concept, rendered obsolete in fact by Russia with all these advanced military technologies pushed by Putin) is the coverage (I of course ignore the quantities and deployments), PROTECTION provided by its highly advanced, sophisticated S400s, S500s (and S550 designed to take down satellites) designed to TAKE DOWN any incoming missile/ICBM, which imho guarantees Russia would SURVIVE a full nuclear war !!!
BUT Russia WILL NEVER do it !
Russia, according to President Putin, will NEVER strike FIRST !
Why? Because Russia HAS MORAL VALUES.
If the reverse would be happening, you can be sure that the Evil United States Neocon Leaders, which have NO moral values whatsoever (obsessed with money), would have already obliterated, without any feeling of remorse, all Russian Cities... 😱
All told the USA and allies have around 5500 nukes. Say only half of those are operable, say again a first strike from Russia removes half of the remaining 2750, so roughly 1375 gey launched,say agsin russia had a 95% interceotion rate, that still leaves 119 nukes exploding on russuan territory, enough to ensure evrry single major russian city is gone, given that eveey nuckear power plant would akso be a high priority tsrget then you czn factor in another 11 nuclear reactor meltdowns.
Would Russia survive, well remote villages would indeed survive, but every significant city and town would be gone and the vast majority of the country would be irradiated for centuries.
Ofc the same situation would be true in the USA as in Russia, remote communities and small towns would survive the initial weeks, Europe of course with a compacted territory would be simply gone forever.
Anybody thinking that a full nuclear exchange is dimmable by anybody simply is MAD (pun intended)
Given both the rate of failure, rate of the effects of a first launch strike and the interceot rate are all high estimates in terms of best case scenario.
The Biden Junta , determined to prevent President Trump from negotiating a peace treaty in Ukraine, has delivered F16s to that CIA Colony. The Biden Junta wants a World War III to be ongoing and unstoppable at the time President Trump is sworn in.
youtube.com/watch?v=JvanUx2LQDE
I believe WW3, yes likely started by the Arrogant and Ignorant Biden Junta would last just a few hours... And with end result: ALL of NATO countries totally destroyed, several Russian cities also, but basically Russia surviving...
China, North Korea and Iran will have no choice but join the fray. They know that if the CIA defeats Russia they are next.
The West is not sleeping. In several months or an your they will also have hyper sonic weapons. The window of opportunity for Russia is closing thanks to Putin's weakness.
They won't, the US has been trying for years to develop them without success, I believe they've scrapped 4 programs so far.
The only three countries believed to us evtbdm are Russia, North Korea and Iran, the latter two both obviously 'aided' by Russia to do so, quite obviously
Hope you’re right, but never sub estimate a dying demon.
Japan might have hypersonics
https://asiatimes.com/2024/07/china-and-japan-ignite-asian-hypersonic-arms-race/
Nuclear weapons are doomsday devices. They are ready for NOT being delivered. The West can destroy the human race but cannot win a nuclear war.
And the West cannot fight a conventional war either, because there is no reason to fight for hetero men - and unicorn identity idiots don't want to fight and btw, wouldn't survive a single day in combat. So without "nationalism" or a strong ideology there is no way to fight a large conventional war. The West has to give a reason, first. I personally don't have a reason (hetero white man with liberterian mindset).
My2cents
110% with You... if they want to die for WEF right to DEI and eating crickets... let THEM die...
You’re right. All of this is nonsense at the end. Why the vacillation of the Russians? Why they don’t make a formal declaration of war and stop the farce of SMO? Just go to destroy the Ukraine state apparatus. Real war. It’s not necessary to attack NATO countries for now, just as you say to stop Putin cowardice and indecisions.
Because of the optics.
The UK-US-France propaganda painted Putin as a tyrannical madman determined to take over Europe,
UNBELIEVABLY , That bullshit worked because it convinced Sweden and Findland to join NATO.
After Obama deposed Ukraine's duly elected president , Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014 - Putin demanded FOR EIGHT YEARS that the Minsk 1&2 Agreements be enforced. But we heard CIA Agent Victoria Nuland stating on a tapped telephone call " Fuck the Minsk agreement , the US is not a signatory".
Russia would have no problem destroying Ukraine . But Putin knows that most Ukranians have no idea that the CIA , MI6 and DGSE are using Ukranians and puppet Zelenskyy as peons , a battering ram against Russia
Have you been watching cnn again? Or maybe listening to Biden?
This article is why two years ago in May 2022 after the Istanbul agreement was trashed I asked the question (not here) why the west is doing this? It really only leads to the west losing either way.
Obama also understood this. He understood that Russia has escalation dominance and understood Russia’s nuclear doctrine. Which is why he didn’t supply Ukraine with offensive weapons.
Aleks, I think it’s my turn to be the optimist here since I’m usually the one giving WW3 50/50 😜. For various reasons, I think we have another cycle or two before “The End”.
When I look at Europe now I don’t know the path it will take to that change. The latest elections, even if you drill down to popular votes, changed nothing. As much as I would like to see Europe wake up and decolonize itself I don’t see “how” that will happen. The worst case scenario is they turn into museums with US military bases attached to them - but I don’t think the status quo will last long enough for that to happen.
I have zero hope for the UK. They are doomed and there is no good way out for them. Mainland Europe is another matter and they should cut them off entirely. They’ve been nothing but trouble for almost two centuries now (even though I love British culture and the English language). As for Germany … it’s complicated. Germany can turn very suddenly. Currently they are in a pressure cooker but I don’t see it bursting imminently. France does what it does best … rebel.
Also, I cannot see any EU state being a part of the BRICS. They are mutually exclusive and at some point states will have to choose. Much easier for those closer to Asia or Russia. All it takes is for one country that uses the EUR to leave and the whole EU starts to wobble. A non-EUR country will have some but minimal effect especially if it has been problematic (like Hungary).
The best outcome is for a sudden and severe economic collapse - which I don’t discount - causing mass civil upheavals and a complete reorganization of political power. It’s not the only way for things to change in Europe but the best and fastest with least pain. But again, I don’t know the path to that change.
My best estimate is it will be a gradual unraveling with LIFO order. The EU will seize to exist in the near future probably once Germany declines precipitously (on its way FAST right now) and the whole structure becomes a heavy burden with little to no benefit, rendering it unsustainable. NATO will follow but will take a little longer.
The reality is, the US without Europe is just an island state. It has very little political power projection (at best) outside its hemisphere, and when an Eurasian trade and security architecture is setup they will be fully contained. Funny how the US is trying to contain Russia and China and it’s them that end up isolated?
As a final note, I don’t discount a kinetic conflict around China, possibly overlapping with Ukraine. Seems foolish from the US but then again so was Ukraine, and if it does, it will end very quickly and concurrently with Ukraine (if it is still going on).
I agree, Phoenix ;)
And thanks for that detailed explanations!
No worries. I'm not so much pesimistic for the world in general.
However, I'm very pesimistic about what will happen with Europe.
And yes, I planned to write about Asia for some weeks already. Maybe I make it haha
As you said, a hot conflict around China is possible, but from my point of view not as we imagine. Again, maybe I find time to write down my thoughts.
Thank you for the kind words and looking forward to the Asia installment.
I hope that when this current conflict has passed that 2 things are true:
1. A multipolar world that can sustain this multi polarity for a long time
2. Russia is one of and a significant pole
Being under Chinese hegemony I gather could be just as bad (or worse depending on your perspective) than the current system.
Either way, EU will be broken up and back to individual countries. Some well run, some in shit, as always. In a nuclear exchange, or even just a "partial" nuclear exchange, the damage to the atmosphere and ocean will make the pain feel like a total war. IMHO, usage of nukes is inevitable. The only salvation we have is a quick drop of tempo due to some unseen factor. I only do "prepping" to a minor extent (USA local chaos and social decadence) but the chance for me to survive WW3 is next to zero.
Maybe, let’s hope for the ideal, the EU could have a rebirth under nationalist normal governments. Highly unlikely, but who knows?
We can hope :)
Yes, possible but unlikely. Also see my post here: https://chenchauchu.substack.com/p/a-handicap-for-the-future-of-eu
Even if ww3 happens, it’s still localized to areas where nukes blow up. The world is too big to destroy all of it. I wouldn’t worry about it.
I bet the retarded powers that be destroy themselves first before they destroy the world.
Just imagine, these are the same people promoting “global warming”, I mean “climate change”. LOL.
"I bet the retarded powers that be destroy themselves first before they destroy the world".
The powers that be are not "retarded". I wish they were but any dumb or stupid stuff you see is part of the Kabuki Theater.
Just imagine, these are the same people promoting “global warming”, I mean “climate change”.
Are you thinking that, just because "global warming" is bullshit that the powers that be are retarded? The whole global warming meme is a psy-op.
prescient + erudite as always. i hope aleks that you can find a way to continue writing in this channel.
Thank you! I will continue.
But less frequent....
The end of the West, the end of the World, or the fulfilment of The Talmud?
"Extermination of the Christians is a necessary sacrifice" (Yalkut 245c).:
https://www.gtvflyers.com/every-single-aspect-of-the-jewish-talmud-is-satanic/
Only about 10-15% of Jews globally follow The Talmud; but it's still too many.
As for the NAZIs, surely they were/are a hoax/psyop created by, for and on behalf of Zionists on Wall Street and in The Corporation of The City of London? Zionists are already in full control of the NATO/Five-Eyes countries, Israel and - of course - Ukraine.
I like your ideas for holding The West accountable; but I suspect the relevant criminals will be dead before it is possible to implement them.
There was a saying in the United States in the Cold War era - "Better Dead than Red". That's how many Americans felt about Soviet Communism. These people were "dead" serious, I can tell you - I was there.
Today, I believe we may see a repeat of that slogan in a slightly different form - "Better Dead than Build Back Better". I for one subscribe to this idea.
The future which the West's oligarchic cabal are creating is an Orwellian totalitarian nightmare. And that is no way to live as a human being. So, I'd rather take my "Get Out of Jail Free Card" and exit stage right. And, as we say in Texas, "Let Hell Take the Hindmost!".
I like Texas :)))
Well it is having its problems regarding the reason Texas was created - LIBERTY - from the influx of leftists fleeing their former homes, now turned into New World Order hellholes. Still, all those Texas metro areas where these globalist lovers moved to (I guess to feel more at home, like back home in Los Angeles), are surrounded by a sea of good folks who are still beholden to the Constitution of the United States of America (1789).
Me too, they should go their own way... like in Joe Nobody's Holding Their Own novel series...
It's impossible to understand the "Better Dead than Red" attitude unless you realise that most of those people were (and are) fundamentalist Christians. They believed that, come the Final Battle aka Armageddon, they would instantly be snatched up into Heaven.
Also, I do not recall any connection between the slogan and Christian fundamentalists. And I was there then.
Forget “exit stage right”. I’m looking forward to making those numnuts my new bitches. Bring it.
Different folks; different strokes.
I have studied nuclear scenarios. A total exchange of all current USA and Russia stocks will not result in the deaths of all of us. It will kill those near the impact points and these constitute less than 0.2 percent of Russia and 0.4 percent of USA land area. If they deploy the new neutron cold fusion warheads buildings will be largely intact. So those ordering up this party can sit underground for a month and business as usual commences, but with a lot less people. Nuclear winter is a children's scare story with little basis in science, invented at the time of Andropov and Reagan. This is the real scare story. They can do it........
@Christopher Busby
Your "study" was quite deficient.
The % of total land area exposed to lethal radiation, shock wave and thermal damages/fire storms is not the point. What is LOCATED on that small % is a majority of population, most transport hub infrastructure, nearly all of the industrial production infrastructure and related workers. Fallout is not a risk to be sneered at either. All of that coupled with a year or two of decreased temperatures in northern hemisphere temperate zones from inevitable dust, soot & etc. will cause a famine sufficient to kill off a large % of us, these conditions would prevail longer than "a month", see "the year without a summer" after Mount Tambora blew itself apart in 1815. So damn the difference anyhow.
I am not disagreeing with that. What I am saying is that the powerful who control the use of the bomb know that they can use it without the end of the world scenario that is peddled. Of course, in a city (and thats where the bombs will fall mainly) the population will be killed. But these people dont care about that, and your infrastructure points either: let them eat cake. Fallout will, of course, kill and cause genetic damage, as it already has from the nuclear tests, fertility will further collapse after such a big exchange. But as Stalin said: no men no problem, нет мужчин, нет проблем. Right now, the West has the increasing debt and decreasing resource problem. A nuclear war will solve all that.
I also agree that a full nuclear exchange would not kill humankind instantly.
However, one must ask whether anyone would want to live in what would follow, especially if you have children and need to take care of and protect them against... well.
I have serious doubts whether the few remaining months or years would be desirable at all, before you eventually either get killed or die from whatever consequences.
That is the big question. Everyone needs to answer that for themselves.
Regardless of the climate effect severity having (perhaps) gone down with the retirement of the megaton range warheads used by the first generations of (rather inaccurate) ICBMs, the famous statement "The living would envy the dead" still would likely hold true for most of us without access to The Billionaire Bunker(™).
https://youtu.be/tPZ7wjiM5yw?si=6RCdmPj2uYGA9Y8F
Interesting point of view. I'd say that the current state of the affairs resembles the infamous "chicken game" for the hot - headed American elite. Unfortunately, the people in position to "make" decisions for the US are puppets and not politicians of the JFK magnitude. So, the Russians have few options to end the war decisively: A. Smack Poland hard or one of the Baltics, in the next "major" step towards escalation. The Western Elites get the chance to see how an expendable Slavic(Polish) or North Germanoslavic (Baltic) elite gets wiped out with conventional hits, rather than nukes, and how easily this could be done by the Russians, and then they will decide whether they would like to have some of the same treatment. B. The Russians - BRICKS continue the bleeding war of attrition in all fronts. Plus, agree on a fast track dedollarization, which defaults US in the span of 6 months and ignites a new civil war.
I don't see a quick decision to resort to nukes from either side for a bunch of reasons - mostly the fact that Western Elites know they'd lose the nuke game due to the Russian superiority in hypersonic missiles technology. The Western Elites would probably bend under such pressure and would decide to allow Russia a win this time, like they did in WWII with the hope of a more favorable opportunity in the future.
Nonsense. Just destroy the government in Kiev! Go for the jugular! Destroy the whole electrical infrastructure, all the command centres, go to a real war and not this fucking Putin vacillations and delays which could cost the nuclear war at the end because cowardice.
Over simplistic approach ignoring the... Hydra paradigm. In essence, you won't kill the Hydra by just severing one of the heads of the beast. The Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev will do their best to cling on power, regardless of the war cost and blood toll for Ukraine. For the Russians, this is a civil war and the best way to minimize the damage on both mations is exactly the way they conduct the war currently.
1 Western hegemoniacs instigate the toxic social institution of ‘blood-feud’ in order to rule in foreign polities. Blood-feud is the compulsive interminable exchange of atrocities, both rhetorical and actual. Hence ‘divide-and-rule’ and wars of conquest. Western commercial practice, competitive capitalism, resembles blood-feud.
Mutualist international co-operators seek to disengage from blood-feud in all aspects of international societies. Being trapped in blood-feud is to both win and lose at the same time, alternately, belligerent tit-for-tat. If it were a game, it would be ‘lose-lose’.
Holding a party responsible for atrocities is another move in the game of blood-feud.
2 “Russia is currently setting up tribunals to be held after the war.” These would only be outside blood-feud if they followed the model of Mandela’s South African ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ for restorative justice. Punishment and revenge are initiatives in blood-feud.
3 It would be helpful to have a map of Ukraine showing the territories whose inhabitants will fall under the national guardianship of the various Nationalist players, Russia, Poland, Hungary, Romania. Each nation would be responsible for funding and executing restorative reconstruction of the territory, and for the inhabitants, whom it guards, including providing for people disabled by the conflict.
It would show the remainder of Ukraine, a relatively small self-governed area. Nazism essentially has the social structure and dynamic of superhumans ruling and oppressing subhumans. A Nazi regime would have problems identifying the subhumans in its remaining manor. Perhaps it would ideologically and politically implode, thereby achieving the Russian goal of deNazification. One can but hope.
4 Putin doesn’t need to nuke Europe, only drop a Kinzhal on a few NATO bases.
The maps are easily obtainable online mate, type in something like former eastern border regions of the Ukraine pre 1940
I think this analysis is too pessimistic, Russia has shown that it has very strong nerves and complete control of the escalation. Some analysts have hypothesized that there are secret negotiations underway between emissaries of Moscow and Trump and it seems that the demands of the Trump's emissaries are to slow the advance of the Russian army until the US election day in November so that Trump can take credit for forcing the Kiev puppet to surrender and Putin in return would receive a partial easing of sanctions and the recognition of the 4 Ukrainian regions conquered so far.
No worries. I'm not pessimistic.
I just added another perspective/dimension on the events.
I described in my blog many other dimensions of this conflict where Russia is winning globally. Economics, geopolitics, technology, etc.
Actually not. Hope you’re right, but what I see is the indecision of Putin closing the opportunities windows. Russia had to destroy the Ukrainian state long ago and go to a real war not these smo that is looking more and more like a joke. And also, it’s a bloody euphemism. It’s a war. Just declare it formally and go to win.
The Biden Junta determined to prevent President Trump from negotiating a peace treaty in Ukraine has delivered F16 to that CIA Colony. The Biden Junta wants a World War III to be ongoing and unstoppable at the time President Trump is sworn in.
youtube.com/watch?v=JvanUx2LQDE
The f16 won't change a danned thing, it's only being given as the Ukrainian air force has ran out of planes almost.
Ignore the bs about these planes adding to Ukraine's capabilities, they are simply arriving to replace stuff they had and lost and which ultimately made little difference whilst they had them,
They won't last long in any case. Russia will take them out quickly as soon as they are spotted.
You said..."If Russia wins, Russia loses. If Russia loses, Russia (obviously) also loses...".
On the contrary... Russia has finally endeavor to cure its Ukranian thorn in the side and it is about to fix it for the next century at least, which repressents a colossal and unprecedented triumph the west wants to avoid at all cost. It couldnt be done before, due to the vast infiltration of western assets inside Russia. But the martyrdom of the Donbass population acted as a historical detonator.
Fascism and colonialism are well alive in the west and sure they arent going to give up... But, do they have the means to do so? I dont think so. The Ukraine was a big loot both for the Poles, the Sweedish, the Germans, French, Italians and of course the anglosaxons, following the usual vassal scheme they share since the conquest of Irak in which the latter keep the hard assets as a long term financial rent and the former keep the retail market. But because of their genetic fascism they went too far too fast. And they failed catastrophically.
Now sure they will try to stain and terrorize every little development the Russians are possibly able to in Ukraine. But thats not a defeat. Thats a long reconstructing recivilization mission for the wasted swamp fascist west had turned those lands into.
Alex rightly so believes what he says about Russia losing either way, due to it being essentially a civil war, where every dead (or the majority) of Ukrainians are essentially russian, so to win means killing a huge amount of what should be Russian people, post war we will have the territory but we won't have the young people, most will have fled west or sadly be dead.
Demographically we will inherit a large amount of older people who will need taking care off, a large amount of territory which will have a very old and very sparse population also.
To win we need to increase the Russian birth rate (not by immigration or by the Muslim areas either) but by convincing white Russians to have much much larger families.
"...to win means killing a huge amount of what should be Russian people, post war we will have the territory but we won't have the young people, most will have fled west or sadly be dead". No, those who fled west will return when the Ukraine is once again sane, being rebuilt, and better in the long run than Germany or the UK, or even France.
That is not losing... That's the price of victory
Where is the fascism alive in the west? Do you call the woke homo degenerates globalist pro great replacement fascists? I’m tired of people using the word fascism like a per word. If we had real fascism here, Mussolini types, none of the degeneracy and madness of the modern west would be happening. What we have is a neo communism instead.
The idea of the west being ruled by communists is a product of the cold war and the people of Q or Bannon. The spent their lives slandering and lying about communism and kept on going when communism disappeared. When somebody challenged the western global explotation system in Africa, LatAm or even inside the west, he was automatically labelled "communist". But no, there are people just trying to bring back some sovereignty out of the hands of corporations. When I say that the west is a fascist organisation is because Nato and the EU integrated thousands of nazis not only from Germany, but from Italy, Greece, Spain or Ukraine too. They sheltered them for decades, used them to build Nato hidden terrorist armies like the Gladio Network. The result is than Nato and the west are the historical heirs of fascism.
Yup. Howl. Hum. Well, I am on shelf life. I would prefer to emigrate to Russia💙🇷🇺❤️; I ponder this, often. A young girl’s fantasy, yet I am, an old woman, of a certain age. Howl, real loudly. My remote viewing skills are honed as I read your stack, repeatedly, thank you, kindly. As for my community, yup. The hallowed shells of former Spirt/Souls. Most have no far~see vision, and are quite distorted in their thinking, or not thinking, due to the labors of survival. Very few Remember…The…Great…Work, yet apply the values of God/Christ Consciousness. Rest easy, I pray, yet this equilibrium is difficult at best to hold in the light, of such darkness.❤️🐈⬛
Excellent work Alex. I can sign your every word. There is huge demographic strain in Russia now.
Contrary to the most of pro Russian crowd, I think you are right.
Russia cannot pursue this war for long but the west can.
A dark future is ahead of us.
The Ukraine army is close to total collapse, while a new Maidan 2 will soon occur & hopefully elensky will be swinging from a lamppost naked with his own excrement running down his leg with the rest of his corrupt acolytes who did not manage to escape to the west next to him. Ukraine manpower is dwindling rapidly as is the NATO capacity to send arms. All while western economies are in free fall, consumed with trillions of debt, enjoying the benefits of ill thought out boomerang sanctions.
The secret police will make damn sure that there is no Maidan 3.0.
Zelenskii and his western Masters are far more ruthless than Yanukovich ever was.
>The Ukraine army is close to total collapse.
there s no proof for this, they are holding the line
>All while western economies are in free fall
there are no riots, no imminent crisis, the population is content
They are steadily losing ground actually, and the line as is being held is at the huge cost of the most valuable resource, people.
At a certain point reserves run out, morale starts to break and a cascade effect occurs, how close to that point the Ukraine is we will see, but by winter when the true effects of the power situation hits home, that will be the possible tipping point (if not earlier)
What would you accept as "proof" ?
The west propagandists lie like a rug.
And if you listen to Russian media you will be a "putin Stooge".
For long time, people have been talking about "the collapse of Ukro army", but that didn't happen yet
Ukraine has lost 100,000 soldiers and is on its lag leg.
Colonel Douglas MacGregor @ 24:00
'nuff said
Just because the nazi regime does not negotiate, doesn't mean the country itself wouldn't be collapsing or literally disappearing. IT IS. There are a gazillion videos of mobilization taking place in Ukraine. Let me tell you, kidnapping people which constitutes 90% of all new recruits is NOT sustainable, and you see the consequence in continuously abandoned positions. Whereas foreign nazi mercs are shooting them in the back to try to stem that.
The issue is the war continues because NATO bribed all Rada deputies who keep the forced mobilization going in exchange for bribes. Were the money spigot to stop, the motivation for mobilization immediately disappears. As Zelensky himself said, the west is paying 'rent' for war. No rent, no war.
"they are holding the line" but the line is moving gradually inexorably west.
The Biden Junta determined to prevent President Trump from negotiating a peace treaty in Ukraine has delivered F16 to that CIA Colony. The Biden Junta wants a World War III to be ongoing and unstoppable at the time President Trump is sworn in.
youtube.com/watch?v=JvanUx2LQDE
Sir... You are scary... but realistic.
But I still have hope: I wish to see the people reaction here in the MSM if "somehow" some untouchable would suddenly fall from the sky... just to say.
But one life is worth one life in my ethic... so the life of a Klaus, a Georgyi or a Bill should be as worthless as the one of any one of us pebbles or Ukr forced mobilized guy...
They are cockroaches, so they will sh... their pants as soon as they will start to feel their impunity has expired...
That was a good article!
I have to agree with the fact that Ukraine won’t exist after the war. The western part will be absorbed by surrounding eu countries. This makes the most sense.
I’m really curious if nato puts troops in western Ukraine as “peacekeepers”, will Russia bomb them? If yes, then western Ukraine becomes another front as far as missiles are concerned. NATO probably needs troops there to secure the western parts for takeover by the eu neighbors once Ukraine collapses.
Thanks, Bridge!!
I think that Western troops will enter West Ukraine AFTER an agreement with Russia at a given time.
Western Ukraine eont alter the strategic threat to Russia much at all if it's limited to Galicia and the Hungarian and Romanian parts of what would then be the former Ukraine.
Can't look it up right now, but the distance this time of launch to impact would change little over it coming from Poland or the Baltics for example and a huge lot longer than from say Finland.
What is your point? Not sure what you’re trying to say.
That if NATO put troops into western Ukraine we won't bomb them so long as it's clearly a way to incorporate the western part of the Ukraine into the countries who historically those lands were.
The russian reaction will make it clear if essentially they and those countries have reached an agreement by which the likes of Galicia returns to Poland for example.