Warmongering for Dummies - Preliminaries And Foreplay

.

Smoke. Mirrored

In the above tabs one finds a timeline of events that are key to an understanding of the conflict that is underway in Ukraine (a more detailed one in the plans), this being very much in line with all that's addressed in this post. In the second is something that most will readily assume to be totally disassociated from the topic at hand: the intelligence report on Jamal Khashoggi's murder that US President Joe Biden had promised to release if he were elected.

Guess what!

Hard to say whether Biden won but I heard Trump lost?

I don't mean any disrespect to Khashoggi's family nor to anyone for whom he were dear, but I've never understood the high degree of indignation expressed by most and why his case mattered when so many others didn't. It's not the grief, per se, that I have issues with, it's the disproportionate amount of incense shown in his regard and the absolute lack of genuine care shown for far too many more whose deaths are brushed off as White House annoyances best not mentioned. That is, unless it's to implicate the Russians and Chinese — and other rogue states when required — in evil deeds, of course.

As I'd mentioned in a piece on the double standards under which the collective West operates, as is made evident through Ukraine, the US-led forces killed more journalists while in Iraq than what's been reported in many conflicts combined, even managing to beat Israel's digits; the numbers are shocking. Truly.

Yet, how many Western outlets have expressed their indignation over these? The stories of a few of those journalists paint a very troubling picture devoid of the sympathy and eye for justice that one would expect had all other cases — which involved foreign and Iraqi journalists, but some with American credentials and passports, too — been treated in the 'outlier' way that Khashoggi's has.

The norm is to disregard such deaths; the values that are suddenly held dear and that must be defended are usually so because of the politicized opportunity afforded, and little to do with the 'who' that was killed, though the first is usually a product of the latter.

Plus, considering Obama's appalling record with journalists and how little shy he was with jailing those who refused to give up their sources, and given Biden's role in the administration and the disdain for journalists he's allowed to shine through at times, I fail to see how anyone could give any credence to the White House's statements regarding the death of Khashoggi and not see right through the politicized layer that's been the only real motivation behind the Biden Bunch's interest in the murder, all of it ending up showcasing Biden for the big-talker, little-doer that'll confront anyone all the more bravely the further away from him they are.

A real brave lot, this Bunch and their Bendable Buddies. Until standing face to face — or fist to fist — with their foe?

Khashoggi's story is far from simple nor simply that of a Washington Post columnist killed abroad for his truthful coverage of the Saudi Prince, as the Western media will have you believe. Let's just say that Khashoggi was in real tight with Saudi Arabia's royal family, and that he wasn't on the 'good' side of a very bad debate, and that he was doing far more to please his CIA bosses than his WaPo ones.

But none of that is what I want to discuss in the context of this post. I simply want to draw your attention toward that much touted intelligence report that provided the proof that Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman is responsible for Khashoggi's murder.

I'm told that, already, I'm an anti-Black, anti-white, anti-American, anti-Exceptionalism, pro-Russian-imperialist Putin lover and Xi Jinpinger who wants everyone to go trans — but just the bottom, not the top — according to the tribal idiocy that passes judgment, so, wanting to avoid being labeled a WaPo-smeaing Khashoggi hater is why I haven't really mentioned it other than when that report was released. And a few times since, too. But if that's what passes off as an intelligence report these days... oh, boy! talk about wasted trillions in tax dollars.

This report is the best they had to convince people that the Crown Prince is behind a murder? There isn't one solid bit of evidence in the whole thing. And I'm passing no judgment; for all I know MBS jumped out of a cake wheeled into the room and he then killed and dismembered Khashoggi with a plastic spoon, and what I do know is that no one can and should condemn the Saudi Prince based on what's in that file.

They have nothing on him that would stand up in court and they know it. "Releasing" the report... all's for show, to convince a gullible, trained-to-be-easily-manipulated people that Biden's new foreign policy position was the right one, whatever that may be, his illogical acts squeezed into a framework that managed to wrangle sense out of nonsense and assign a direction to the mess he left, Psaki, Rice, Blinken, Sullivan, and the other clowns following behind, cleaning up his mess, much like the circus workers following behind the elephants.

The dates on that 'long-awaited' report, what's served up, and details like the top line of the first paragraph on the third page, with the pen marks to stretch the letters... so very junior-high. 

That DNI Haines, she pumped out several of these 'declassified reports' for a while, starting right after the Biden Bunch had taken over office. I've always seen them as pure hogwash, tailored to serve a precise political purpose, and always available in a timely manner that coincided with whatever atypical foreign policy move they needed to sell to the public.

Yeah, sure, OK, whatever. I'm a big cynic on his way to becoming a certified curmudgeon... because I actually seek out and read some of these things and I can't believe that the world's most powerful government should get a "D-" if not a solid fail for such efforts? It's insulting.

And for all their doing, there seems to have been a fair bit of undoing, the Biden Bunch bumbling things up on more than a few. 

Trump was still in office and the vibe I was picking up off of the Dems was how badly they needed to get him out of there, 'cause he was putting them behind schedule.

Which schedule and for what I hadn't a clue, but it's become quite clear since then, this vibe solidified when Biden took over and set to work; as if per some set plan, he ran around signing what needed to be signed, placing the pieces in place, pissing off and promising, accusing and forgetting, kicking fictional foes and licking fudge ice cream... the world; a war? Who cares: not Trump!

It suddenly became very important for Biden to revive the Khashoggi case and seek a so-called justice by voicing accusation and verdict without process, presenting that piece of garbage as proof and justification for a radical change in the US' Middle East foreign policy, ditching Saudi Arabia, all whilst selling a false front of exasperation regarding Israel, the Biden Bunch telling the public they're cutting the tether between it and Zionists as the rest of Washington visibly kept them alive, all while maintaining a fighting force in Syria that's working full time with al-Qaeda to steal the country's oil just to stick it to Assad...  

If treating the Khashoggi case within the purported framework of justice, it wouldn't receive what can only be qualified as undue focus considering all else that is disregarded, thus negating the application of "justice" as anything that is "just", hence, justice is merely a side effect the Biden Bunch wanted to exploit as a primary goal, and nothing more.

Their real goal? Hard to say, but the flip-floppiness and lack of follow-through on any "pariah" conversion, the butt-licking that followed the press briefing bravado, and given all else that's transpired and consumed the world's attention, and all that dicking around concerning a JCPOA that Biden never gave a hoot about... the Biden Bunch were hoping the sudden void would rush a re-balancing that promised turmoil before peace, thus triggering the kind of situation that justified a full-scale NATO intervention, letting the US take care of Iran and Syria in one big-kabang of a swoop while Israel had a field day with Palestine and Lebanon.

Oh, so not the way things are working out, is it? Let's face it: the US just lost all control over the region with the latest peace treaty brokered by China. But they'd pretty much lost it already when Biden decided to play the bully and pull out the Khashoggi card, then, when the US needed Saudi Arabia, had to return and kiss some butt while attempting to maintain some posture of authority, which, somehow, meant sending more troops and weapons to fight Yemen, again?  

However baffling it may be, not one in the Bunch seemed to account for all that the foreign 'others' may have done in the four years they spent trying to trump the Trump. So, Biden ran around setting the pieces in place, but failed to realize that the plan itself hadn't been updated, and too much of it couldn't possibly play out now as it would have, had the Russians not rigged the election, robbed Hillary Clinton of her rightful place at the top of the world... blah, blah, blah.

What boggles me all the more, though, is how the biggest bunch of crooks and liars are suddenly wholly trustworthy if they've successfully lied to their public and supporters in order to create another false foe, and another pretext for a war, pillaging sure to be in the picture. Tossed aside will be all those named as justification for violence and death, none of it necessary. 

Are you somehow fooled into believing that this hasn't become the norm, and that similar games aren't being played in regard to too much that concerns Ukraine?

Shame on you.

A Quick Flashback

2-Aug-2018 — For the past four years senior officials from a group of leading democracies, calling themselves the “D10”, have quietly been meeting once or twice a year to discuss how to co-ordinate strategies to advance the liberal world order. Foreign ministry policy-planners and a few think-tank types would discuss responses to Russia, China, North Korea, Iran—but largely below the radar, so as not to be seen as a cabal of the “old West”. The idea has been to enhance co-operation among “a small number of strategically like-minded and highly capable states”, as Ash Jain, a former member of the State Department’s policy-planning staff, put it in a working paper in 2013.

But, at their next meeting, in Seoul in September, the D10 (America, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, Australia and South Korea, plus the European Union) will have a new agenda item: America’s global role. Whereas the main threat to the rules-based order used to come from outside the leading democracies, some now fear it comes from within.

Countries team up to save the liberal order from Donald Trump | The Economist

That it was neolib buddies from the dominant nations within what's labeled the collective West who shared in Washington's fear of losing its democracy, all of them coming together and acting in very undemocratic ways in support of their like-minded friend who — still stunned from the loss — obviously had their election win stolen by the Russians, Putin unarguably in bed with Trump, or vice versa, well, that's gotta be a coincidence... ditto for the lack of any sunstantiating proof in regard to any collusion, but in one's heart, one knows the real truth, no?  

The D10 is also what's referred to as "the world" whenever someone from the collective West makes any claim relating to support, allies, sanctions or condemnation whilst mentioning Ukraine; "the world" doesn't break 30% population wise, and it's also extremely eurocentric.

Remove all those who live in D10 countries and who do not buy into the narrative pushed by the greedy collective West's ideologically-loony leaders and who, therefore, not only do not support their government's escalatory involvement in Ukraine — negotiating a peace isn't their primary goal, that's clear — but who also assign much, if not all, of the blame on the US-led collective West, and "the world" sits below 10% of the actual, real-world world.   

Not Looking Good for the West; Finally Gonna Accept It?

Bakhmut. In the northeastern part of Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine. Ruins are still smoldering and spilled blood coagulating, and it is already said to be the place that's seen the fiercest, bloodiest fighting of this conflict, perhaps since WWII, if not going back further.

A retired US Marine fighting alongside Ukrainian forces estimated that, on the front lines in Bakhmut, a soldier's life expectancy was around 4 hours.

And now, after months of fighting, Ukrainian fighters are pretty much surrounded, Russia's mercenary Wagner forces having gained control of the area around the town as well as all except one access point and road—referred to as a "pincer" effect; Russia's private force, which has been largely responsible for carrying out this offensive, has been funneling pressure toward a last-chance-exit for all those wanting to escape what has commonly become categorized as "a meat grinder." A picture may be worth 1,000 words, but no one should require more than those two, especially if having a well-sourced account of the actual numbers, which isn't likely to be accurate, but far more in line with the reality that all should be expecting, and that all should have been made aware of before demanding one's support.

Wagner group's founder and leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin, recorded a video message for Kyiv; Bakhmut lay in the background, plumes of dark smoke rose and melded with the doom-laden sky. Prigozhin boldly told the Kyiv government that Bakhmut was soon to be under their control, and that it ought to do the right thing: tell its fighters to retreat rather than continue fighting toward their certain death in one or two days.

The gall! But it's just more Russian propaganda, right? Of course it is! No one in their right mind could ever believe that Putin is capable of achieving anything, which makes Putin's army even less likely to come close to something resembling success. Unless you get your news from Putin-lovin', Kremlin-talking-point-repeating, conspiracy theory subreddits — or any non-Western-controlled media — then you know what's what: Putin's soldiers are so incompetent, most of them throw the pin at the enemy, not the grenade, and far too many of them get flustered and confused when forced to fight amid kabooms and kabangs, and tend to forget which end of an AK-47 is the deadly one.

If there's one thing that the soulless liberal media have been consistent with it's the ways they presented the Russian military as bumbling fools perpetually on the verge of mutiny when out in the field, and always itching for a coup if anywhere near Moscow; all Russian soldiers are savages and serial rapists who've committed more war crimes on poor, unsuspecting, democracy-seeking and freedom-fondling Ukrainians then there are Ukrainians in Ukraine, and they're not only two notches below amateur in terms of fighting prowess, they're always out of ammo.

And Russians obsess over meaningless goals and targets. For endless months now, they've been piling up the dead Russians attempting to take over some crummy real estate defended by a few Ukrainians with a pea-shooter. France24 calls events in Bakhmut "Russia's Bloody Bid for Ukraine Breakthrough."

As we are explained by the neocon-pleasing outlets, there's really nothing significant or important about capturing Bakhmut, it's just a town, and this is nothing more than a symbolic, albeit pathetic, victory toward which Putin sacrificed countless lives.

"Russia has shown a seemingly endless willingness to sacrifice waves of soldiers in a months-long push to seize Bakhmut, losing hundreds of soldiers per day during some of the worst fighting, many from the Wagner mercenary group led by oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin."

[...]

"...Russian President Vladimir Putin would be able to seize on the capture of Bakhmut to “spin his broader storyline” to continue the war effort after months of setbacks and signs the Russian army is on the verge of collapse."

(Source: Bakhmut on the brink as Ukraine signals retreat | The Hill)

Kyiv, on the other hand, isn't just peace-loving and Trump-hating, it's also far more reasonable than any Russia could ever hope to be. Well, I mean, if Russians weren't so hopeless, right?

Alexander Rodnyansky, a top Zeeskyy adviser, assures us, "So far they’ve held the city, but if need be, they will strategically pull back because we’re not going to sacrifice all of our people just for nothing.”

Really? Seems to me like Rodnyansky's statement is contradicted by all that will have preceded that need to retreat, but that I would think such a thing only serves to prove that there are deeply-hidden depths of Putin fetishism within me. Oh, my!

And, anyhow, "[t]here are no indications of a Ukrainian withdrawal yet," and talk of a retreat could very well be "a strategic headfake from Kyiv."

Meanwhile, the Pentagon's press secretary told reporters last Thursday that they've continued to see "intense fighting near Bakhmut," and Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister, Hanna Maliar, announced this week that reinforcements were on their way to Bakhmut, albeit it's not clear if they're to provide cover and help with a retreat or to beef up the ranks and continue the fighting.

That's the type of unidimensional-yet-all-over-the-place fare that's been offered as real news and war analysis regarding Ukraine, and this is what's been setting the norm among Western liberal media, it being the view that's forged out of pro-Western think tanks and PR cum propaganda firms, which they mold into the headlines that are pummeled into all those in the very white-cultured collective West. Give it a bit longer and I'm certain that brainwashed Russophobes will have much in common with the Dodo bird.

And although there have always been contradictions, a year ago, these weren't so glaring or numerous, in part because it was near impossible to discern reality from narrative at that point unless one was willing to put in the long hours needed to dig for any truth. Since then, much has surfaced, making certain claims now impossible to deny, hence why these matters are entirely avoided by all of the liberal-aligned media, as if a refusal to acknowledge a particular reality instantly converts it to fiction. Simultaneously, although time isn't linear, a life must adhere to a linear path if it is to make sense, i.e., per their usual sense, death can never come before birth. As such, as more is said and more is done and more is understood, any story that depends on fabrications will provide plenty of blunders — facts not lived are easily forgotten; more often change than not — and plenty to properly identify outliers and ambiguities, and to single out decisions and actions whose logic is embraced or tossed aside, depending on context, which also shines a light on all the layers that were piled on to enforce and maintain the desired narrative, and how current justifications wouldn't be necessary if those previous justifications had been, in fact, warranted, and the reasons that encapsulated them were accurate and true. Sound and solid.

That being said, the same article asserts:

"Victory in Bakhmut would give Russia its largest advance since last summer and control over a key transport hub in Donetsk, one of two regions that make up the Donbass in eastern Ukraine, which Moscow is hoping to assert its control over in its fresh offensive."

The author contradicts his opening claims, showcasing that he's, clearly, quite clueless — saying anything — which the above paragraph alone makes clear. Firstly, Bakhmut is of utmost importance, as the author betrays. Further, believing that Russia is acting in ways that correspond with the types of gains and successes that the collective West claims it seeks is all kinds of contradictory, and idiotic, too, not to mention scummy and with more than a hint of undeniably evil if doing it with full awareness of the strategy that is, undeniably, I should think, by now, being employed by the Russians; I see anything but an incompetent and ill-trained army.

That this may not appear to be as readily evident to you is expected, should you be convinced that the liberal media has been giving you an interpretation of events and of Putin's motivation that is aiming to be as truthful as can be, this whilst having no compunction about twisting every little detail to the whims and wants of corporations on any other topic being the elephant in the room, so to speak, but... Russians and Chinese, whatever shit someone says about them has got to be the truth, right?

So, Bakhmut.

It's pretty much 'fallen'. Or getting ready to rise, depending on one's point of view. I'm more apt to see the latter. You would, too, if you took your head out of liberal media's ass, listened to those in East Ukraine, accepted that Russians are people, not demons, and that good leaders who truly care for their citizens — all of them — don't diminish the rights of some or overlook abuses perpetrated on a portion, nor cut off essential services for the same, and, especially, they don't shell the hell out of them for eight years.

And if leader Zee knows that doing X will assuredly result in a civil war but still chooses to do X and to arm one side, given his decision, how caring a leader can such a person be? And is that for one's nation or for just a portion?

In the whole Ukraine situation, I've continually affirmed my position quite clearly and, on this, there's been no real change, it being the same prior to 24-Feb-2022. Other than now having access to a great deal of info that substantiates those claims, what has changed is my distaste for the Kyiv regime and my sympathy for Putin along with a deepening appreciation for Russia's situation.

And, no, this doesn't mean that I'm a Putin punter or that I've been doing cartwheels with each Russian victory in Ukraine; military action of the type seen isn't anything I'll ever be happy about. However, although I'm staunchly anti-war, pacifism isn't always the course that guarantees less destruction and fewer deaths; a non-militarized, non-rules-based, equally-applied legal framework must first be established as the expected normalcy, otherwise, per what the US is promoting globally, "pacifism" becomes the loser's way of saying: "I'm bent over, spread wide, and waiting; rape me some more, please!"

That said, I'm now quite certain that matters would have eventually turned far deadlier had Russia not launched its Special Military Operation when it did. Because: Russia never wanted this war, and neither did Ukrainians.

The numbers we were being fed don't correspond with polls or voting results recorded in the years in between 1991 and 2014, and I can't imagine that many of them would have been supportive of Kyiv's actions in the Donbass, or of the duplicitous nature of the arrangements made with the US-led NATO, nor of their "pro-Western" government's eagerness to sell the country to the IMF, had any of them not been kept in the dark while being continually bombarded by fierce anti-Russian propaganda, and pumped full of fictitious lies of an imperialist Putin.

It shouldn't be hard for many to see why this is far from far-fetched, and how this can play out, nor to grasp why local attitudes and interpretations shouldn't instantly see extra weight attached to them simply due to them being local which, consequently, implies that these arise from those who are more in the know. Presently, this is especially true if an American given the gap-filled version of facts that forge two different realities under which the two tribes operate, each with certainty in regard to what the proper reality is.

I don't care if one's birth certificate says "made in USA," anyone telling me that radical-Commie pedophilic Leftists are taking over Washington and Trump is the chosen one who'll MAGA the country back to its God-intended exceptionalism... I'll tend to believe my Canadian take over theirs, every time.  

I've continued to affirm my position, but I was rarely confrontational, for I'd learned quite well that some 'battles' are best avoided when ideologically-rooted elements are in play, as nothing one says will convince someone who's not 'ready' to handle such info properly, until they are; the trigger can be anything, but rarely does it lie in aggressive arguments. Laying a seed of doubt and trusting that it will germinate when the individual has left 'battle mode' and is left to their own thoughts, this tends to be more effective but any victories are hard to claim, occurring long after the 'fight'.

As Russiagate has now very firmly established: it's not the proof that's the issue, it's the level of indoctrination absorbed by some.

Consequently, my take has pretty much been: Those kinds of lies, they can't be maintained forever. No way, no how. The harsher the reality, the harder it'll be to explain any of it, the harder the slap on the face will be, and the clearer the wake up call will surely be.

But, in the meantime, many have died and many more continue to die.

And I do blame the West for all of it; those who reason that, simply, 'I see one country doing the invasion and it's Russia, ipso facto, Russia is at fault and it's the baddie' are opting for the most facile answer possible, demonstrating both gutlessness and a striking inability to be a fair arbiter.

For the most part, finding myself in a vilified minority within the collective West did also have much to do with why I've avoided being confrontational albeit the accusatory stance I did take vis-à-vis several institutions and individuals stupidly fanning the flames of war in ways that revealed how moronically brainwashed they'd become if not in on the take.

Indoctrination. Say what you will; I see what I see, and, without it, would we be where we are?

As such, some debates with some people are bound to end in frustration if not worse; bound to be wasted efforts no matter the amount of proof one can present, this aspect being a sad side effect of the Internet's ability to, practically, deliver any truth one wants to believe in, this, in turn, convincing many that, other than to extract precise details, the research was a waste of time if one already knew the general consensus adopted by their tribe, or if one had a gut feeling on the matter at hand.

•     •     •

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)  recently had a segment titled, "Exposing the Real Number of Russians Killed in the War." 

Being the good, establishment-pleasing, establishment-run institution that it is, it's generally been going all-in on the anti-Russia propaganda, though with nowhere near the ferocious deviousness of other state media like Great Britain's BBC or Germany's DW. The latter may be warranted, though, as rumour is that a crazy green woman is wrecking havoc looking for Putinmenschendiealsfossilebrennstoffebrennen. 

Those Germans and their fancy words. 

Having said that, I went into the segment with eyes pre-rolled, expecting some way-exaggerated number that the host would then use to remind us all of how incompetent and ineffective Russia's army really is — and filled with convicts who moonlight as rapists — which, for a superpower, given the reputation they had built as a worthy adversary to the greatest country that ever were and will ever be, the US of A, is disturbingly pathetic.

This is precisely the type of soft, limp, shriveled army one would expect from an abusive dictator. 

In the mid to late summer of 2022, several groups and experts — indie and not — had tried to get a fix on the total number of casualties on both sides. Anyone not lapping up the liberal media's spin automatically saw the estimated number of deaths that the West had established for the Russians as being those that belonged to Ukraine.

We'll get to those numbers, but, first: This facet has been true in regard to the majority of claims made against Russia since the onset of this phase of the conflict (24-Feb-2022). A prime example concerns a claim that's been repeated as if on a schedule, just not one that's been in sync with Russian manufacturing and deliveries, or with sundry other details that relate to reality.

Pesky thing, reality; it always comes back to bite you in the arse unless you let it sniff your front.

Is that how it goes, or am I getting my sayings confused with Bob's poodle again?

No matter. I was referring to "ammunition". The Russians have been a circus bear's-pubic-hair away from total collapse due to failing supply lines and the country's inability to produce anything worth dying for, let alone anything that can kill — not even a single bullet — because, you know, all those sanctions and how successful they've been, crushing life out of Russia like a foot on a ripe red grape, and all that. Any minute now.

Maybe.

So, in addition to their ranks being filled with nothing but scummy criminals with cannibalistic tendencies and at least three STDs, all of them conscripts aged between 15 to 19 and 70 to infinity, all other military-trained Russians having fallen to their deaths fighting a lost battle for the feverish imperialistic dream of a madman, it also appears as if Russia has been out of shells since 1991... 

Amid all the propaganda coming out of Ukraine and the West that's been distorting every single facet of this war, it's become rather easy to spot certain classes of recurring lies providing that one adopts a scope that extends far beyond the one wherein liberal mainstream media is both situated and boxed in. With the contrast this provides, 'anti-narrativists' (a.k.a. Putin Lovers) can become quite adept at identifying which stories are clearly fact-based, all of it sounding accurate though somewhat Twilight Zony until one flips the subject and object of a phrase, or swaps the nationalities. The great majority of stories informing us of logistical woes fall under this category.

Ever since Russia was forced to pivot and concentrated its efforts in the Donbass, it's been out-shelling Ukraine by at least five times their average, top-end number of 6,000 on slow days, and, for a period, by insanely huge amounts on the rebound end of their well-defined cycles.

Near the start of this piece, when I mentioned that no one in the Biden Bunch seemed to have taken into consideration what their dueling partner had been up to before slipping off their glove and slapping them in the face with it, well, it seems a tad humongously obvious that, their A-Hole arrogance competing with ideological lunacy for control of their badly-wired brain has prevented the allocation of the minute-but-required thinking power that would have allowed them to consider that Russia used up that time preparing for the inevitable it were to have imposed on it, seemingly, by folks who expect all to bend over, or to be so inclined to do so, 'cause it's the rules-based rules, baby! 

Essentially, Russia can keep on shelling at the same rate until long after the West manages to set up ammunition factories dialed into war production mode (didn't Germany willingly offer to move its weapons manufacturers to the US. Because: You know, Nord Stream 2, and a tremendous opportunity, and all that.).

After the 2014 coup, Russia knew it'd be forced into this conflict, hence Crimea. Because: Sevastopol. And the West would love nothing more than to boot the Russians out of the Black Sea, dominate that, too. Because: Eurasia, then the world 

And don't be fooled; Crimeans do not want to return to Ukraine, especially not after the Kyiv regime used them as pawns, showing them it was willing to sacrifice their lives just to 'stick it' to Russia. Many have stated that they will take up arms against Ukraine if forced to fight to remain a part of Russia. If everything else previously offered wasn't convincing enough for you because it came from Crimean or non-establishment-approved outlets, I think I've got something perfect for you: an NBC segment that I'll discuss in another post.

•     •     •

Every once in a while the liberal media, like the politicians, would let something slip, these gaffes never getting any mention in the establishment-supporting outlets or by hawkish opposition unless it was to refute the matter, disregarding the issue no longer an option, it having gained a significant traction with the public at large.

In other words: What I qualify as a gaffe within this context is any bit of narrative-countering info that the Western media has released into the public, knowingly or not, which could be due to a slew of reasons, ranging from a producer not being up to date on the latest, acceptable Western version through to having missed the swastika that lurks in a video's background, or that sneaked up during that photo op...  in short: caught telling the truth when they weren't supposed to do so. 

Biden, the boob, he's done plenty of that, keeping his people frustratingly busy, I bet, but it's OK, he's already forgotten all about it.

That Business Insider piece with the headline announcing that Ukraine is low on ammunition, that's not a gaffe, though. That's deliberate, and part of a slight shift that emerged as a steady practice — no longer just the sporadic safety valve it was — some weeks ago, this perspective being given incremental weight by the establishment media mainstays.

What does it signify: In my opinion, the collective West is getting ready to abandon Ukraine at a moment's notice if it has to, willingly throwing the Kyiv regime under the proverbial bus.

Why? Because: some Westerners are shitting their pants since, unless a high-yield miracle flushes Russia down some toilet, everyone involved in the "Ukraine project" will soon be up shits creek with turd paddles as it becomes clearer just how many got the shit blown out of them, for the shit has long hit the fan and let's be frank... only a select few are wearing raincoats. And none of them call Ukraine home.

No. It isn't a funny subject; humour is how I cope. And it's one hell of a heart-wrenching state of affairs, and on at least four more levels than most people seem to, or will, ever realize, so, sadly, a disgustingly-gooey, multi-coloured diarrhea is what best paints a picture of the situation. Even Imodium can't help now; too much Ex-lax got ingested, making it unreasonable to still expect solid BS. Something like that. A real crappy situation.

Those demanding that more weapons be sent to Ukraine, those who are bullying support for them no matter the cost, devolving into puerile name calling befitting some juvenile black or white world where idiocy reigns supreme, calling for the blood of fellow humans for acts that cannot possibly be understood unless one has allowed hatred to completely cloud their judgment, giving over control of their good sense to the indoctrinated, fear-filled reality that also sees the same manufactured foes lurking, or they do not but won't dare say so, fearing the social and/or financial consequences one may face; these people, like all the head-in-the-sand warmongers who are always cheering on a war, always willing to sacrifice other people's children to make a buck — like Nestlé, but with weapons — are they fully aware of what they are acquiescing to, if not willfully partaking in, by encouraging the wholesale slaughter of a nation, depriving it of several generations of men, stealing from members of those generations who'll have managed to live through this ordeal any semblance of all that's deemed to be a normal life, trauma now a permanent backdrop...

And all of it, the death and destruction, the scars and hatred, all of that, the Kyiv regime and the collective West see justification for when, boiled down to its essence, reduced to the one element which, flipped, would have made all the difference, avoided so many needless deaths, all of that violence finds reason in Ukraine's refusal to remain a militarily neutral nation?

The fucking irony! Mind-melting stupidity.      

If that weren't enough, there's a great deal more irony in the fact that those who've been loudest against white supremacy and the oppressive nature of Capitalism, namely, the Progressives and Caucus-Leftist media, have been among those most easily swept into the service of these entities, willingly lashing out against those who've remained steadfast in their convictions and clear-eyed in terms of seeing the path that leads to their goals, these being the same that Progressives claim to want yet never find the right conditions in which to implement steps and solutions that will get them there...  

Those numbers:

The CBC clearly thought it was breaking through Russia's lies with their segment on an anti-Putin blogger who had worked out the approximate number of deaths by combing through obituaries and examining the burial rates in cemeteries, etc. In fact, they gave credence to the numbers given by Moscow, and by those who reject the Western version of things.

Because of that, I'm sure, it got yanked rather quickly.

Last year, the numbers I reported, which I felt confident about forwarding although Russia's tally seemed low per what we were hearing out of the West, were:

Approximate number of deaths (Aug. 2022): Ukraine - 80,000;  Russia - 6,000  

The numbers concerning Ukraine were mostly avoided by the collective West, rarely being mentioned beyond those of a skirmish, and whatever they provided for Russia seemed to excite more than few closet ideologues whilst all those in the know were quite certain that the numbers given were really what Ukraine had suffered.

One thing I've noticed about the propaganda coming out of Kyiv: it always contains a hard truth; this aspect facilitates the spread of confusion and/or doubt. That said, all the numbers provided by Kyiv thus far aren't ones that they've pulled out of thin air, though they've rarely properly tied them to that which they represented.

Mind you, to the surprise of many, within a month after attempted numbers were floated as a warning and wake up that were disregarded by those being warned, Britain's BBC — the BBC — confirmed Russia's 6,000 deaths. Did I say that many were surprise by this? They may have had their right to report Ukraine-related numbers taken away from them since then, I mean, being off by about 75,000 or so from the "official" count.

And now, several months and several skirmishes later, that blogger was working off of the 6,000 that had been reported, and, CBC overjoyed to be "debunking" that number, figured that the total number of Russian deaths was most probably 2 to 3 times that amount, perhaps even as high as five times, though between 15,000 and 20,000 was the most realistic range... so, take that, Russia; we have your number!

Meanwhile, not everyone being in sync, here's Kyiv wanting us to believe that well over 100,000 Russian soldiers have fallen while Ukraine's are holding strong, keeping the beast at bay... no wonder that CBC segment got pulled real fast.

Presently, as of today, these are the numbers I'm seeing as realistic; these are the number of deaths, not casualties, which are usually at least double the number of the first, though I've a feeling that normal metrics are severely warped in this one:

• Ukraine: Over 300,000 
• Russia: 30,000 

I'm being very serious; once the lies no longer hold up and the dust has fallen, many will be shocked, and should feel tremendous guilt, for it's their gullible stupidity on which I place much of the blame.

There are some aspects of what unfurled that I'm far from being able to forgive so easily, and part of that is the Progressives' handling of any and all aspects of what's sure to become a wide-scale war. They should feel only shame once the guilt has dissipated, and for some time, too.

By refusing to see what was, endorsing lies, and turning a blind eye on history and on neocolonialist practices, all Progressives have invalidated their raison d'être to their would-be base; there is no logical reason that can now be offered as to why those they target should in fact offer even an ounce of their support.

By being willing players in the decisions and votes that have killed a country — and let's be real frank: the collective West killed Ukraine, this being true even if Kyiv were to win the war and kill every single Russian — the Progressives have killed the movement that had given them renewed life.

You're being continually lied to! Are you finally going to wake the hell up?!

Quite frankly, I had expected that some European leaders would have broken their bond with the US-bent bunch of bendable buddies by now, and that the whole of the EU would be holding on by no more than frayed threads.

Lots of 'institutional' changes are to be expected. But that's a whole other topic for a whole other post.

Right now, despite all attempts being made through Western outlets to present Zeeskyy and his US-led and backed regime as reasonable, scoffing at the Russian's obsessive need to win a victory over 'just a town' and their willingness to lose innumerable men to do so, the The Hill piece referenced earlier being a prime example that also assures readers that Kyiv does not take the lives of its people as lightly... they do not obsess or fight senseless battles, and they'll retreat if it's the smart thing to do, hence why there's even been the mention of a "retreat"...

And yet, what the Hawkish West wants, and the messages its media sends out... I'm not seeing one reasonable soul from that side of things. Not a single one.

Along with the mention of that video by Wagner's Prigozhin that I spoke about earlier, what I didn't say is that, halfway through, the camera panned to two teens and an older gentleman; captured 'soldiers' fighting for Ukraine. Prigozhin was telling them to ask Kyiv for permission to retreat, return to their loved ones. 

The mistreatment of soldiers; plucking people off the street, slapping a weapon in their hands and sending them to the front line and to their deaths; human wave attacks; counting on convicts and conscripting the young and old, women, too; taping and/or locking individuals to tanks and other vehicles sent off, aimed at Russians; killing those who dared attempt to retreat, etc., these are all Ukrainian offenses, and there's more for the list is long, including bombing safety corridors, and using civilians as human shields, thus forcing them to stay in zones with active fighting happening. 

Many of these collective West leaders should be jailed!

Besides a Trump Pushing for Trump World, Two Major Challenges to a Rules-Based Oligarchic hell are?

Ukraine and Syria, of course. And Putin, too. And, now, a Xi, see.

The US doesn't give a crap about Ukrainians, that much should be clear by now. Its all about geopolitics, and all's about power and hegemony, and a united Eurasia is one hell of a threat to any of that.

But a Western-controlled Ukraine changes everything.

The US-led collective West had already achieved a coup in 2004, but that one didn't stick, the people furious with both the US and Russia's meddling — the type and level of deviousness exhibited by the West was degrees of despicable worse, in my opinion — but it did sow the seeds and teach a lesson for a future time, the US-led West managing a successful one in 2014, which, despite all their claims, wasn't quite in line with the Ukrainian majority's wants, per what the voting records indicate.  

Consider the following, from the very pro-West and anti-Putin British outlet, The Guardian, published 20-Mar-2014:

Deputy headteacher Oleg Tutunnik is bemused by the country's sudden bifurcation. "Ten years ago there was no distinction between east and west. We would take school groups to the Carpathian mountains," he said. "The situation has changed. We don't understand it." The deputy mayor, Alexander Ruban, also ruled out fighting. "There won't be a war. It would be a fraternal war. We want peace," he said.

Ukraine nationalist attacks on Russia supporters – fact or Kremlin fairytale? Ukraine | The Guardian

The last part explains why it's easy to fool people into believing that the Russian army is incompetent, but I assure you, that isn't what I get from all that's transpired, not one bit.

The Russian troops have, for the most part, done their all to avoid civilian casualties, hence why they're not zipping along flattening everything, à la American style.

Also, thinking in terms of territorial gains is the wrong way of seeing things. That's not the strategy that Moscow cares about, not one bit. They've worked choice areas into "cauldrons" from where they're fighting a war of attrition, letting Kyiv brashly and hotly send in troop after troop, sacrificing countless for a piece of land whose ethnic-Russian Ukrainian citizens it had no qualm in shelling day after day, even after signing the Minsk agreements — and spitting on that — and trying to pass off to the world that it was Putin who refused to seek peace, harbouring imperialist ambitions... veritably sick psychopaths! 

Where the hell is the logic in any of what the West claims and is doing?! Why do we still put up with their shit?!    

Little Big Details

Just a few rather important details that the West often seems to forget to mention, for some odd reason:

Putin mobilized troops in the spring of 2021. Waiting close to a year before "invading"? It doesn't take a year to mobilize less than 20% of one's forces up to one's border. 

Putin literally proposed that DPR/LNR get autonomy status and remain in Ukraine and Ukraine will remain a neutral state, ending the civil war.

Putin was receiving much flak from citizens and members of government for what they saw as his inaction in the face of Russians requiring assistance, these being subjected to undue terror and violence on a daily basis. 

Putin had proposed a new security compact that the West ridiculed if it acknowledged it at all, Biden and his Bunch not even bothering to show up to negotiate some resolve per a pre-established meeting, preferring to bad-mouth Putin to the world instead; that's the state of diplomacy in the West. Things have gotten so bad is the only reason why a totally corrupt, legume turd bent on having a war to compensate for his small brain, and stuff, can manage to make it to President.

Here's the NYT's callous and way-slanted take on that, which does, nonetheless, confirm Moscow's continued attempts at peace; Putin's demands were what had been promised, seeking to estabslish a peace guarantee that was suitable and comfortable for all dirtectly involved (i.e. living in the general viccinity, which tends to impact one's urgency vis-á-vis peace): 

Russia Lays Out Demands for a Sweeping New Security Deal With NATO | The New York Times

Also, please consider:

Earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy addressed the Russian nation asking Russians to protest against the military operation in Ukraine.

The sad irony of the situation is that this happens amid the hysteria of Ukrainian government bodies, media, and ‘activists’ that vow to kill every ethnic Russian in Ukraine (a large part of the country’s population is ethnic Russians) and in Russia itself.

Another fact showing the real intentions of Kyiv authorities is the decision to give weapons to anybody who wants it in the Ukrainian capital to “fight Russians”. This has no real military value in the conditions of modern warfare. However, it already led to the creation of multiple gangs of ‘patriotic Ukrainians’ that kill each other, ordinary civilians and just loot property all around the city.

It is clear that the Kyiv regime has no real intention to save the lives of Ukrainians or protect the existence of the country. The only goal is to create a ‘nice picture’ for MSM, cause deaths and destroy the city for propaganda purposes.

Putin Says ‘No Deal’ with ‘Gang of Drug Addicts and Neo-Nazi’s in Kyiv – Veterans Today | Military Foreign Affairs Policy Journal for Clandestine Services

Russia Lays Out Demands for a Sweeping New Security Deal With NATO | The New York Times

Countries team up to save the liberal order from Donald Trump | The Economist

Ukraine – Berlusconi again blames Ukraine for war, says Zelenski should not have «attacked» Donbas | msn.com