Panicdemic. Scamdemic.
You still, even today, see the occasional loonie wearing a facemask.
Tweets seen
As this blog has predicted for over 2 years. Not exactly autarky, but maybe semi-autarky.
At last, some good news.
As the blog has always said, Russia cannot lose this war, and will not lose it.
Late music
Ian Robert Millard 
I haven’t commented for several days because I have been busy with work. Trying to wrap up several things before Christmas.
Ian, Merry Christmas! I hope you and yours are doing well.
With regard to the news, I hear that the Traitor Keir has announced another 225 million pounds to be sent to (((Zelensky))). Meanwhile British pensioners are freezing this winter.
I also read that the nasty William Hague has been appointed Chancellor of Oxford University, replacing the equally loathsome and repulsive Chris Patten, or “lord patten, knight of the garter” as he prefers to be called.
With regard to Russia, I have to say that Putin’s responses to various Ukrainian acts of provocation have seemed rather weak.
It seems that every time the Ukrainians do an attack on Russian soil, Putin simply launches a few missiles or drones in response, which usually do negligible damage to the Ukrainian side.
The latest Ukrainian act, the broad-daylight assassination of a top Russian general in the middle of Moscow, seems to have been met with the same feeble and muted response.
The Ukrainian leadership are openly bragging about the assassination and taking credit for it, and Putin’s reply was to send a meager handful of drones and missiles.
Such a weak response will only encourage the Ukrainian side.
I’m not sure why Putin’s responses to these Ukrainian provocations have been so lackluster.
It really makes Putin and his government look weak and powerless.
I suppose it could be possible that he is trying to avoid giving (((NATO))) a pretext to send Taurus missiles and other powerful weapons to Ukraine.
But surely the Russian people must be getting impatient with Putin to show that attacks on Russian soil will not be tolerated. After all, Russia is supposed to be a world superpower, not Syria or Yemen which can be attacked by foreign countries with impunity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Friend of Britain:
Thank you very much for the Christmas/Yuletide greetings. The same to you and your household.
While I hear what you say about Putin, I think that at least part of his apparent weakness in response could be called statesmanlike. He knows that Zelensky’s only chance is to get Russia involved in a war against NATO. To that end, Putin is being very cautious, a trait which his early career in the KGB Second and then First Chief Directorate must have intensified. Spies and their handlers typically exhibit a high degree of caution (the ones that go the distance, at least). I think that that must be ingrained in Putin.
Putin has been waiting for Trump’s “accession”. Once Trump has his feet under the table, Putin will see what Trump is able to offer by way of compromise. Putin’s offer will be to stabilize the front more or less where it now is (but with withdrawal of Kiev-regime forces from the Kursk region). He will offer an immediate ceasefire on that basis. Trump, for his part, will offer cessation of delivery of all long-range offensive weapons to the Kiev regime.
Putin will also want NATO or USA (with its veto power) to guarantee no NATO membership to the Kiev regime
Putin has cards to play. The Kiev regime is running out of soldiers, and in terms of its functioning as a “state” and economy is running on empty. Without Western aid, not only would the front crumble but also the whole Ukrainian economy and society.
I think that Trump will want a clean break, a clean clear “contract”. Putin might agree, if the terms are right. Trump also wants to stop having to supply arms, ammunition, money etc to Kiev.
Putin might be willing to have an armistice on that basis. Of course, Russia will keep all the territory it has now occupied– Donetsk, Lugansk, Crimea etc.
The Kiev regime cannot win in the sense of taking back the occupied territories, it cannot win in the sense of destroying the Russian army in the field, it cannot win in the sense of conquering Russia, or European Russia. Its best hope is to keep the areas of Ukraine it still holds.
On the above basis, an armistice is possible.
You are right of course to say that Putin cannot be seen to be weak. Historically, Russians have tolerated harsh rulers but never weak ones.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very good analysis of the Russo-Ukranian situation. I never trusted nor liked Putin; he is a cynical bastard who made a clever but sinister cocktail of nationalism, patriotism and bolshevism; in other words: neo-stalinism. So far that has worked quite well for him and his cronies.
Having said that, and Ian has made the same point several times here, in a similar situation, Stalin would have immediately sacked or executed several of his generals and would not have doubted to reduce Kiev to a pile of rubble.
Obviously, the Russian soldiers are poorly trained, and their officers must be fairly mediocre because their performance against a very weak enemy whose morale has collapsed is really dismal. The Ukrainian army is in a very similar state to the German army at the end of 1944. There are almost no veterans left, lots of inexperienced recruits, and extremely short of fuel and ammunition.
LikeLiked by 1 person