On this day a year ago
We are constantly fed an NWO/ZOG msm narrative about how “Ukraine” (the Kiev regime) is “defeating Russia”. Is it true?
What would “Ukraine defeating Russia” look like, ultimately? Presumably, in that scenario, all Russian forces would be forced to leave behind not only the pre-2022 borders of Ukraine but also the Crimea, the population of which is at least 85% Russian and only a few percent Ukrainian now (there are also Crimean Tatars and others).
So, in that scenario, Russia would have been driven back into its own unargued territory, and kept there by Ukrainian/Kiev-regime military might. Is there any logic at all to that?
Russia is, of course, famously the largest country in the world, over six and a half million square miles, so about 72 times the size of the whole of the UK, and 29 times the size of Ukraine (even including Crimea and the Donbass). A country which covers one-eighth of the landmass of the entire planet.
Russia has a population of over 144 million (147 million if Crimea is included); Ukraine had 41 million people (excluding Crimea) in 2021, before the Russian invasion or incursion, but about 20% of the population of Ukraine (I suspect the relatively affluent layer) has fled beyond Ukraine, so the real population, at present, is perhaps 30 million.
Russia has, therefore, almost five times the population of Ukraine.
Russia’s economy may not be booming, now that Western (NWO/ZOG) sanctions have hit hard, but it is still functioning. Russia is getting huge amounts from oil and gas (and mineral) sales, and has, of course, no problem with generating electricity. Russia’s domestic agriculture has actually been stimulated by the Western sanctions which prohibit import and export.
Compare that to Ukraine— it has very limited sources of fuel of all kinds, its electricity generating and distribution capacity is being smashed, possibly beyond easy repair, its industry is scarcely operational, and its agriculture is unable to export easily.
Even before the invasion/incursion of 2022, Wikipedia noted that “Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe by nominal GDP per capita.”
The only material advantage that Ukraine has is that the Kiev regime is in receipt of enormous amounts of Western aid: arms, ammunition, military transport, food, clothing, medical supplies, and money.
There is no suggestion that Ukrainian forces can either invade or destroy Russian territory or cities. There can, likewise, be no suggestion that Ukrainian forces will actually topple Putin or the existing Russian Government (unless obliquely— e.g. should a coup d’etat take place).
The most that the Ukrainian forces can do, the peak of their realistic ambition, would be to expel all Russian forces from the pre-2014 Ukrainian borders, and then dig in, in effect.
Russia’s war aims have never been openly or clearly expressed in a manner that makes any sense, but part of them would be the necessity to demilitarize Ukraine, something that is now impossible without Russian control over the bulk of the territory, including Kiev.
Under other circumstances, Russia might now be sitting on the entire eastern half of Ukraine (ie Ukraine east of the Dnieper), but “we are where we are”, in the tiresome phrase.
As I predicted would happen on the blog months ago, Russian forces have recently been trying to think outside the box by applying “oblique warfare”, targeting the electricity production and generating system deep inside Ukraine, using missiles and drones.
While the Kiev-regime forces have supposedly been downing most of the attacking missiles, the ones that are getting through have been smashing the electrical system of Ukraine to pieces. What next? Possibly the railway network.
Russia is said to be mobilizing more troops, possibly with the idea of a mass assault on Kiev next summer.
Unless a peace treaty or armistice can be agreed and executed, the war can only escalate. However, Russia can only “win” this ghastly mess of a war by taking Kiev and toppling the present Kiev regime.
The “Jack Monroe”/”Bootstrap Cook” story rolls on
See also: https://tattle.life/wiki/jack-monroe/. Very eye-opening. One could even call it “devastating”.
Hard to see why anyone not very feeble-minded would send money to “Jack Monroe” after reading that Tattle Life exposé . Surprising, therefore, to see that no fewer than 647 utter mugs are still sending her £3.50-£44 monthly, a total of between £2,265 and £28,468, each and every month. “A nice little earner“, in the estuary argot, even if the actual total amount sent is nearer to —at a guess— maybe £6,000 or £7,000 a month rather than the maximum. Probably taxfree as well.
I have no idea whether the Essex Police, Metropolitan Police, trading standards officers, or fundraising regulators are “on the case” or not. If not, though, why not?
From the newspapers
“The composer of Jerusalem has been effectively ‘cancelled’ by the Royal College of Music (RCM) because his views on race a century ago are unacceptably offensive to today’s woke students, The Mail on Sunday understands.“
There will be a real race/culture/religion war somewhere down the line.
Peckham Rye Park, by Peckham Rye where William Blake supposedly saw an angel in a tree about 200 or so years ago [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Blake]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peckham_Rye]
I have also been there (in the 1980s). Just as well that Blake and I do not walk around that part of London now; we might get stabbed by some untermensch, almost certainly non-white.
I recall having a beer at the Clock House pub once, in the late 1980s.
Peter Hitchens’ column is worth publishing in full:
“What a twisted society we have become. We stir up wars in other people’s countries and praise ourselves for doing it.
But there is no political reward for protecting our own people against crime and disorder on their streets and in their homes. It is no longer clear if anyone is governing the country at all, so busy are we putting other nations to rights.
Burglaries go unprevented, uninvestigated and unpunished, in colossal numbers. Our capital city seethes with uncontrolled knife crime and stinks of marijuana.
Christmas brings news of terrible ultra-violent crimes in supposedly peaceful suburban areas. Migrants stride boldly ashore in unknown numbers. We pay heavy taxes for pitiful services, cratered roads and a health system that is the envy of nobody.
Yet, nothing happens about all this. The surest way to gain praise in politics is to make simple-minded statements about a crisis abroad and demand that we send bombs and shells to some strife-torn state, or actually bomb it ourselves.
The idea that such things are often complicated and dangerous, and may do harm, has faded from view. When Prime Minister Anthony Eden dragged us into his disastrous attack on Egypt in 1956, the entire country was bitterly divided. And rightly so. The archives, when they were opened, showed that the adventure was based on lies, futile and doomed.
When the USA sank up to its waist in the bloody mud of Vietnam in the 1960s, the whole world was at odds. Once again, now that the truth is revealed, we know that thousands of brave men died, and many more thousands of innocent civilians were killed, because of a mistake.
But since the Blair revolution of 1997, pious, allegedly virtuous foreign crusades have come back into fashion. Criticising them gets you into trouble. There is only one permitted view. Few go back to find out how things actually went.
The Kosovo episode, for instance, did not bring paradise to that part of the world. Nor did the Iraq invasion. I know most people now pretend to have been against it at the time but as one who actually was against it at the time, I can assure you that they are mistaken. It had wide support. The same goes for the daft adventures in Afghanistan and Libya.
In fact, the last three did so much harm that it will never be measured. Together they began the era of mass migration from the Middle East and Africa to Western Europe. This is probably the biggest event in human history since the First World War, and perhaps bigger.
How can we do all this stamping about in foreign countries when we are so bad at governing our own and also not very strong? Our country doesn’t work properly. You can’t even see a doctor. The police are equally invisible. Our Army is as tiny as our debts are huge. Our grandest new warship, the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales, has broken down. Even when it works, we have to borrow aircraft from the Americans to fly off it.
None of this will be properly discussed at the rapidly approaching General Election and nobody will stand in that poll who prefers reforming Britain to foreign policy fantasy abroad. Why do we put up with it?“
My rhetorical answer to Hitchens’ rhetorical question? This:
“The British/English people do not rebel against all of the above, not yet anyway, because they are bombarded with propaganda brainwashing 24/7, because few have either the independence of thought, or the (real) education, to stand against the tide, and because the “plebs” think that all that matters, or that the main matter of importance, is whether the “England” sports teams (which are now largely black or brown anyway) win some meaningless game, match, or tournament somewhere or other in the world.”
That, and because those in political life, those of great wealth, those in the mainstream media, who should all be protecting the people, are exactly those who, from malice, evil, or just sheer inability and lack of basic competence (as with “Boris”-idiot, Liz Truss, Woollyhead Trussbanger —Kwasi Kwarteng— etc), are encouraging migration-invasion of this country, are letting standards and services slide, and are preventing —by ever more repressive laws— even obviously justified criticism from being made. They are, in effect, signed up to the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan.”
[the odd link immediately above now seems to be the only one for the interesting Western Spring article].
Incidentally, I see that the Daily Mail/Mail on Sunday is now, yet again, refusing to allow its readers to comment on Hitchens’ column, no doubt afraid that the readers will leave comments hostile to mass immigration, migration-invasion, “intervention” in foreign wars or countries, or even (could it be?) comments hostile to the Zelensky Jew-Zionist regime in Kiev…
More tweets seen
Ha ha! Brilliant! Goed gedaan!
Interesting. I only saw that tweet today.
There are also other areas of society where there is a need for equity and justice.
Undeclared social nationalists in the right places, e.g. within the legal or “justice” system, could do a lot of good.