A good piece, and one of your best. But then it mirrors my own views so I would think that!
I would not add much, except to say that I doubt Russia represents a military threat to the EU/UK - or at least as it is commonly portrayed ie hordes of asiatics rampaging across the North European plain with snow on their boots. No, I think any Russian military threat resides in an asymmetrical ability with long/intermediate range missiles plus "terrorist" action or support of those who do not like western values - whatever they may be these days. And with UK and French and maybe soon German attacks (aka Storm Shadows etc) this might come sooner than is percieved. [complicated by USA ISR]
Though in the medium to long term, I suspect Russia will take its revenge cold. Europe will be subject to an unimaginable level of diplomatic and economic isolation and pressure, BRICS dominated, but also by most of the world. It takes a special sort of genius to drive Russia and China together, along with India and others. And I don't think the US cares about Europe anymore. Its only purposes now are to buy expensive US energy and waste its resources distracting Russia.
The European political classes are a classic example of the Peter Principle - and writ large.
And I would say the same thing about the "leaders" in the USA, which has a uniquely disfunctional system of governance - internally and as it affects the rest of the world.
Whatever. I have little confidence that the West will be able to take the correct decisions, or even frame the problems in a a suitable frame of reference.
"I would not add much, except to say that I doubt Russia represents a military threat to the EU/UK - or at least as it is commonly portrayed ie hordes of asiatics rampaging across the North European plain with snow on their boots. "
The whole thing raises the question of *why* Russia would want to go on a far-flung war of conquest, that, the moment europeans (biggest metrosexual weenies on the planet!) let their guards down, Russian hordes will descend upon Denmark, pillaging, marauding and stealing peoples' pronouns.
Of course, Russian reluctance to fight has only caused those euroweenies to smell blood. At least as long as they still are convinced that, once push comes to shove, they can drag the Americans in to do any actual fighting for them.
"Russian hordes will descend upon Denmark, pillaging, marauding and stealing peoples' pronouns."
OK, that made me laugh, and not for the usual reason of absurd 'woke' pronouns but that Russia would ever want to add more of them, given that there's already far too many in their language. See if you don't agree!
I've studied a few languages and have yet to find one with such a convoluted grammar as Russian. They must hold the world's record for pronouns, and as a Russian friend once said to me, in western schools kids hate mathematics. In Russia, they hate grammar.
Polish grammar is worse. FWIW, I understand that the hardest languages for westerners to learn well are Turkish and Arabic languages, in part because in those cultures, speaking in straight sentences is the sign of a simple mind.
Rather than "Please pour me a beer." you get "The yellow nectar foamy, Urquell fruit of Pilsen which makes me pee too much, lay out for me!"
Not to mention these languages as actually spoken on a daily basis include a lot of cultural references to poems everyone has read, movies everyone has seen, the Koran, to songs, etc.. If you didn't grow up in that culture, a lot of those references would go screaming over your head. It would be like if someone who never saw a Star Wars movie were to go to a Star Wars fan convention and try and make sense of things. "What is a 'Jedi' and why the hell does everyone here keep talking about 'The Force'?"
You're exaggerating. You just need to understand how the language works, and everything will work out. There is nothing particularly difficult in the Russian language. Once in Beijing, I saw a young Chinese student girl who was studying Russian. Russian Russian she spoke better than the Russians themselves.
Exaggerating? Seriously? 6 cases, where everything gets inflected, including proper names? I've studied French, Spanish, Japanese and Punjabi. Grammatically all are easier. From a written perspective only Japanese is more complicated because of the Chinese characters, Gurmukhi being just a bit harder to learn than Cyrillic.
One Chinese girl? This is your argument? I saw a couple of Chinese girls 8 and 10 on YouTube playing Vivaldi's 4 seasons. That doesn't mean playing the violin is easy. Russians make grammatical errors all the time, and I'm guessing you do too if you're not a native speaker.
I am a native speaker of Russian and I almost never make mistakes. Only typos. My eldest son doesn't make mistakes at all. He has innate literacy. There's nothing particularly difficult about it.
I gave the Chinese woman just as a curious example.
Hilarious. First you tell me I'm exaggerating, something you couldn't possibly know because you've never met me, and it's all subjective anyway. What one person finds difficult another finds easy. Then you tell me you're a native speaker, so obviously you'd have no difficulty. It's funny actually. Most Russians I've met are pleased that someone bothers to learn their language because they know how difficult it can be. Anyway, I don't believe in arguing for it's own sake, so I'll just leave it at that.
It is clear what the Russians will do. Alexander 1 reached Paris. A battery of 12 guns opened fire, and the Parisians, after two volleys, sent parliamentarians to him. A couple of hours later, Napoleon said goodbye to the old guard. Lol
A few days ago, I was watching a French TV news chanel. One which prides itself on an unwavering support to Ukraine (whatever it means) and which, I believe, represents somehow the official view. Or at least what decent people should think on the matter.
So, as the story goes, the pundits of the day, the usual mix of retired generals, self-appointed geopolitical experts and Ukrainian refugees on a mission, were talking about the forthcoming election of Merz as German Chancellor. And all the good things it might mean for Ukraine.
And thus, one of them was rejoicing on the idea that Germany might finally agree to supply the famous and (supposedly) all-powerful Taurus missile. And, this time, that could allow the Crimea bridge to be finally destroyed.
Of course none of them mentioned that firing these missiles could only be done by heavily involving German personal at all stages of the process, with all the risks of escalation it could entail (if not vetoed by the US anyway).
But one of them still went all the way to mention that destroying the bridge would probably not change so much the dire situation on the front line.
To which a third one immediately replied that it was sadly true. But that was not the point as it would nonetheless deeply humiliate Putin.
Doesn't that sum up the whole European situation in a few sentences?
This is an accurate description of the entire European policy. Before the advent of the Internet, due to the inability to read the European press, many people in Russia thought that Europeans were much smarter.
Larry Johnson has listed with full details all the NATO/US military exercises on the borders of Russia over the last 30 years. If NATO did not want a war it has a funny way of showing it.
Russia is not the Soviet Union. It is still an enormous country with vast resources and if it came to a final nuclear showdown its likely the last person standing would be Russian rather than American. However Russia has a population of 150m far lower than the USSR, and Putin knows that he cannot afford to lose millions of young men in a war if the country is to prosper. That is why he honestly wants to be left alone. He is no Stalin. I have followed his every speech and most of his working meetings published by the excellent Karl Sanchez. He spends on overwhelming amount of time planning and supervising the social and economic aspects of his country, as it should be of course.
This is looked at as a weakness by his enemies. And why are they enemies. Because he stopped the financiers of the West rescuing their debt ridden system pillaging those vast resources. Add in a little 19th century hangover from the UK and to some extent France and of course the financiers storm troopers, the neocons in Washington.
But if you want to know who is really calling the shots look no further than the major shareholders of the US Federal Reserve who sit prettily in Europe and principally in the City of London. They never really wanted to go to war with the original Nazis now they have a new set working for them in the borderlands.
I agree. I’m amazed that this author seems to believe that Russia wants to take over Europe, and poor NATO is simply a friendly but sick puppy, all lovable. Matt Ehret, Scott Ritter, Chas Freeman, Alistair Crooke and many others wait to educate.
Mike, aurelien did not say the Russians wants to take over Europe. He did say that, being the sole dominant military power on the continent, they will be dictating the terms of agreements.
Thanks for this. Thought provoking as ever. I lack the guts to write articles such as this. I would react far more directly to people who snipe in the comments while consuming the free content that you graciously provide.
Been there, done that. And I am talking about formally intelligent academic people here. But I don't think that big dose of reality will come. Once this war is over, provided a rump-Ukraine remains, they will salve their conscience by telling themselves that Ukraine has truly won, because there's still a state called Ukraine, reduced as it may be, and really they killed a gazillion of Russians. And I doubt that narrative will die before I do, and I am no THAT old.
Oh, how I wish this was not so true and accurate as it is. But here we are, clamoring that also women need to be drafted to make the devastation of the coming crusade against Russia complete. We europeans are obviously intent on offing ourselves just to spite Russia, and including women in the military ensures that the nations that will be left over will not be european. I mean, I doubt the immigrants (especially female) will join the army to punish Russia and defend the west. After west having sponsored all the war that made their previous home uninhabitable? Poetic justice seems to prevail: what you do unto others and all that. If it was not for actual lives lost, the behaviour of the political class would be funny comedy. Now it is a tragedy still in progress. No end in sight, only escalating stupidity.
If Europe is to have any hope of military security, perhaps from Russia but more likely from each other, then it should follow the example of the Swiss and the assorted militia of West Asia. Lightly armed and universally trained citizens cannot stop armoured columns from invading one’s country but they can make it too expensive to occupy. Such a practice is never a threat to neighbouring countries but a clear danger to any of malign intent.
While affordable compared to any heavily armed military, it seems very unlikely that any European elite would consider it as an armed population is always a threat to the ruling class, especially a corrupt, entitled, senile one, and the current lot are afraid to have their people armed with pens, let alone rifles.
By the way, I just remembered that the Russians have never defeated the British in their history. In the sense that they were not defeated like the Germans or the French. So the British are next. This is the law of history. You will enjoy this process in London. And Paris will be fun, even though it's already a repeat of the plot.
It would be nice to see that, but I think Russia has more productive things which it will pursue instead, rather than wasting time on a dying (although still virulent) puppet.
I'd like to add that Europe's elite also clings on to the hope that things in Washington will go back to 'normal' under the next president.
We all know that this ain't gonna happen, but remember that most of Europe's decision making class is captured by American/Globalist interests and they can't think straight.
It is very much like being in a cult. And deprogramming cultists is notoriously difficult to do.
"...the gratuitous self-mutilation that Europes ruling class has inflicted upon its citizens."
The overwhelming majority of said citizens were marching in lockstep with the ruling class, waving their anti Russia-Putin hate flags and collectively frothing at the mouth - F__k the citizens & the ruling class. They deserve each other.
Thank you, Aurelien, for this excellent essay. I would be interested in reading more on your impression of the American and European ruling elite, particularly the intersection of their plausible ignorance and probable bribery.
On the one hand, it seems that the American ruling elite understand nothing. "How can they possibly not know X when I know X?" I'm suspicious of the claims of ignorance in the face of obvious financial incentives for them to PRETEND they don't know or understand this or that. For example, how can they possibly believe that more weapons and $ to Ukraine would help Ukraine? Isn't it far more likely that these politicians promote spending on "defense" because "defense" is a euphemism for embezzlement of the nation's money?
If you've already addressed this, I'd love to be directed to your analysis. If you haven't dove into it and it's a topic worthy of exploration in your opinion, I'd be very eager to read your thoughts. I understand it's not a black/white issue.
So, do the American and European ruling elite promote claims and policies that are demonstrably false because they don't know better, or because they are bribed?
"But it’s already clear that the Trump administration sees some kind of detente with Russia as a higher priority than continuing an un-winnable war in Ukraine."
This assumes facts not in evidence. The United States will only escalate, as Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
The reason that the hot war was unlikely from 1945-1991 was that the West genuinely feared the Soviet Union. Russian dithering and indecision have caused the West to lose all fear of Russia.
Remember how Trump twice tried to leave Syria, only to cuck out both times on he promise of being able to loot Syria's (practically nonexistent) oil?
Of course, anyone with the brains Gog gave a six week old kitten knew that Syria's actual recoverable oil is a rounding error. Of course, those who sold the cockamamie scheme to Trump knew that, too.
Well, OK -- I take "Ukraine, treasure trove of mineral wealth!" to be more of the same foolishness, but I'm betting it won't lead to much material assistance to Zelensky et al.
Insightful piece. Poking the Bear further would be very mis-guided especially as China backs the Bear (for now), and any military escalation would end very badly for Europe. But then maybe that is the sick plan of the no-borders globalists to end the west as a step in their reset - EU is just a step to one world government. Orban gets it!
Thank you greatly again. With each article on this subject, my sense of foreboding grows. No doubt Russia will turn the screw on energy supplies to the West, likely with blackmail involved - "lift sanctions and we'll supply more, maybe cut the price". Otherwise we have have to get by on irregular renewables backed up by imported LNG, as consumers pay more and more and industry evaporates. I'd suggest preparing for many years, maybe decades of social, economic and political turmoil.
Russia could impose sanctions on the west (LNG, oil, processed nuclear fuel rods, etc.). They could elect to require reparations from the west to rebuild the area of Ukraine that becomes under their own permanent control. They could elect to specify that members of the EU are not eligible to join BRICs.
A good piece, and one of your best. But then it mirrors my own views so I would think that!
I would not add much, except to say that I doubt Russia represents a military threat to the EU/UK - or at least as it is commonly portrayed ie hordes of asiatics rampaging across the North European plain with snow on their boots. No, I think any Russian military threat resides in an asymmetrical ability with long/intermediate range missiles plus "terrorist" action or support of those who do not like western values - whatever they may be these days. And with UK and French and maybe soon German attacks (aka Storm Shadows etc) this might come sooner than is percieved. [complicated by USA ISR]
Though in the medium to long term, I suspect Russia will take its revenge cold. Europe will be subject to an unimaginable level of diplomatic and economic isolation and pressure, BRICS dominated, but also by most of the world. It takes a special sort of genius to drive Russia and China together, along with India and others. And I don't think the US cares about Europe anymore. Its only purposes now are to buy expensive US energy and waste its resources distracting Russia.
The European political classes are a classic example of the Peter Principle - and writ large.
And I would say the same thing about the "leaders" in the USA, which has a uniquely disfunctional system of governance - internally and as it affects the rest of the world.
Whatever. I have little confidence that the West will be able to take the correct decisions, or even frame the problems in a a suitable frame of reference.
"I would not add much, except to say that I doubt Russia represents a military threat to the EU/UK - or at least as it is commonly portrayed ie hordes of asiatics rampaging across the North European plain with snow on their boots. "
The whole thing raises the question of *why* Russia would want to go on a far-flung war of conquest, that, the moment europeans (biggest metrosexual weenies on the planet!) let their guards down, Russian hordes will descend upon Denmark, pillaging, marauding and stealing peoples' pronouns.
Of course, Russian reluctance to fight has only caused those euroweenies to smell blood. At least as long as they still are convinced that, once push comes to shove, they can drag the Americans in to do any actual fighting for them.
"Russian hordes will descend upon Denmark, pillaging, marauding and stealing peoples' pronouns."
OK, that made me laugh, and not for the usual reason of absurd 'woke' pronouns but that Russia would ever want to add more of them, given that there's already far too many in their language. See if you don't agree!
https://www.russianlessons.net/grammar/pronouns.php
I've studied a few languages and have yet to find one with such a convoluted grammar as Russian. They must hold the world's record for pronouns, and as a Russian friend once said to me, in western schools kids hate mathematics. In Russia, they hate grammar.
Polish grammar is worse. FWIW, I understand that the hardest languages for westerners to learn well are Turkish and Arabic languages, in part because in those cultures, speaking in straight sentences is the sign of a simple mind.
Rather than "Please pour me a beer." you get "The yellow nectar foamy, Urquell fruit of Pilsen which makes me pee too much, lay out for me!"
Not to mention these languages as actually spoken on a daily basis include a lot of cultural references to poems everyone has read, movies everyone has seen, the Koran, to songs, etc.. If you didn't grow up in that culture, a lot of those references would go screaming over your head. It would be like if someone who never saw a Star Wars movie were to go to a Star Wars fan convention and try and make sense of things. "What is a 'Jedi' and why the hell does everyone here keep talking about 'The Force'?"
I've never attempted Polish so I'll take your word for it. Russian is bad enough.
You're exaggerating. You just need to understand how the language works, and everything will work out. There is nothing particularly difficult in the Russian language. Once in Beijing, I saw a young Chinese student girl who was studying Russian. Russian Russian she spoke better than the Russians themselves.
Exaggerating? Seriously? 6 cases, where everything gets inflected, including proper names? I've studied French, Spanish, Japanese and Punjabi. Grammatically all are easier. From a written perspective only Japanese is more complicated because of the Chinese characters, Gurmukhi being just a bit harder to learn than Cyrillic.
One Chinese girl? This is your argument? I saw a couple of Chinese girls 8 and 10 on YouTube playing Vivaldi's 4 seasons. That doesn't mean playing the violin is easy. Russians make grammatical errors all the time, and I'm guessing you do too if you're not a native speaker.
I am a native speaker of Russian and I almost never make mistakes. Only typos. My eldest son doesn't make mistakes at all. He has innate literacy. There's nothing particularly difficult about it.
I gave the Chinese woman just as a curious example.
Hilarious. First you tell me I'm exaggerating, something you couldn't possibly know because you've never met me, and it's all subjective anyway. What one person finds difficult another finds easy. Then you tell me you're a native speaker, so obviously you'd have no difficulty. It's funny actually. Most Russians I've met are pleased that someone bothers to learn their language because they know how difficult it can be. Anyway, I don't believe in arguing for it's own sake, so I'll just leave it at that.
It is clear what the Russians will do. Alexander 1 reached Paris. A battery of 12 guns opened fire, and the Parisians, after two volleys, sent parliamentarians to him. A couple of hours later, Napoleon said goodbye to the old guard. Lol
https://schoolofwar.substack.com/p/ep-194-mark-moyar-on-the-vietnam
Just read this. But possibly some interesting parallels with Ukraine - at least in terms of thought processes.
A few days ago, I was watching a French TV news chanel. One which prides itself on an unwavering support to Ukraine (whatever it means) and which, I believe, represents somehow the official view. Or at least what decent people should think on the matter.
So, as the story goes, the pundits of the day, the usual mix of retired generals, self-appointed geopolitical experts and Ukrainian refugees on a mission, were talking about the forthcoming election of Merz as German Chancellor. And all the good things it might mean for Ukraine.
And thus, one of them was rejoicing on the idea that Germany might finally agree to supply the famous and (supposedly) all-powerful Taurus missile. And, this time, that could allow the Crimea bridge to be finally destroyed.
Of course none of them mentioned that firing these missiles could only be done by heavily involving German personal at all stages of the process, with all the risks of escalation it could entail (if not vetoed by the US anyway).
But one of them still went all the way to mention that destroying the bridge would probably not change so much the dire situation on the front line.
To which a third one immediately replied that it was sadly true. But that was not the point as it would nonetheless deeply humiliate Putin.
Doesn't that sum up the whole European situation in a few sentences?
This is an accurate description of the entire European policy. Before the advent of the Internet, due to the inability to read the European press, many people in Russia thought that Europeans were much smarter.
Larry Johnson has listed with full details all the NATO/US military exercises on the borders of Russia over the last 30 years. If NATO did not want a war it has a funny way of showing it.
Russia is not the Soviet Union. It is still an enormous country with vast resources and if it came to a final nuclear showdown its likely the last person standing would be Russian rather than American. However Russia has a population of 150m far lower than the USSR, and Putin knows that he cannot afford to lose millions of young men in a war if the country is to prosper. That is why he honestly wants to be left alone. He is no Stalin. I have followed his every speech and most of his working meetings published by the excellent Karl Sanchez. He spends on overwhelming amount of time planning and supervising the social and economic aspects of his country, as it should be of course.
This is looked at as a weakness by his enemies. And why are they enemies. Because he stopped the financiers of the West rescuing their debt ridden system pillaging those vast resources. Add in a little 19th century hangover from the UK and to some extent France and of course the financiers storm troopers, the neocons in Washington.
But if you want to know who is really calling the shots look no further than the major shareholders of the US Federal Reserve who sit prettily in Europe and principally in the City of London. They never really wanted to go to war with the original Nazis now they have a new set working for them in the borderlands.
I agree. I’m amazed that this author seems to believe that Russia wants to take over Europe, and poor NATO is simply a friendly but sick puppy, all lovable. Matt Ehret, Scott Ritter, Chas Freeman, Alistair Crooke and many others wait to educate.
Mike, aurelien did not say the Russians wants to take over Europe. He did say that, being the sole dominant military power on the continent, they will be dictating the terms of agreements.
Thanks for this. Thought provoking as ever. I lack the guts to write articles such as this. I would react far more directly to people who snipe in the comments while consuming the free content that you graciously provide.
You would rather we all just uncritically agreed with every word? I'm sure even Aurelian as the author would not be comfortable with that.
Brilliant. Your last three paragraphs should be posted all over the walls of European cities.
Almost all my friends in Europe are in complete denial. Any attempt to show them a glimpse of reality is met with accusations of being a Putin lover.
Unfortunately, they are going to get a big dose of reality shoved down their throats.
Been there, done that. And I am talking about formally intelligent academic people here. But I don't think that big dose of reality will come. Once this war is over, provided a rump-Ukraine remains, they will salve their conscience by telling themselves that Ukraine has truly won, because there's still a state called Ukraine, reduced as it may be, and really they killed a gazillion of Russians. And I doubt that narrative will die before I do, and I am no THAT old.
Oh, how I wish this was not so true and accurate as it is. But here we are, clamoring that also women need to be drafted to make the devastation of the coming crusade against Russia complete. We europeans are obviously intent on offing ourselves just to spite Russia, and including women in the military ensures that the nations that will be left over will not be european. I mean, I doubt the immigrants (especially female) will join the army to punish Russia and defend the west. After west having sponsored all the war that made their previous home uninhabitable? Poetic justice seems to prevail: what you do unto others and all that. If it was not for actual lives lost, the behaviour of the political class would be funny comedy. Now it is a tragedy still in progress. No end in sight, only escalating stupidity.
If Europe is to have any hope of military security, perhaps from Russia but more likely from each other, then it should follow the example of the Swiss and the assorted militia of West Asia. Lightly armed and universally trained citizens cannot stop armoured columns from invading one’s country but they can make it too expensive to occupy. Such a practice is never a threat to neighbouring countries but a clear danger to any of malign intent.
While affordable compared to any heavily armed military, it seems very unlikely that any European elite would consider it as an armed population is always a threat to the ruling class, especially a corrupt, entitled, senile one, and the current lot are afraid to have their people armed with pens, let alone rifles.
By the way, I just remembered that the Russians have never defeated the British in their history. In the sense that they were not defeated like the Germans or the French. So the British are next. This is the law of history. You will enjoy this process in London. And Paris will be fun, even though it's already a repeat of the plot.
It would be nice to see that, but I think Russia has more productive things which it will pursue instead, rather than wasting time on a dying (although still virulent) puppet.
British missiles are attacking Russian territory again. Russians are not such kind people to ignore it. It's already impossible to ignore it.
Excellent piece - as usual.
I'd like to add that Europe's elite also clings on to the hope that things in Washington will go back to 'normal' under the next president.
We all know that this ain't gonna happen, but remember that most of Europe's decision making class is captured by American/Globalist interests and they can't think straight.
It is very much like being in a cult. And deprogramming cultists is notoriously difficult to do.
Europe's leaders know full well that they need not wait for Trump to go, he is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
They will get the war on Russia that they so crave, it just will take a little more time and groveling than they might have originally hoped for.
"...the gratuitous self-mutilation that Europes ruling class has inflicted upon its citizens."
The overwhelming majority of said citizens were marching in lockstep with the ruling class, waving their anti Russia-Putin hate flags and collectively frothing at the mouth - F__k the citizens & the ruling class. They deserve each other.
Thank you, Aurelien, for this excellent essay. I would be interested in reading more on your impression of the American and European ruling elite, particularly the intersection of their plausible ignorance and probable bribery.
On the one hand, it seems that the American ruling elite understand nothing. "How can they possibly not know X when I know X?" I'm suspicious of the claims of ignorance in the face of obvious financial incentives for them to PRETEND they don't know or understand this or that. For example, how can they possibly believe that more weapons and $ to Ukraine would help Ukraine? Isn't it far more likely that these politicians promote spending on "defense" because "defense" is a euphemism for embezzlement of the nation's money?
If you've already addressed this, I'd love to be directed to your analysis. If you haven't dove into it and it's a topic worthy of exploration in your opinion, I'd be very eager to read your thoughts. I understand it's not a black/white issue.
So, do the American and European ruling elite promote claims and policies that are demonstrably false because they don't know better, or because they are bribed?
"But it’s already clear that the Trump administration sees some kind of detente with Russia as a higher priority than continuing an un-winnable war in Ukraine."
This assumes facts not in evidence. The United States will only escalate, as Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
The reason that the hot war was unlikely from 1945-1991 was that the West genuinely feared the Soviet Union. Russian dithering and indecision have caused the West to lose all fear of Russia.
You keep saying this sort of thing -- yet where is the US "escalation"? I cannot see it ...
Remember when the West hesitated to even send lethal aid to Ukraine, lest WWIII ensue?
Of course. I'm just not convinced that Trump has the patience for the endless Biden-style dragging out of this forever. I guess we'll know eventually.
Remember how Trump twice tried to leave Syria, only to cuck out both times on he promise of being able to loot Syria's (practically nonexistent) oil?
Of course, anyone with the brains Gog gave a six week old kitten knew that Syria's actual recoverable oil is a rounding error. Of course, those who sold the cockamamie scheme to Trump knew that, too.
It doesn't matter. Trump took the bait.
Well, OK -- I take "Ukraine, treasure trove of mineral wealth!" to be more of the same foolishness, but I'm betting it won't lead to much material assistance to Zelensky et al.
Sure it will, the whole point of this foolishness is to get Trump stuck in let The Sunk Cost Fallacy do the rest.
You have a point.
Another great piece.
Insightful piece. Poking the Bear further would be very mis-guided especially as China backs the Bear (for now), and any military escalation would end very badly for Europe. But then maybe that is the sick plan of the no-borders globalists to end the west as a step in their reset - EU is just a step to one world government. Orban gets it!
Italian translation, here:
"Il giorno dopo.
E il giorno dopo ancora."
https://trying2understandw.blogspot.com/2025/05/il-giorno-dopo-e-il-giorno-dopo-ancora.html
Thank you greatly again. With each article on this subject, my sense of foreboding grows. No doubt Russia will turn the screw on energy supplies to the West, likely with blackmail involved - "lift sanctions and we'll supply more, maybe cut the price". Otherwise we have have to get by on irregular renewables backed up by imported LNG, as consumers pay more and more and industry evaporates. I'd suggest preparing for many years, maybe decades of social, economic and political turmoil.
Russia could impose sanctions on the west (LNG, oil, processed nuclear fuel rods, etc.). They could elect to require reparations from the west to rebuild the area of Ukraine that becomes under their own permanent control. They could elect to specify that members of the EU are not eligible to join BRICs.