The West and Europe have gone spiritually downhill since 1991, since the soviet threat was the only thing that put some sense into their heads .
For me who as a teenager believed in the european unification dream , witnessing the increasing foolishness that took hold of the european elites in the last 20 years has been a heartbreaker .
Professor Linus Hagström at the Swedish Defense University, a fierce critic of EU and Swedish foreign policy, thinks it's about identity politics, not pragmatism or interests. Europeans (and Americans) believe themselves to be GOOD because they are white. And that's all of it. So they must stand together. And, if necessary, build up a wall against the rest of the world.
And, apparently, stick their heads into the ground.
Little do they realise, but they are not 'white' at all. Western Caucasians seem to range to anything from a pasty pink through shades of mauve to a deep purple, but white? No. (Some of these shades are deeply unattractive, especially when the wearer is annoyed). 😡
So I think this 'white' generalisation needs to be retired, along with its connotations of purity and goodness.
A great article, but having looked at British rearmament in the 1930's I'd make a couple of observations. In the 1930s it is true that the British military modernised, but also that they inherited in 1918 (less than 20 years before) enough equipment from WW1 to equip c 100 divisions, and also the RN was the largest Navy in the world. Even so in 1930/31 defence spend reached a nadir of 2.7% of GDP, and even in the lean years if the mid-1930s was 3.2%. Defence spending only really accellerated after Munich. Compare this with the hot air of today, and at least the British have effectively demilitarised, partly though the so-called peace dividend since 1991, and latterly by stuff been blown to pieces in Ukraine. Most if not all other European nations too, and even the mighty USA is sufferring critcal shortages (eg AA missiles). And the industrial and technological capacity has - if not vanished - been much reduced. Let's not even get into the downgrading of tradtional masculine martial values. If you were intending to "re-arm", I wouldn't start from here...
I just hope that the French ( I don't think the UK is independent enough to participate) haven't found a way of permanently ending the whole affair for all of us for good. By smuggling nuclear components for Ukraine to assemble and deliver on a 'Ukrainian' branded missile.
Combining the signal that EU/Britain has provided Ukraine with nuclear warheads along with the recent successful penetration of Russian air defenses by the British designed (& mostly EU component sourced) "Flamingo" certainly would change Russian Federation priorities for deploying their best short & medium range air defense systems, AWAY from supplying Iran and TOWARDS their own borders & strategically vital facilities?
Here we go again: the european plan is fairly obvious - use Ukrainians to soak up Russian munitions and pick off Russia's friends, one by one, declare open season on ships carrying Russian cargo, destroy Russian infrastructure with impunity, get Kiev WMDs, etc..
When Russia tries to make peace, NATO "peacekeepers" rush in while Ukraine acts as outrageously as possible to provoke a Russian response whereupon the british and french run screaming "Article Five!" to the Americans.
You've been declaring a premature end to the war for how long now, but unless and until the european rulers pay a price, that end never will come.
Thank you again. So, supposing what you describe in the last few paragraphs does not happen in the three most important European countries - UK, France and Germany - which is by far the most likely outcome, what then? Will ordering various items of new military equipment more or less at random and frequently snarling impotently at Russia, actually make no difference or will it lead to some sort of calamity that could have been avoided?
Rather than being seen as an error by Russia, the invasion was seen (hopefully by most governments) as a blatant breach of international law. We don't really want countries to invade others because the current leaderships differ on opinions, strategies and policies. Putin, in any case, didn't achieve the quick victory (of total annexation) that he seemed to be aiming for. Instead, he achieved the opposite of one of his goals, an increase in neighbours which are members of Nato, instead of a reduction (indeed, an outright victory would also have resulted in more Nato neighbours). Since the first year of the war, very little extra territory has been won by Russia at, according to independent estimates, a disproportionate cost in terms of soldiers' lives lost. I've been reading, in blogs, of imminent Russian victory for the last 3 years but it is still fighting and still bombing civilians in another country. Regardless of whether one sees Russia as the ultimate victor, or whether one thinks Putin has outfoxed other leaders, the "special military operation" is a clear breach of international law and so may have put the final nail in the coffin of the old world order. Perhaps we'll see countries imposing their will more widely in future. Is that a good thing?
Surely the original Euro plan was quite clearly stated -- squeeze Russia via proxy Ukraine until unstable Russia fell apart and the City of London could step in and buy up the whole place on the cheap. (Presumably China was not going to take advantage of this putative Russian collapse faster & better than the Euros?). The question is -- What to do now that Euro plan has clearly failed?
The President Trump plan is clear -- kick Zelensky to the side, and re-establish normal commercial relations with Russia; sorry about all the unpleasantness! However, the Trump plan cannot work when it is directly opposed by Europe's "leaders" and many of the unrepresentative CongressScum in the US Congress. Maybe the real attrition is whether Trump or the deeply unpopular EuroScum "leaders" crumble first?
And let's not leave China out of this. Because of Japan's forceful support for Taiwan, China has just cut off essential components to Japanese companies involved in military manufacturing. Those Japanese companies use Chinese components in the sub-assemblies which are essential to European and US weapons, which are the only weapons that keep Zelensky in the fight. When re-armament becomes practicably impossible, European "leaders" and US CongressScum will need a way out of the situation in which they have trapped themselves (and us).
Oil, lets be clear , most oul is used to produce diesel , peteol is a by product , diesel is required for all sorts of engines in prticular aeroplanes and farm machinery i think about 70% of oil is used for diesel.The USA wants Venezuelas heavy oil so it can combine it with the USA,s own light shale oul to make diesel this combination would make USA the biggest supplier of diesel.
I think its all about money , the EU and UK were happy going along with increasing trade with Russia and China until the USA decided it was time to be belligerant they sensed a withdrawal by an increasing number of countries across the world from using the USA dollar to trade and decided as it always does that negotiation should be ignored in favour of heavy handed threats , tariffs , sanctions and military action.
Yes the USA do now recognise they cannot defeat Russia and China militarily especially if Russia and China team up with India and others to form BRICS so the USA have decided to tackle those countries in other ways , smaller countries and those close to USA will be threatened militarily but bigger foes will be attacked in other ways.
We hear a lot about how the USA destroyed the pipeline bringing cheap gas to EU and UK and how the USA then persuaded Ukraine to threaten Russia ( Ukraine joining NATO would threaten Russia by having USA missiles on the border of Ukraine Russia) and how the EU was then pressed into threatening Russia by USA withdrawing NATO funding , all of this has caused Russia to increase its spending hugely on defence which simultaneously reduces Russia,s ability to counteract the control USA has of global trade.
Job done for USA without going to war.
We do not hear how similarly China has had its trade with the EU and UK cut dramatically , virtually overnight amazon and others stopped selling goods produced in China and likewise China is having to dramatically increase its defense spending because of AUKUS this is similar to the threat of Ukraine joining NATO which is causing huge spending on arms by Russia , the Chinese are having to spend hugely on arms to ready themselves for the threat of nuclear submarines that Australia has agreed to have with the help of UK and USA , these subs will be based in Australia and will sail up and down the Sea of China along the coast of China.
I should probably mention Iran too , it is being threatened because of its strategic importance not just its coast on the straights of hormuz but its northern border on the Caspain Sea which is important for the planned direct road route from China to europe , the USA want to prevent such a road and are already active in persuading and threatening other countries that such a road would pass through such as Turkmenistan , Azerbaijan , Armenia.
The capital city of Iran is in the north close to the Caspian Sea and far from the straits of hormuz yes its not beyond the reach of the USA armada but the USA would not be able to conduct a prolonged offensive that way .
Anyway the picture is set , the USA wants control of global trade it wants to continue to control finance and the use of the USA dollar and it will use a combination of methods , attacking orher countries directly , getting other countries attacked by their neighbours using threats and bribes , tariffs , sanctions , oil,
So true. The West has gone stupid. And like all stupids, is blind to it.
"if you create impossible fantasy victory conditions and symbolically try to impose those on the Russians, then of course you can always claim that they have “lost.”"
The latest announcements from Kremlin, by Putin himself, is that Russian services think that the West (put there whoever, UK, France, CIA) is thinking to pass nuclear devices to Ukraine and present it as locally built as well as blowing up the Turkstream on the floor of the Black Sea, which is several times deeper than the Baltic Sea.
I am not sure what the west thinks, but I am convinced that the Russians will act in a very dramatic way if its territory is explicitly and directly attacked by western forces. No repeat of WWII for them. If London or Paris or Berlin have to go up in smoke under the mushroom cloud, so be it...
Let's take a step back and have a bit of a bird view. Basically you are asking Russia to behave likeke assholes, the way the West and US or Israeli behave, no? Maybe Russians do not have this mentality, maybe they didn't have the resources to start with, maybe is a political decision to not alienate the rest (majority) of the world, maybe a bit of all three. But I would not call it dithering and indecision.
Combining the signal that EU/Britain has provided Ukraine with nuclear warheads along with the recent successful penetration of Russian air defenses by the British designed (& mostly EU component sourced) "Flamingo" certainly would change Russian Federation priorities for deploying their best short & medium range air defense systems, AWAY from supplying Iran and TOWARDS their own borders & strategically vital facilities? USA/NATO wouldn't even need to give the Ukrainians such weapons, just "leak" that they had done so.
What Iranian need is radars, EWs, and maybe some ADs, as well as intelligence, IRS, and integration. Chinese can provide some as well. As far as I remember, it was the Iranians that supplied the Russians in the past couple of years.
AFAIK, Iran never supplied the Russian Federation with cutting edge air defense missiles, definitely hasn't supplied them with air defense RADARS & sensors- Quite the reverse, in fact.
There were lots of claims about cheap fixed wing drone weapons supplied by Iran to the Russian Federation in the earlier years of this war, however, lately the RF claims to have taken over production of improved versions of such weapons themselves.
The major effects of Flamingo as I see it will probably be diverting more air defense assets to protect important infrastructure farther back from the line of contact (that need also requires diverting those units from export to allied nations).
IRS I think has to do with intelligence via remote sensing and satellites. Yes Russians got at the beginning the Shahed drones which they adapted into Geran-1 and -2.
"In 2022, European governments believed that the Russians had committed a disastrous error in invading Ukraine, and celebrated this belief with champagne and canapés in the best hotel bars in Brussels."
Would you be kind enough to provide us with some evidence of this? From my memory, the reactions were quite different, in twofold ways. First, they communicated to the Ukranians they should give up as soon as possible. The head of Germany's Liberal Party has been quoted as saying this. Secondly, if they had any empathy whatsoever, they were shocked to the core that such an invasion could happen, in Europe, in 2022. They didn't believe the American intelligence at the time, and now they had pie on their faces.
Your little anecdote paints a nice picture of EU scoundrels rubbing their hands, but to me it sounds like a fabrication.
Yes, I had a similar thought. And reading the first few paragraphs, I was reminded of what was written a bit earlier: "the process of thinking starts at the end, from a predetermined conclusions, and works forwards, flailing around in the search for evidence to support the imposed conclusions from which you began."
I hesitate to engage with you because I find your lack of understanding baffling, but really?
I don't know who this German politician you refer to as stating a generally held belief that all of Europe was counseling the Ukrainians to submit asap is, but have you heard of Angela Merkel? Minsk 1 and 2?
The general consensus was that the Russians were broke, their military was a joke, and by taking this action they had doomed their nation, they walked into the trap. Something about Russia being a gas station masquerading as a country.
The West and Europe have gone spiritually downhill since 1991, since the soviet threat was the only thing that put some sense into their heads .
For me who as a teenager believed in the european unification dream , witnessing the increasing foolishness that took hold of the european elites in the last 20 years has been a heartbreaker .
Perhaps "being a member of Nato" is THE strategy?
Professor Linus Hagström at the Swedish Defense University, a fierce critic of EU and Swedish foreign policy, thinks it's about identity politics, not pragmatism or interests. Europeans (and Americans) believe themselves to be GOOD because they are white. And that's all of it. So they must stand together. And, if necessary, build up a wall against the rest of the world.
And, apparently, stick their heads into the ground.
Little do they realise, but they are not 'white' at all. Western Caucasians seem to range to anything from a pasty pink through shades of mauve to a deep purple, but white? No. (Some of these shades are deeply unattractive, especially when the wearer is annoyed). 😡
So I think this 'white' generalisation needs to be retired, along with its connotations of purity and goodness.
A great article, but having looked at British rearmament in the 1930's I'd make a couple of observations. In the 1930s it is true that the British military modernised, but also that they inherited in 1918 (less than 20 years before) enough equipment from WW1 to equip c 100 divisions, and also the RN was the largest Navy in the world. Even so in 1930/31 defence spend reached a nadir of 2.7% of GDP, and even in the lean years if the mid-1930s was 3.2%. Defence spending only really accellerated after Munich. Compare this with the hot air of today, and at least the British have effectively demilitarised, partly though the so-called peace dividend since 1991, and latterly by stuff been blown to pieces in Ukraine. Most if not all other European nations too, and even the mighty USA is sufferring critcal shortages (eg AA missiles). And the industrial and technological capacity has - if not vanished - been much reduced. Let's not even get into the downgrading of tradtional masculine martial values. If you were intending to "re-arm", I wouldn't start from here...
Excellent piece.
I just hope that the French ( I don't think the UK is independent enough to participate) haven't found a way of permanently ending the whole affair for all of us for good. By smuggling nuclear components for Ukraine to assemble and deliver on a 'Ukrainian' branded missile.
No need. They'll just hand over the warhead and pretend that Ukraine did it all on their ownsome.
What do you make of claims by Russia that nuclear weapons components may have been transferred???
@toolate
Combining the signal that EU/Britain has provided Ukraine with nuclear warheads along with the recent successful penetration of Russian air defenses by the British designed (& mostly EU component sourced) "Flamingo" certainly would change Russian Federation priorities for deploying their best short & medium range air defense systems, AWAY from supplying Iran and TOWARDS their own borders & strategically vital facilities?
Here we go again: the european plan is fairly obvious - use Ukrainians to soak up Russian munitions and pick off Russia's friends, one by one, declare open season on ships carrying Russian cargo, destroy Russian infrastructure with impunity, get Kiev WMDs, etc..
When Russia tries to make peace, NATO "peacekeepers" rush in while Ukraine acts as outrageously as possible to provoke a Russian response whereupon the british and french run screaming "Article Five!" to the Americans.
You've been declaring a premature end to the war for how long now, but unless and until the european rulers pay a price, that end never will come.
Thank you again. So, supposing what you describe in the last few paragraphs does not happen in the three most important European countries - UK, France and Germany - which is by far the most likely outcome, what then? Will ordering various items of new military equipment more or less at random and frequently snarling impotently at Russia, actually make no difference or will it lead to some sort of calamity that could have been avoided?
A description of the state of Europe, and the action in the Ukraine, which as far as I can see, adheres closely to reality. Thanks A.
Rather than being seen as an error by Russia, the invasion was seen (hopefully by most governments) as a blatant breach of international law. We don't really want countries to invade others because the current leaderships differ on opinions, strategies and policies. Putin, in any case, didn't achieve the quick victory (of total annexation) that he seemed to be aiming for. Instead, he achieved the opposite of one of his goals, an increase in neighbours which are members of Nato, instead of a reduction (indeed, an outright victory would also have resulted in more Nato neighbours). Since the first year of the war, very little extra territory has been won by Russia at, according to independent estimates, a disproportionate cost in terms of soldiers' lives lost. I've been reading, in blogs, of imminent Russian victory for the last 3 years but it is still fighting and still bombing civilians in another country. Regardless of whether one sees Russia as the ultimate victor, or whether one thinks Putin has outfoxed other leaders, the "special military operation" is a clear breach of international law and so may have put the final nail in the coffin of the old world order. Perhaps we'll see countries imposing their will more widely in future. Is that a good thing?
Surely the original Euro plan was quite clearly stated -- squeeze Russia via proxy Ukraine until unstable Russia fell apart and the City of London could step in and buy up the whole place on the cheap. (Presumably China was not going to take advantage of this putative Russian collapse faster & better than the Euros?). The question is -- What to do now that Euro plan has clearly failed?
The President Trump plan is clear -- kick Zelensky to the side, and re-establish normal commercial relations with Russia; sorry about all the unpleasantness! However, the Trump plan cannot work when it is directly opposed by Europe's "leaders" and many of the unrepresentative CongressScum in the US Congress. Maybe the real attrition is whether Trump or the deeply unpopular EuroScum "leaders" crumble first?
And let's not leave China out of this. Because of Japan's forceful support for Taiwan, China has just cut off essential components to Japanese companies involved in military manufacturing. Those Japanese companies use Chinese components in the sub-assemblies which are essential to European and US weapons, which are the only weapons that keep Zelensky in the fight. When re-armament becomes practicably impossible, European "leaders" and US CongressScum will need a way out of the situation in which they have trapped themselves (and us).
Oil, lets be clear , most oul is used to produce diesel , peteol is a by product , diesel is required for all sorts of engines in prticular aeroplanes and farm machinery i think about 70% of oil is used for diesel.The USA wants Venezuelas heavy oil so it can combine it with the USA,s own light shale oul to make diesel this combination would make USA the biggest supplier of diesel.
I think its all about money , the EU and UK were happy going along with increasing trade with Russia and China until the USA decided it was time to be belligerant they sensed a withdrawal by an increasing number of countries across the world from using the USA dollar to trade and decided as it always does that negotiation should be ignored in favour of heavy handed threats , tariffs , sanctions and military action.
Yes the USA do now recognise they cannot defeat Russia and China militarily especially if Russia and China team up with India and others to form BRICS so the USA have decided to tackle those countries in other ways , smaller countries and those close to USA will be threatened militarily but bigger foes will be attacked in other ways.
We hear a lot about how the USA destroyed the pipeline bringing cheap gas to EU and UK and how the USA then persuaded Ukraine to threaten Russia ( Ukraine joining NATO would threaten Russia by having USA missiles on the border of Ukraine Russia) and how the EU was then pressed into threatening Russia by USA withdrawing NATO funding , all of this has caused Russia to increase its spending hugely on defence which simultaneously reduces Russia,s ability to counteract the control USA has of global trade.
Job done for USA without going to war.
We do not hear how similarly China has had its trade with the EU and UK cut dramatically , virtually overnight amazon and others stopped selling goods produced in China and likewise China is having to dramatically increase its defense spending because of AUKUS this is similar to the threat of Ukraine joining NATO which is causing huge spending on arms by Russia , the Chinese are having to spend hugely on arms to ready themselves for the threat of nuclear submarines that Australia has agreed to have with the help of UK and USA , these subs will be based in Australia and will sail up and down the Sea of China along the coast of China.
I should probably mention Iran too , it is being threatened because of its strategic importance not just its coast on the straights of hormuz but its northern border on the Caspain Sea which is important for the planned direct road route from China to europe , the USA want to prevent such a road and are already active in persuading and threatening other countries that such a road would pass through such as Turkmenistan , Azerbaijan , Armenia.
The capital city of Iran is in the north close to the Caspian Sea and far from the straits of hormuz yes its not beyond the reach of the USA armada but the USA would not be able to conduct a prolonged offensive that way .
Anyway the picture is set , the USA wants control of global trade it wants to continue to control finance and the use of the USA dollar and it will use a combination of methods , attacking orher countries directly , getting other countries attacked by their neighbours using threats and bribes , tariffs , sanctions , oil,
My italian translation here:
"Pensare al Passato.
E sperare nei miracoli."
https://trying2understandw.blogspot.com/2026/02/pensare-al-passato-e-sperare-nei.html
So true. The West has gone stupid. And like all stupids, is blind to it.
"if you create impossible fantasy victory conditions and symbolically try to impose those on the Russians, then of course you can always claim that they have “lost.”"
Haha. Perfect.
The latest announcements from Kremlin, by Putin himself, is that Russian services think that the West (put there whoever, UK, France, CIA) is thinking to pass nuclear devices to Ukraine and present it as locally built as well as blowing up the Turkstream on the floor of the Black Sea, which is several times deeper than the Baltic Sea.
I am not sure what the west thinks, but I am convinced that the Russians will act in a very dramatic way if its territory is explicitly and directly attacked by western forces. No repeat of WWII for them. If London or Paris or Berlin have to go up in smoke under the mushroom cloud, so be it...
The fruits of Russian dithering and indecision, right there.
Let's take a step back and have a bit of a bird view. Basically you are asking Russia to behave likeke assholes, the way the West and US or Israeli behave, no? Maybe Russians do not have this mentality, maybe they didn't have the resources to start with, maybe is a political decision to not alienate the rest (majority) of the world, maybe a bit of all three. But I would not call it dithering and indecision.
Does Russia want to be nice or do they want to win?
Well done, Feral. Amusement value 7/10. You lose some marks for repetition.
@Kouros
Combining the signal that EU/Britain has provided Ukraine with nuclear warheads along with the recent successful penetration of Russian air defenses by the British designed (& mostly EU component sourced) "Flamingo" certainly would change Russian Federation priorities for deploying their best short & medium range air defense systems, AWAY from supplying Iran and TOWARDS their own borders & strategically vital facilities? USA/NATO wouldn't even need to give the Ukrainians such weapons, just "leak" that they had done so.
What Iranian need is radars, EWs, and maybe some ADs, as well as intelligence, IRS, and integration. Chinese can provide some as well. As far as I remember, it was the Iranians that supplied the Russians in the past couple of years.
@The Freeze-Frame Revolution
Please disambiguate "IRS"?
AFAIK, Iran never supplied the Russian Federation with cutting edge air defense missiles, definitely hasn't supplied them with air defense RADARS & sensors- Quite the reverse, in fact.
There were lots of claims about cheap fixed wing drone weapons supplied by Iran to the Russian Federation in the earlier years of this war, however, lately the RF claims to have taken over production of improved versions of such weapons themselves.
The major effects of Flamingo as I see it will probably be diverting more air defense assets to protect important infrastructure farther back from the line of contact (that need also requires diverting those units from export to allied nations).
IRS I think has to do with intelligence via remote sensing and satellites. Yes Russians got at the beginning the Shahed drones which they adapted into Geran-1 and -2.
Thanks for the reply-
I'm used to seeing that in a different order, ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance). Usually means satellite intelligence.
"In 2022, European governments believed that the Russians had committed a disastrous error in invading Ukraine, and celebrated this belief with champagne and canapés in the best hotel bars in Brussels."
Would you be kind enough to provide us with some evidence of this? From my memory, the reactions were quite different, in twofold ways. First, they communicated to the Ukranians they should give up as soon as possible. The head of Germany's Liberal Party has been quoted as saying this. Secondly, if they had any empathy whatsoever, they were shocked to the core that such an invasion could happen, in Europe, in 2022. They didn't believe the American intelligence at the time, and now they had pie on their faces.
Your little anecdote paints a nice picture of EU scoundrels rubbing their hands, but to me it sounds like a fabrication.
Yes, I had a similar thought. And reading the first few paragraphs, I was reminded of what was written a bit earlier: "the process of thinking starts at the end, from a predetermined conclusions, and works forwards, flailing around in the search for evidence to support the imposed conclusions from which you began."
I hesitate to engage with you because I find your lack of understanding baffling, but really?
I don't know who this German politician you refer to as stating a generally held belief that all of Europe was counseling the Ukrainians to submit asap is, but have you heard of Angela Merkel? Minsk 1 and 2?
The general consensus was that the Russians were broke, their military was a joke, and by taking this action they had doomed their nation, they walked into the trap. Something about Russia being a gas station masquerading as a country.
That was just mean, I shouldn't have said that.
I guess this was meant to be a response to the comment I was replying to, rather than a response to my comment.