Mar 1, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023

Excellent article. I think any attack by Russia against NATO countries in Europe would be aimed at Diesel infrastructure. Oil refineries, storage, import terminals. It's a small list as Europe is especially vulnerable here. Without diesel their civilian economies collapse in short order and any military operations would grind to a halt.

The US mainland is also very vulnerable with it's dispersed and extensive civilian infrastructure (power generation and distribution, water, rail, etc.) Russia, I'm sure, if it wanted to could launch a campaign against it using hands-off third party actors already present in the increasingly socially and culturally divided US.

I think the smart people in the room (who are a few levels down from the idiots in charge) have already figured out that NATO and the US are on a hiding to nowhere but the delusional bubble that the leaders live in, as you've mentioned, is extremely dangerous.

"We'll if we can't beat Russia militarily, economically or diplomatically what option does that leave us?" That's a scary thought.

The massively indebted US and the EU are facing a looming financial system meltdown which is acting as a timer on the whole exercise. Hopefully the smart people get to have a say.

Expand full comment

Good writeup.

Just noting that Russia (or any other semi-intelligent attacker) would absolutely not attack Western political or military headquarters in case of outright war. The likelihood of improving leadership would be too immensely risky...

The real targets in the US and UK would be transport facilities: ports and airfields receiving imports and those which host outgoing military and civilian transport capacity plus orbital assets. This would cripple US capability to project force anywhere outside of the US much less support Europe and the many foreign US bases. It would cause literal crisis in the UK - which imports more than half its food and is already short; Mercouris has reported egg, potato, fruit and vegetable shortages already and they are not even at war.

Even if Russia chose not to strike at US targets as noted above, the next item on the list is clearly cross Atlantic (or in the case of China, cross Pacific) transport. 1000 to 2000 km anti-ship missile systems allow China or Russia to attack both transport ships and planes from far out of range of carrier based fighter protection; this in turn forces Western militaries to try and take out these anti-ship missile carrying fighters and bombers more or less at home...buried deep within the modern Russian anti-aircraft net.

Lastly, insufficient focus on the real Achilles heel of NATO forces and systems: resupply. Macgregor and others have pointed out that the M1 Abrams, Challenger etc aren't just big and heavy - they are hogs for fuel, manpower, maintenance and other forms of logistical support. Having a gigantic, jet fuel sucking, non-mobile in a practical sense, monster hunk of metal makes sense if you're attempting to defend the Fulda Gap against 5 Soviet attackers per defender; it makes offensive projection an impossibility. It is literally like trying to live in a Ferrari - you would need to tow a pikey style trailer behind it. As I believe Macgregor said - each Abrams needs its own fuel tanker truck...

Expand full comment

I'm interested to see if Russia retaliates for the Nord Stream bombing. That was an attack on Russian facilities outside of Ukraine, and a response in kind by Russia could make things interesting. At that point, the kind of questions Aurelien raises here might have to be addressed.

Expand full comment

Miltary and governmental structures would still disperse even if done chaotically. Most bang for the buck could probably be achieved by hitting the generator halls of electric power stations. No redundancies left here, decades of green policies have seen to that. Doing it in winter would greatly amplify the effects of wide-ranging blackouts. The electrical system, especially in Europe, also relies on a very small number of control centers that are tasked with balancing out loads in realtime year round. Further non-dispersable targets would be data centers and subsea infrastructure.

Another case in point, has anybody of these pundists and politicians ever visited the subway systems in Russian cities? Every single one of these subways stations is prepared to serve as a bunker. Blast doors are recognizable from metal panels that cover their recesses, usually close to the entrances. Thes subway stations tend to be huge and very deep. Where in any Western city are there any subway stations similarly built and prepared? They are very few and far in between.

Expand full comment

Thank you for taking the time to write this fascinatingly comprehensive and informative article on the practical aspects of actual warfare in the current climate. It’s really hard to find actual expert commentary in the media, which is flooded with patriotic/belligerent guff from journalists, soundbites from politicians, and loud Anglosphere-centric bravado from internet commenters. I appreciated your estimations of available infantry and weaponry of both sides, as well as the vastly underrated deep-cover sabotage agents already implanted in NATO member countries. Living not far from NATO’s Luxembourg-based logistics base, the comments on high profile targets and missile accuracy levels was a definite eye-opener.

Expand full comment

Excellent, thanks a lot

Expand full comment

Very good indeed, thank you - there's so much rubbish written that it confounds and muddles even if one tries to avoid it - this sets the record straight - and is reflected in the high caliber of your comments ( I mean except for one!)

Expand full comment

You are too brilliant for words. Grateful to have discovered you.

Expand full comment

Firstly, no government today has made serious provision for continuing to run the country during a conventional war, with the risk of air and missile attack??

Both Russia and China – who jointly defeated the Axis Powers – have made serious provision for continuing to run the country during a conventional war.

China's epidemic preparations resulted in 400% faster GDP growth and 1.6% of the casualties. Expect the same after an atomic exchange.

Expand full comment

Despiste that, related to the chances of a possible successful of a missil land Exactly in Ukraine Government House, actually it isn’t so unprobable. The Government House is stablish in a city in the Coast in the southeast of the country (cep 11035-260). The president has two houses, and even he never knows where he is going to stay. He usually stays more in the smaller one, but with the war issues he has staying more often in this other, the Main one, that I informed the Cep before. Once he has many meetings to treat about the war, the Main Government House is strategically well positioned, just above the Sheraton Hotel in the city. Also, It is two blocks from the ocean, farest related to the other one that it is righ in front of the beach, and of course leave the president more exposed.

Expand full comment

Funny you should mention "the 43rd Mechanised Brigade with its handful of tanks". Aren't they thinking about sending all 18 Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine?

Expand full comment

I understand how it is difficult to see reasons to NATO proceed with an intervention in Ukraine. However, what it is not been informed in media is that Ukraine has been called to many many meetings in the last few days, since last week. NATO has promoting this reunions between Ukraine and Russia - not all them with Russia’s representants -, where they start as a peace call face to last serious events happened against Russia. As most of events seems to have been articulated by NATO whithout Russia knowing, when Ukraine advance in make the information public once clear breaks more than one International Treatys and both countries own legislations, NATO quickly step in try to neutralize the situation.

Only the past night it has happened three meetings. The second one, with the kings (presidents), they brought someone with more technical speech. NATO infringing all the Ukraine’s disputed reasons, offered to this country money in a way make Ukraine accept that everything is already done and the only way ia accept. When Ukraine denied the offer NATO started threatening in a very direct way and clear speech, whithout subliminar words. Later in a quick search I also found some others speechs like that. Inclusive, one of it was from NATO representant inside Ukraine and very close to the palace, who was affirming something like ‘soon he will visit the palace and the president’. Documents narrating the problem with Ukraine (in which a few of it have been written a name from a south america country, Apparently a silly mistake), NATO make the subject come to public. I separate some examples here and i can send you if you need for your next article.

That stated, these are some of the reasons that concern me if NATO really are only playing the game or if they have real intention to go against Ukraine.

Other subject they talked to it was about A kInd of intelligence that has coming improving really, but reeeaaaalllyyy fast as a second form of attack to Ukraine. The country worry about the facts have been notice in the last week brough to debate and it was a completly waste of time. We can come back again in this issue, if you want. It was a very long debate.

The third and last meeting occurred early in this morning, called by a renowned doctor, representing NATO or RUSSIA or HERSELF, not clear for me until now, and the president of Ukraine. Later join us the president of Russia, bit as I already said that kind of situation happened before and later Ukraine have knowed that it wasn’t Russia representant but a fake one from NATO.

If it was or not, the subject it was even worse than the meeting before and who knows what proceeds or not. As I have my people to inform me only in Ukraine, maybe you can try to confirm something with your sources in Russia.

So, you can imagine all kind of attacks have been suffered Ukraine every day, more than once.

It is unpredictable face all the situations I exposed here truly know what Russia is capable of.

Expand full comment

I’m extremely confused. This article seems thoughtful and you seem to have a background in the subject. But I am incredulous that anyone watching Russia’s efforts to invade Ukraine (including a very public long range missile campaign) would conclude that they could strike at NATO targets successfully on a large enough scale to matter

Expand full comment

True courage to write against today's cultural hegemony, but only dead ak coward fishes swim with the current.

Expand full comment