The event corresponds less to expectations in war than in any other case whatever.

Livy, History of Rome XXX, c. 10

The President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, says that Wednesday will be “the day of the attack.” The Russian Duma will supposedly vote to recognize Luhansk and Donetsk. When that happens, Russian troops will move in to Ukraine.

Key points to follow: (1) The United States is evacuating its Embassy even as Americans have been advised to leave Ukraine; (2) Russian troops have surrounded Ukraine from three different directions (i.e., north, east and south); (3) Russia is demanding that Ukraine promise it will not join NATO; (4) President Zelensky says he will not make this promise; (5) Russian military bases near Ukraine show increased activity with units deploying to attack positions; (6) six Russian amphibious transports have left port in Crimea, moving up Crimea’s west coast, headed for the Ukrainian coast; (7) Russian rocket artillery units seem to be preparing to strike; (8) Ukraine is not seriously preparing to repel an invasion.

It therefore appears that an invasion of Ukraine will occur within hours. Sources indicate that if the United States puts sanctions on Russia, the Russians will commence a cyber-attack on the U.S. East Coast. If you live on the East Coast, you might want to prepare for a major power blackout. I have no idea how serious such an attack could be.

My own thinking has always been: (1) Moscow was always gong to take back Ukraine; (2) Moscow was always going to ally with Beijing; (3) the United States was always going to miss all the cues; (4) the West does not understand that the military balance of power is now shifting in favor of Moscow and Beijing; (5) the United States cannot win by dropping refrigerators and cars, along with other consumer goods, on Russian cities because China will soon cut off our supply.

The West will shortly learn that money is not the sinews of war. As Machiavelli said, good soldiers are the sinews of war. Or as Oswald Spengler said, “Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy.” Almost all the discussions we have been seeing on American TV are beside the point. These folks do not see things realistically. They are still moralizing. War is not about moralizing. It is about violence. WONDER, if you dare, at the following shameful exchange.

After citing Tulsi’s Christmas greeting to her fans on Twitter, I wrote that if she had been in the Garden of Eden, she would have gotten the snake to eat the forbidden fruit. In this exciting episode, Tulsi blames the U.S. military industrial complex for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This is such a cliche, and so thoughtless, that I can just see all these Pentagon contractors petitioning Putin to invade. “Please, Mr. Putin. Invade Ukraine. We defense contractors in America will starve if you don’t!” So Putin, apparently, has a heart after all. He just loves our defense contractors. And this baffles me, because you would think that Tulsi would not like Mr. Putin for being so soft on those nasty people in America who make all those nasty weapons that endanger the peace of the world.

We all know that evil dictators never invade their neighbors. It is evil American defense contractors who make them do it! I believe that Tucker Carlson’s pro-Russian stance will come back to bite him. In fact, it will take a giant chunk out of his back end. We are entering an era in which misjudgments about Russia and China will undo a person’s reputation. Permanently. To misunderstand what is happening now, after the situation has become so crystal clear, is unforgivable. The Russians are putting the Soviet Union back together. But more than that, they are doing so rapidly even as communism has America by the throat here at home.

And what is this nonsense about Ukraine joining NATO? Please! That is not in prospect right now. In practical terms, it is not remotely possible. Everyone in Europe knows that such a move would invite a war with Russia, and nobody in Europe wants a war with Russia. The real issue is NATO’s weakness and America’s weakness. This is the ideal time for Moscow to force Ukraine back into a union with Russia. NATO is an alliance of frightened little countries huddling under the dwindling U.S. nuclear umbrella. Their idea of threatening Russia is cutting off credits when, in fact, they will have their heat turned off when the Russians stop sending natural gas to Europe.

Need I remind anyone that it is mid-winter. Not only has Russia mobilized its forces, but NATO has done very little in response to this mobilization. Hand-wringing is in vogue. From what I’ve read, even Ukraine has not mobilized her trained military reserves. Even as Zelensky pronounced a “unity day” in response to the expected invasion, we have to wonder what that actually means. Patriotic slogans will not stop invading armies.

The Russians, of course, promised that they would not invade. Perhaps all this is a tremendous misunderstanding. Perhaps the Russian troops will turn around and go home. Nancy Pelosi says that if Russia does not invade Ukraine, then President Biden’s political genius will be proven. Logically, on its face, that just about guarantees that Russia will follow through on its invasion.

Here is the real question: Why wouldn’t Russia invade and take Ukraine? I have heard people say that there would be guerrilla war there, and the Russians wouldn’t like it. Well, Ukraine doesn’t have a lot of jungles and forests for guerrillas to hide in. And the kind of weapons the Ukrainians would have to fight back with simply would not stop Russian tanks and air power. I’m sorry. It’s a fantasy.

The Russians have 11 times zones, and they did not get them all through peace. They got them because the Russians have conquered, and conquered, and invaded, and subdued, over and over again. Ukraine was subject to the Russian Empire for a long, long time. And the current conquest of Ukraine will not even give Russia another time zone. Therefore, the folks in Romania and Poland had better look to their options. Let us see if NATO holds together. Let us see what kind of resolve the rest of the world has.

Of course, it is one more fiasco for the West. One must ask whether we are serious people.



Quarterly Subscription (to support the site)


The Fool and His Enemy: Toward a Metaphysics of Evil: Nyquist, J.R.: 9798666501382: Books

297 thoughts on “Hurried Notes on the Pending Invasion of Ukraine

  1. I think that it’s very possible that Russia will invade Ukraine this time. I hope I am not right but the situation in Ukraine is escalating very quickly. Because Russia have already surrounded Ukraine from north, south, eastern and southwestern side and moreover the Russians amid its own naval exercise have blocked illegally the Kerch Strait and this is how they stop the crossing of merchant ships through the Kerch strait and reaching of the ports of Mariupol and Berdiansk. On the other side Russia is able to block the reaching of merchant ships to Odessa sea port. On the other side during the naval exercise around Kerch strait the Russians “repair” parts of the bridge that unites Crimea and Russia but it’s very possible to put explosives in order to blow up a parts of the bridge and to accuse Ukraine. Now Moscow is trying to accuse the Ukrainian army for using mine-cleaning systems against civilian villages in Eastern Ukraine in order to advance on the battlefield no matter what the cost is. But this is just a Russian disinformation and the same thing was done by the Russian proxies in Donbass throughout the years. The things are definitely not going well.

    1. Repairs may be legit on the Kerch bridge. The sea bed in the strait is not stable and the bridge moved significantly during use because of the current through the strait. From what I’ve been able to determine, the life of the bridge is limited because of condition of the sea bed.

  2. If or when Ukraine folds, what do you reckon Putin’s next move in Europe will be, given that his army is now fully mobilized? A quick grab of the Baltic states (who despite being in NATO have pitiful defence arrangements)? Maybe even, in extremis, a threat to surge into Poland too with a view to compelling Germany and France told to agree peace terms in some form or other?

    I’m also concerned about the situation in eastern Europe even if this is simply contained with Ukraine; won’t the Russian army’s air defence systems be activated and of so, won’t that pose a threat to commercial air traffic well beyond the war theater? In which case, shouldn’t westerners in eastern Poland and the Baltic states be evacuating now as well?

    1. It should be considered that Ukraine may not be the goal, but that it is only useful as the trigger for a larger sequence. The West has no choice BUT to respond if Russia invades. The communists know that. So the only question should be whether Ukraine is merely a pretext for the kick-starting of a tit-for-tat escalatory sequence that ends with communists nuking the homeland of the United States. They need a “reason” for attacking the US, and if the US will not attack them, then they will create a reason. That could be what Ukraine is all about, and if Jeff is correct that they plan to respond to sanctions with a grid attack, it could be even more correct.

      The thing that should really worry you is if the executive branch in America has Russian agents of influence whose goal is to make the US “escalate” in kind, providing the perfect dance partner for this evil final choreographed waltz.

  3. Thanks Jeff. Sending out your blog posts to friends and family hoping they will prepare. That is all we can do now is prepare. But even that window is closing.

  4. The way the West is sick, there must be people rooting for a nuclear war in Ukraine because tanks increases carbon footprints

  5. I started riding the submarines in 78 and rode them through 86. I knew then that the Russians were dangerous and realized each day how close we could come to war. I thought that day had passed. Now I am an old man with 12 grand kids, 4 of which could be involved in this war and 2 that were born 2 weeks ago. What fools we are to think that we can poke a bear with a stick and think he is not going to rip our arms off!

  6. I think The whole Ukraine situation is just the lighting of the fuse – to be followed by Chinese action. This vision given to Dimitri Duduman looks to be nearing fulfillment:

    China and Russia
    A Vision Received by Brother Dumitru Duduman April 22, 1996
    I prayed, then went to bed. I was still awake, when suddenly I heard a trumpet sound. A voice cried out to me, “Stand!”
    In my vision, I was in America. I walked out of my home, and began to look for the one who had spoken to me. As I looked, I saw three men dressed alike. Two of the men carried weapons. One of the armed men came to me. “I woke you to show you what is to come.” He said. “Come with me.”
    I didn’t know where I was being taken, but when we reached a certain place he said, “stop here!”
    A pair of binoculars was handed to me, and I was told to look through them.
    “Stand there, don’t move, and look,” he continued. “You will see what they are saying, and what they are preparing for America.”
    As I was looking, I saw a great light. A dark cloud appeared over it. I saw the president of Russia, a short, chubby man, who said he was the president of China, and two others. The last two also said where they were from, but I did not understand. However, I gathered they were part of Russian controlled territory. The men stepped out of the cloud.
    The Russian president began to speak to the Chinese one. “I will give you the land with all the people, but you must free Taiwan of the Americans. Do not fear, we will attack them from behind.”
    A voice said to me, “Watch where the Russians penetrate America.”
    I saw these words being written: Alaska; Minnesota; Florida.
    Then, the man spoke again, “When America goes to war with China, the Russians will strike without warning.”
    The other two presidents spoke, “We, too, will fight for you.” Each had a place already planned as a point of attack.
    All of them shook hands and hugged. Then they all signed a contract. One of them said, “We’re sure that Korea and Cuba will be on our side, too. Without a doubt, together, we can destroy America.”
    The president of Russia began to speak insistently, “Why let ourselves be led by the Americans? Why not rule the world ourselves? They have to be kicked out of Europe, too! Then I could do as I please with Europe!”
    The man standing beside me asked, “This is what you saw: they act as friends, and say they respect the treaties made together. But everything I’ve shown you is how it will REALLY happen. You must tell them what is being planned against American. Then, when it comes to pass, the people will remember the words the Lord has spoken.”
    Who are you?” I asked.
    “I am the protector of America. America’s sin has reached God. He will allow this destruction, for He can no longer stand such wickedness. God however, still has people that worship Him with a clean heart as they do His work. He has prepared a heavenly army to save these people.”
    As I looked, a great army, well armed and dressed in white, appeared before me.
    “Do you see that?” the man asked. “This army will go to battle to save My chosen ones. Then, the difference between the Godly and the ungodly will be evident.”
    Excepted from: Dreams and Visions From God Copyright © 1994, 1996, 2000

      1. Is it spin? Here we were, innocently leaving our exercises, when those evil Ukranians just attacked to of the blue for no reason?

        Poland and Romania…..I had the same thought. But if they really want to go for it, I would expect a major attack on the US to disable us, then Putin would truly be king.

  7. Russia is NOT withdrawing. This is confirmed by on the ground reporting from the area. They are playing a shell game and are in fact reinforcing their final attack positions. If you watch any of the video feeds coming out of the area most of the armor is no longer on lorries. Tanks/APC’S only ever move of their own accord when they’re going to fight.

  8. Alex Jones had a Russian talk show host who used to command Soviet nukes give a speech on his show the other day. He pleaded that Ukrainians live and work in Russia because of the poor economy in Ukraine, as if somehow that were to give Russia rights to possess Ukraine. Despite how Jones exposes the global cabal, he’s a bit, too, pro Russia as JR Nyquist has asserted, to be entirely credible.

    Russia has pulled back a few troops, announcing willingness to negotiate. The price of oil has hit $100 per barrel, so that helps both Russia and Ukraine, along with OPEC, and Western oil interests.

    Ukraine has never escaped Soviet control. The people of Ukraine will never be free, any more than the Russian people will ever be free. The United States, bolsters the borders of Eastern European NATO member countries in token gesture to defend them from Russia, and to give moral support as if honoring the voided treaty to assure security in Ukraine.

    There is an old Soviet saying of the people: “They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work.” Seems to me that the Soviet Union, pretends to collapse, and the United States, pretends to believe it.

    If Russia had been trying to make the US look bad, out of concern for public opinion of Russia, they’ve blown it, unless they save face with the pending negotiations.

    1. Jones has taken the wrong approach to understanding the world. He encourages a kind of mass-mindedness. I am so sick of hearing about the New World Order conspiracy. This is not clear. It is a very muddy way of thinking. Who it is, or how things work, is thereby turned into a cartoon

      1. Actually, Jones produces in evidence such as documents found on websites of the Rockefeller Foundation; Operation Lockstep, which describes the Covid Live Exercise, to be followed by Carbon Lock downs. Again, confusion will be the epitaph.

      2. Evidence of what? Jones has interpreted everything as an Illuminati conspiracy, or reptilians or inter dimensional critters. He is lost battling ghosts in the astral, as it were. Come down to earth, if you dare. The truth is, Bill Gates and others of that ilk have become very close to the Chinese communists. And this has rotted them. It is the communist world order that actually threatens us, not the imaginary “New World Order.” There have been many pandemic exercises over the last 23 years. Those exercises do not prove Jones’s conspiracy theory. He has interpreted those things to fit his theory. But his theory, as he expounds it, is not falsifiable. It is vague, loose, flexible enough to “explain” anything and everything that happens. He is giving your mass-mind a mass-minded narrative to send thrills through your jaded carcass. His speechifying forms an uncritical, hysterical, hypnotizing mantra. It has very little critical thinking to it. He is using a formula, over and over again. I have been writing about national Strategy, communist subversion, theories of social decline. That is what we are facing. Jones neglects a huge body of knowledge because he is an entertainer, not an truth-seeker. The truth is difficult and is usually rejected by people. He wants a mass audience and is good at getting people to listen. He would have you believe that a small group of black magicians rule the world through the banks and secret occult societies. It is an old, discredited, cranky hobby horse. Jones cannot really think in terms of political reality — China and Russia; that is, real countries using real strategy with real weapons. He has dragged everything into the conspiracy sewer, where the muddled-heads continually soil themselves and make everything foul with their half-truths and childish fantasies.

      3. President George Herbert Walker Bush, invoked The New World Order, if you recall.
        Wasn’t he co-opeted by Chicoms?

        Lock Step, describes perfectly what the World is going through.

        Page 18
        Published on Jun 27, 2012
        Scenario For The Future of Technology And International Development (Rockefeller Foundation) – Global Business Network

      4. To find speeches of U.S. presidents in which they use the phrase “New World Order”, go to the American Presidency Project site: 1

        President George H. W. Bush, State of the Union, 29 January 1991:

        What is at stake is more than one small country; it is a big idea: a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind–peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law. . .

        The end of the cold war has been a victory for all humanity. A year and a half ago, in Germany, I said that our goal was a Europe whole and free. Tonight, Germany is united. Europe has become whole and free, and America’s leadership was instrumental . . .

        The world can, therefore, seize this opportunity to fulfill the long-held promise of a new world order, where brutality will go unrewarded and aggression will meet collective resistance. . . . 2

        Maxwell Air Force Base War College in Montgomery, Alabama on 13 April 1991:

        I wanted to speak . . . about the new world taking shape around us, about the prospects for a new world order now within our reach. . . . The new world order really is a tool for addressing a new world of possibilities. . . . 3

        Announcement on 16 January 1991 of allied military action in the Persian Gulf:

        We have in this past year made great progress in ending the long era of conflict and cold war. We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order–a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful–and we will be–we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders. . . . 4

        Address before a joint session of Congress on 11 September 1990:

        Clearly, no longer can a dictator count on East-West confrontation to stymie concerted United Nations action against aggression. A new partnership of nations has begun.

        We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective–a new world order–can emerge: a new era–freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor.

        Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we’ve known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak[!]. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come.

        The test we face is great, and so are the stakes. This is the first assault on the new world that we seek, the first test of our mettle. Had we not responded to this first provocation with clarity of purpose, if we do not continue to demonstrate our determination, it would be a signal to actual and potential despots around the world. . .

        Once again, Americans have stepped forward . . . At this very moment, they serve together with Arabs, Europeans, Asians, and Africans in defense of principle and the dream of a new world order. . . . 5

        Fundraiser for gubernatorial candidate Pete Wilson in San Francisco on 19 September 1990:

        Ours is a generation to finally see the emergence of promising, exciting new world order which we’ve sought for generations. And we are witness to the first demonstration of this new partnership for peace: a united world response to Iraq’s aggressive ambition. . . . 6

    2. Alex Jones has fallen prey to communist disinformation about “globalists”. The same disease has afflicted Joel Skousen, who wrote an excellent book on strategic retreat. His theory is that the “globalists” will “allow” the US to be nuked, in order to somehow marshal a global government to drive back Russia. Sheer lunacy.

      The disintegration of the conservative Right in America is the biggest story here. Tucker Carlson shilling for Russian fascists. Jones and Skousen believing the “globalists” are in charge. This is all communist diversion. Weapons and energy matter, not “banks” and ngo’s. Because of the 60 years of peacetime, we have an entire generation of delusional people. They will wake up when reality hits. But by then it will be too late. The communists will not waste their advantage, they spent too much time cultivating it.

      There is no NWO or globalist, there is only the “worldwide communist federation”, as Golitsyn called it, perpetrating the most massive strategic disinformation campaign in human history.

      1. Some say Jones works for Vatican, by “globalists” he actually means freemassons. So did JFK, he allegedly tried to eradicate freemasonry, probably killed by freemassons.

      2. You are right. And Daniel Estulin, a soviet born guy who writes in Spanish about the Bilderberg group, is one of the main sources of disinformation. At least in Latin America. His trick consists of abstracting communist action from the facts so that everything that happens can be presented as a globalist conspiracy.

      3. That is my concern as well. I’ve watched this unfortunate development unfold, completely baffled by it. The only explanation that comes to mind is that conservatives became so disillusioned with our MSM, the Russiagate hoax, the lies, that they are looking to Russian state owned media and their affiliates as the truth, and Putin is laughing. Bezmenov et al were right. When I try to explain, and provide Jeff’s or Trevor louden’s work and others, only a few listen. Example, only when I posted about ZeroHedge’s ownership (former communist official who worked in Soviet propaganda owns his son’e site) did people actually sit back and think. Russia has the last word on Reagan. They’ve turned conservatives.

      4. Yes, you are right about Daniel Estulin. His book about the “Bilderberg Group” contained many supposedly “insider” predictions that failed to materialize. He seems very sympathetic to Cuba and other communist regimes. While I used to lend some credence to the notion that the globalists control things behind the scenes (and certainly they do exercise power), its seems to me that this aspect is greatly exaggerated to the point of becoming a ridiculous caricature of reality. Boris Berezovsky was filthy rich, having bought up state assets after Russia opened up its economy to privatization, and that wealth and power certainly didn’t protect him from the machinations of Putin, nor did relocating to Great Britain. The “globalists” unquestionably have a degree of influence, particularly in the West, but in countries with a totalitarian system, their power is greatly limited. Additionally, there seems to be a fair amount of differing opinions and agendas among the superrich globalists, making it unlikely that they conspire together to achieve some secretive, overarching agenda to control the world. Estulin is similar to Alexander Bachman (another individual that reaches a fairly large audience in Latin America, or at least in Mexico) in his promotion of largely unprovable conspiracy theories, but at least Bachman seems to have an understanding of the legitimate threat posed by communism (Bachman has also promoted Golitsyn’s book on his program to his credit).

      5. MSM and Big Tech are full of communist agents or communist sympathizers. They have been censoring speech in the West. Clinically, and ironically, the Russian news outlets and Russian-owned Telegram emerge as the champions of freedom. This is completely ridiculous. And it demoralizes western regimes.

  9. PS:

    The cyber attacks are so far, against the fund raisers for Canadian truckers who block the US border. People have donated about twenty million dollars. Biden ordered Trudeau to crack down. Now, all that money has vanished. Blame it on the Russians?

    1. You are not reading what I wrote. Russia will launch a cyber attack against the U.S. if we declare sanctions on Russia. Do not bring another subject in and confuse everyone. This has nothing to do with truckers losing money.

      1. Are saying that Biden is not a tool of Russia? How do we know that these cyber attacks are not prelude? Where did the money go if not to Russia? Did Canada steal it? Did Biden steal it? As cyber attacks escalate, will Russian attacks be blamed on Biden? Confusion might well be part of the strategy.

  10. Jeff-

    I am continually amazed at what is accepted as astute analysis in the otherwise quite accomplished western psyche. I too have fielded the argument that Russia can’t hold Ukraine if they take them by force. I’ve heard it passionately argued by those who aught to know better, that a Ukrainian Resistance armed with just 50 cal weaponry would eventually force the Russians to retreat, as their supply lines, namely food and fuel, would be intercepted as they are not armored. I’ve asked in response, “Then how did they march to Afghanistan? And hold them all for decades?”

    The western mind seems to have become stunted, possibly because it is too far removed from the one constant of conquest – Violence. The Russian Army need only destroy all strategic defenses in the Ukraine from 90 miles out and then march in with their fully armored arsenal. The food and fuel they need they will take from Ukraine and then they can rape, pillage, and plunder to whatever degree that they want or need to. It is interesting to me that the way it has always been done is discounted as a thing of the past. The mindset of the west hasn’t grasped that the only reason that Europe stopped warring on itself is because of “the bomb”. And I would posit that the hiatus of the past 80 years is a result of the unprecedented development and build-up of known and (probably) unknown WMD. But, it of course can’t hold. The winner of the next WW will be those with sufficient stockpiles of EFFECTIVE WMD, who methodically weakened their enemy from within, while at the same time, appearing to be weakened themselves. 🤔

    Everyone seems to agree that, even though Russia has been mobilizing a massive offense military presence for months and surrounding them on three sides, Ukraine has not mobilized a defense. Russia is in a position to attack at the perfect time of year, while the West is severely weakened physically and politically by a bio-weapon attack, and while Europe is highly vulnerable, being the middle of winter, to an interruption or downright elimination of Russian fuel deliveries. And Nato isn’t mobilizing an equal and opposite defensive posture? How can this be? I see only one explanation. The outcome is already known and agreed to. So what will the outcome be? One clenched fist, perhaps?

    And for those who naively believe that nukes won’t ever be used, consider that perhaps like all new things, it takes someone to push the envelope before others will do the same, even though they were more than capable of doing so, but were apprehensive about the consequences. I hold out the possibility that nuclear weapons (and other WMD) may be deployed ultimately, (and perhaps already)by many actors, and in a way that isn’t consistent with reigning dogma.

    1. A childhood friend of mine was a Naval crane operator stationed in Vietnam during the war. He sat at high elevation in his booth, listening to his hi-fi and smoking purple heroin, while loading war ships with tactical nukes. I don’t know it they were ever used or not, but why was he always loading them? The ships weren’t the only thing that was loaded, but I believe him. If nuclear weapons were used in Vietnam, would the general public really know?

    2. Yes. Ukraine was conquered by the USSR within living memory, in 1943-44. There was guerrilla fighting for years afterward. We never even heard about it in the West. Guess who won? Moscow won.

      1. That is why the Soviets hunted Bandera. They finally ran him to ground Paris and killed him.

        The Russian regime may be a lot like the Soviet regime of the late 40s and early 50s, but Ukraine will uglier than that period.

        Russians “held” AFG for a number of years, but only the towns. It was worth a troopers life to be taken out of those towns. Gorbachev saw that and realized the Afghans were not going down any time soon. Withdrawal was the only option.

      2. And those groups did not help the Russians. The groups we funded kept them penned up in the towns unless they came out in large groups armed to the teeth.

    3. I just watched a Youtube video where a Ukrainian youtube said the people literally do not believe an invasion will happen, that Russia “just wants to scare them”.

      It seems that many people, and not just the West, are in a state of almost fatal delusion that is downright frightening. When hundreds of thousands of soldiers and tanks are at your doorstep, perhaps you need to wake up.

      1. I have been thinking about this myself. It is a familiar motif. Look at China and COVID. We are incapable of accepting it might have been an attack.

  11. There will be no invasion. And people of the Donbass have the right to self determination in face of the lunatic aggression against them at the hands of folks like Right Sector, Svoboda, and Azov Battalion Nazis

      1. Anyone with heart wants it that way. People that use war as their first option are simply sociopaths. The KGB training system produces sociopaths.

      2. Quit acting like a Putinist idiot, Strannik. I’m not a gullible mark. I am well aware of why the Putinist regime hates Bandera. The same reason Stalin and Khrushchev hated him.

        If you want to think that truth is the enemy of slavic peoples, and is fascist, then you will never know the truth. Frankly, your hero Putin would like to keep you ignorant and stupid.

      3. Putin has a Stalinist streak. This has been documented by his biographers. Only he has never gone beyond bumping off rival politicians, journalists, dissidents and business men, He is more refined and less paranoid than Stalin. Perhaps a man with more balance in him. This Ukraine business is going to show us what he really yearns for.

    1. Strannik, not everyone is a pro-Soviet fool like you are. The people you list are not the aggressors. People like yourself and Russian troops and mercenaries are. If you want to meet Nazis, go to Moscow. The place is crawling with them, and their leader resides in the Kremlin while he robs Russia’s people blind. But, then again, others are just blind, as you are.

      1. Ah, breathing more Fascist hatred of brother Slavs and Proslaviye, I see. You are going to be sorely disappointed in the coming months and years

      2. Strannik, to a fascist, anything associated with Bandera is agitprop. You need to learn some actual history instead of acting like you were educated by Soviets.

      3. Ok, let me correct that and say that there was a brief window of time where it had a meaning, but now it just means “someone you disagree with politically.” I especially don’t like the use of this word in the east because it was and is used by communists to mean anyone who they don’t like.

    2. The “people” in Donbass do not control anything, KGB soldiers do. You are a mouthpiece, either witting or unwitting, for the worst kind of fascists.

      1. Funny, Strannik. Given most of what you post is Putinist agitprop. Putinists hate Bandera because he stood up for the independence of Ukraine.

    3. Actually you are incorrect on several points. Only 17% of Ukraine is Russian. The Donbass has a large non Russian population. Russia recognized those borders in 1990-91, 1994, and the Minsk agreements. Those battalions are fighting on their own soil to protect the integrity of their borders. Using your logic, all countries who have a claim to Crimea should take it from Russia. This is no longer the time of Vlad the Impaler, and conquering marauders. As for the battalions you name? They aren’t Nazi’s just nationalists, like the Russians are. All three battalions have Muslim, and Jewish members, some coming from Israel (the 400K Russian Jewish immigrants to Israel are split between pro-Ukraine and pro-Russian depending on how they were treated by Russia (my good friend who escaped here is pro-Ukrainian. The discrimination her family went through in Russia and the kindness in Ukraine sealed that for her family.). Jewish papers have interviewed Jewish members of the three battalions. When three Jewish young people were murdered on the Maidan by “unknown” (FSB per Girkin), it was Right Sector who carried their coffins on their shoulders honoring them. If Russia’s extreme nationalism isnt a problem, neither should Ukraine’s nationalism be, its a direct result of Russian attacks. Russia has never had a Jewish leader in the top position. Ukraine has a Jewish president, and top cabinet members. But much of this is not about the Russians in Donbass. If the Donbass did not have such extensive deposits of lithium, titanium, iron ore and other minerals much easier to mine than in Irkutsk or the Arctic Circle, if Ukraine did not have the #1 amount of arable land in Europe, the 4rth largest amount of arable black earth, allowing it to feed 600 million people, would Russia be that interested? China has been buying up land in the US and elsewhere, to help feed its people. Russia only has a population of 149M. Russia could increase its revenues even more if it also provided food to china, not just oil. Hopefully dissenting voices coming from retired the military in Russia will be heard and no invasion will ensue.

  12. Ukrainian banking sector and defense establishment under comprehensive cyber-attack as of a few hours ago.

      1. Frankly, I would not be the least surprised. But, Putin would be stupid to invade. Ukraine will cost far more then Russia can afford. The Donbas and Crimea are nothing but financial drags on his regime.

    1. No surprise. I keep wondering why banks and governments place themselves on a network that is so easily compromised. US FedGov has a secure network that is not open to the internet. While I was an Engineer at Ohio DOT, one of our maintenance crews was digging close to one of their lines and a government crew pulled up with a couple FBI agents in tow within 20 minutes after the digging had started. Turns out the signs warning of underground lines had been destroyed and the Ohio Utilities Protection Service (OUPS, pronounced oops!) didn’t have a record of it either. We always checked with OUPS and they sent out people to mark lines, but they didn’t mark that line.

      DOD still uses the internet a lot and many defense contractors do as well. That’s how China has gotten so much on us.

    1. According to Suvorov, first comes grey terror, and pink terror only happens if the communist strategists were absolutely convinced of success. Otherwise it would not happen.

      I have not even seen signs of grey terror yet. No major crashes, no grid malfunctions, no oil spills, etc.. Perhaps the supply chain problems could be considered it. But why send Spetznaz if you weren’t going to use them? That’s why I say it feels too early, but I am hardly an expert.

  13. Jeff, I am not questioning you, but how can you possibly know what Russia is planning to do in response to sanctions? Did they communicate it to some European / American counterpart?

    Also, in your opinion, is this merely a prelude to the final attack on the US or the buildup to it? In other words, is their goal here merely annexation of Ukraine, or is Ukraine merely a catalyst for an attack on the main enemy, the US?

    Because if that is so, then it follows that they want to work backwards from a surprise nuclear strike and try to justify it somehow. If what you are saying is true regarding a cyber-attack, that would suggest Ukraine is merely a pretext and America is the main target here, because shutting down the East Coast’s power in response to sanctions would be a significant escalation, suggesting they want to create an escalation dynamic that would lead to a strike. Do you see that as the probability here?

    If Russia and China, or the “world communist federation” as Golitsyn called them, truly believe the balance of military power has swung in their favor, wouldn’t they simply go for the US? Because once the US has fallen, they can take Ukraine and Europe easily. Heck, North Korea could take the South, China could take Taiwan and the US homeland, etc.. The US is the only obstacle.

    Since communists primarily use disinformation, this over-focus on Ukraine seems like a diversion to me. Chi Haotian said they would pretend to focus on Taiwan while having the US as the main target. This seems eerily similar.

    I suppose my question is, do you think this is the main attack on the US or a move before the main attack? The only reasons I thought it might be too early is that I thought they could crash the dollar or US economy first, which seems like while it has started, has not even come close to reaching full peak yet.

    In Spetznaz, Suvorov wrote that before the outbreak of hostilities, they would send them into the the US “months” beforehand. Considering the entrance of Russian nationals began sometime in November, it is hard for me to know if it is too early yet, as I haven’t seen any signs of sabotage or “grey terror”, much less pink. It feels slightly early.

    Jeff, considering that Biden’s administration is staffed basically with Obama loyalists, and that there are some murky Russian connections there vis a vis Frank M. Davis, Tom Fife’s testimony, the approval of Nordstream, the uranium sale, etc.. doesn’t it seem plausible that if you were Russia, you would use any agents of influence inside the executive branch to be over-aggressive against Russian provocations in order to provide the world with moral cover for a “retaliatory” Russian strike? I have watched many Putin interviews and he is obsessed and disciplined in always portraying the US as the aggressive party, intending to nuke Russia at any minute, and Russia as the mere responding party, meekly building up their hypersonic missiles and warning systems as a “response”. Of course we know that is all lies, but it seems quite important to the KGB as a narrative.

    Also, these trucking “convoys” seem rather suspicious to me, and bring to mind Duduman’s vision where he says it begins with “people in the middle of the country rising up against their government”. I hear there is a US “convoy” planned for Feb 23 starting in California.

    Speaking of which, do you place any stock in the Dudman vision or Henry Gruver’s? Both men had a vision of China / Russia attacking the United States. While both seemed plausible, Duduman’s claimed that after the attack, China would turn on Russia and “drive them to the gates of Paris”, which seemed rather implausible to me, and that they would then go to Israel.

    Do you find this plausible at all? Golitsyn wrote in New Lies for Old that the end goal was a “worldwide federation of communist states”, a rather nice euphemism for a global fascist dictatorship of hell and misery. But he implied that the communists would carve up the world among themselves. Do you find it plausible that China would turn on Russia after a successful attack?

    Thanks for all you do in these troubling times, btw.

    1. To answer your question, Perseus, the Kremlin has openly told at least one visitor what they are planning to do this week. I suspect the Kremlin is sharing its plans with many other visitors. That;s why so many leaders in Europe seem to know the timetable here. It is sensible for Russia to intentionally signal the West and thereby assure themselves that NATO will not react unpredictably. They want to warn the West against sanctions by threatening a cyber attack. Whether that threat is a bluff or not, we will see. Today the Duma voted 351 to 16 for recognition of Luhansk and Donetsk (just as my source predicted). Now the invasion is supposed to follow. As for a prelude to an attack on the West, bringing Ukraine back into the Union is a necessary strengthening move for Moscow. This move also reassures the Chinese that Moscow is a serious partner. At some point it will be Iran’s turn, and China’s turn. Each of these strategic partners will probably affirm their commitment through agreed on actions. As for a larger war, unless things spin out of control, the stew pot must cook a bit more. We have the revolt in Canada, the advent of administrative tyranny justified by the pandemic, the election fraud narrative and the 1/6 Commission. So many pots are on this stove, not to mention the unraveling vaccine narratives. Moscow wants to thoroughly discredit our leaders, our form of government. The crisis is now mature. We are headed toward the final sequence.

      1. I’ve long thought Russia would end up recognizing the fake statelets in the Donbas. Both are not run by the residents, but by Russia, specifically, probably the GRU. There have been Russian troops there since 2014, when the Russians stopped the Ukrainians from crushing their on the cheap invasion. Girkin can be grateful that Stalin was not in charge. He would probably would have had an appointment with Comrade Blokhin and his Walther pistol.

      2. Wow, that’s interesting and seems on target to me. The internal situation in the US and Great Britain is a mess, and if my memory is not mistaken (I can’t remember all the details), Russia also conducted military exercises as a sort of “dress rehearsal” just prior to the outbreak of open hostilities in Georgia.

      3. I’ve seen no reports of a Russian invasion at this point. Given modern thermal systems, however, the attack could begin at night. The MoD is saying the troops are returning to the bases. Some have claimed they were already at bases. I doubt that seriously as according to Satt photos they were living in the field.

      4. The never boring propagandist for the DNR on YouTube, Russell Bentley, has suggested that the larger invasion of Russia — which he suggests will be in response to a provocation by all those “nazis” and fascists in Ukraine (meaning anyone who disagrees with communist ideology) — will be delayed until the clouds and rain come into the region later in the week to make it more difficult to track troop movements via satellite.

    2. It is very strange. Last night it seemed imminent and then the Russians at least started pretending to deescalate.

      1. Putin has yet to accept the Duma vote to recognize Luhansk and Donetsk. The Russian troops still appear ready to invade. Allegedly a bridge was built in the Pripyat River by Russian forces last night four miles from the Ukrainian border.

  14. Jeff, are you at all concerned about US Olympic athletes being detained in China if the US and Russia get into a back and forth cyberwar, now that China is openly backing Russia?

      1. While the situation is frightening, it is almost a kind of relief to think everything will soon be out in the open and apparent to many more. The lies are exhausting, especially the ones we tell ourselves. Our faces are covered, but masks are being ripped off left, right, and center, figuratively speaking. Some people are hurridly making emergency preparations now. Many can sense the danger but think it is domestic.

      2. Thinking back on Georgia in 2008, Russia also claimed to be moving back and leaving in July. There seemed to be a short period of quiet. A month later they invaded.

  15. Get a load of this:

    Pentagon’s Latest Strategy: Promote Socialism To Combat China
    Adam Kredo • February 15, 2022 3:15 pm

    The Pentagon is slated to host an event on Wednesday making “the case for global justice and democratic socialism” as a means to combat China’s rise, sparking ire on Capitol Hill.

    The event, titled, “Responding to China: The Case for Global Justice and Democratic Socialism,” is being hosted by the Institute for National Strategic Studies, a department of the National Defense University, the Pentagon’s top policy shop. The event is open to the public and will be held on the Pentagon’s Strategic Multilayer Assessment platform, a Defense Department initiative that studies global challenges, according to an invitation for the event posted online.

    Featured speaker Thomas Piketty, a French economist, “will argue that the right answer” to addressing China’s rise “lies in ending Western arrogance and promoting a new emancipatory and egalitarian horizon on a global scale, a new form of democratic and participatory, ecological and post-colonial socialism,” according to the event invitation. “If they stick to their usual lecturing posture and a dated hyper-capitalist model, Western countries may find it extremely difficult to meet the Chinese challenge.” Piketty is the author of the book Time for Socialism.

      1. Welcome to how people like me have felt, mr Nyquist, since the beginning of this present age. One does not ” win” against modern sectarianism when most people allegedly aligned with you are at least half in the enemy camp in some fashion: feminists, etc… You are right about Von Clausewitz of course, versus Sun Tzu, but I am thinking only Almighty God Himself can prove the point. And will. Now that, is serious.

      2. serious (adj.)

        mid-15c., “expressing earnest purpose or thought” (of persons), from Old French serios “grave, earnest” (14c., Modern French sérieux) and directly from Late Latin seriosus, from Latin serius “weighty, important, grave,” probably from a PIE root *sehro- “slow, heavy” (source also of Lithuanian sveriu, sverti “to weigh, lift,” svarus “heavy, weighty;” Old English swær “heavy,” German schwer “heavy,” Gothic swers “honored, esteemed,” literally “weighty”). As opposite of jesting, from 1712; as opposite of light (of music, theater, etc.), from 1762. Meaning “attended with danger” is from 1800.

        -ly (2)

        common adverbial suffix, forming from adjectives adverbs signifying “in a manner denoted by” the adjective, Middle English, from Old English -lice, from Proto-Germanic *-liko- (cognates: Old Frisian -like, Old Saxon -liko, Dutch -lijk, Old High German -licho, German -lich, Old Norse -liga, Gothic -leiko); see -ly (1). Cognate with lich, and identical with like (adj.).

        Weekley notes as “curious” that Germanic uses a word essentially meaning “body” for the adverbial formation, while Romanic uses one meaning “mind” (as in French constamment from Latin constanti mente). The modern English form emerged in late Middle English, probably from influence of Old Norse -liga.

        Perhaps it would be somewhat helpful; if people in general and specific; would at least sometimes, spend time – asking themselves – seriously: “What do I mean when I use that word?”

        As in: Do you seriously think . . . . . ?

        (A comment that is, and is not, about Biden)

      1. Infighting amongst the Oligarchical clans. There will be no invasion, as there is no need or desire to do so. If anyone plans anything, itll be the would be rejects of the OUN variety who might attempt a false flag attack (like tomorrow on Purim so people can blame Jews!). But even they will have no need, as it looks like they’ll have their Galician rump state in any case, for their spreading their ideology. You already have a man on here who is slowly but surely advocating clearing the ” good name” of people like Bandera. You should ask him what he thinks of “Roma” and” Zhids”: I already know what he thinks about “Moskals”

        No, what you have here is more than anti Communism, which is reasonable and popular. What gravitates here are tribal and religious haters. Why is that, that a Great Russian Nationalist and Monarchist would be so vehemently and poisionously opposed? Your fans would drive off another Alexander Solzhenitsyn or Igor Sharefevich, I am thinking. So again, no invasion. Biden and Clinton will not be able to distract the West forever against their treason, uncovered slowly but surely by Durham.

      2. “You should ask him what he thinks of “Roma” and” Zhids”: I already know what he thinks about “Moskals””

        The irony, Strannik, is that you’ve made it clear that you yourself are an out and out racist, justifying the destruction of the Crimean Tatars based on imaginary crimes. If I recall, you said something about Tatars “wanting to bring back the good old days of enslaving” slavs or some such nonsense, in response to a comment about Russian soldiers–in broad daylight–kidnapping a Crimean Tatar who was later found tortured to death. We also have not seen you saying anything about all those Russian “separatist” leaders prancing around with Swastikas when not saluting giant photos of Stalin.

        There is a reason why the Ukrainian Jews continue to make announcements condemning Russian anti-Semitism and aggression against Ukraine. While they will be the first to say that Ukraine isn’t perfect, they’re not buying Russian BS about roaming Nazis or a Nazi regime in Ukraine with a Jewish President in charge!

      3. Strannik, I have read your posts here for a long time, and while I disagree (I think) with your interpretation of events, I think some of the comments directed against you have been uncalled for and contrary to the spirit of chivalry. That being said, whatever the political affiliations of Russia’s leaders, they have chosen to ally themselves with China, the greatest enemy my country has ever faced. China shows itself daily to be a greater and greater scourge on the world, and so I think that while that alliance stands, the United States and Russia must have a relationship of struggle rather than friendship.

      4. Luke, Strannik has brought it on himself with his aggressive ignorance and Putinist stupidity. I don’t like using that kind of language on a man, but he has uniformly pushed a line of Putinist lies and agitprop. He calls anyone “Banderist” who dares tell the truth about Putin and Ukraine, while anyone knowing the history of Ukraine understands quite well why Bandera is respected in Ukraine. Frankly, Strannik has insulted the intelligence of most of us on here, and even after being taken to task for his stupidity, he still carries on with the same nonsense. He would fit in quite well over at Russia Today which is filled with same sort of Putin apologists as he is. He’s simply a troll and contributes little to nothing to the conversation. Given his posting, his Orthodoxy is also very questionable. As long as he keeps coming a posting his swill, it will be necessary to deal with him in terms that he refuses to understand because he simply can’t be bothered or simply wants to feel like a martyr. He deserves little respect.

      5. It is good to have a little of the Putinist worldview here, so we can see it up close, converse and grapple with it; because softer forms of it are everywhere and this helps us trace its lineage, expose its untruthfulness. We need to confront these narratives and learn why they are so successful.

  16. Looking at the Ukrainian response to Russia’s obvious preparations, is it a hope that the Russians will leave Ukrainian people largely alone while using the land as a corridor to the west? That hopefully they can avoid a Katyn Forest redux?

    While Ukraine has largely succeeded in stopping a low grade invasion from advancing, they know that their military hasn’t a chance of stopping a determined, armoured attack. That’s the background for my questions above.

    As for the timing, I don’t think the attack will happen before summer, probably July. There are tactical reasons for my conclusion. But I could be wrong.

  17. I honestly don’t understand how people like Tucker Carlson, who claim to be conservatives with a populist bent, can be so pro-Russia. Are they not aware that Putin referred to the collapse of the USSR as the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century?” Or that Russian agents likely working under his orders have assassinated or attempted to assassinate critics and dissidents both at home and abroad, such as the poisoning of Litvinenko with polonium, or the attempted poisoning of Sergei Skripal, leading to collateral damage as many other completely innocent people in Great Britain were exposed to the the toxic nerve agent that was used in the attempt against the latter? Or that he has aided communist countries like Venezuela and Cuba which are in the America’s “backyard?” How can people like Tucker Carlson — who, on the one hand claims to stand for individual liberty and freedom, and yet on the other suggests that Putin represents no serious threat to America or the notion of individual liberty that exists in the US — reconcile these two contradictory positions? I just don’t get it. So far as I can tell, Putin represents the sort of totalitarian, oppressive government that existed under the Soviet system, and notwithstanding that fact, American conservatives suggest that Putin is no threat and is really just a little overzealous in his promotion of traditional values and so on. Huh?

    1. Yes, it worries me too; especially because Putin is a murderer with totalitarian inclinations. We are not obligated to fight him; but let’s not depict him as the victim of Western imperialism. That is hard to take.

    2. Conservatives are inherently simple-minded people; the KGB influenced Western society to abandon traditional Christianity, then portrayed Putin as the counter-point to it. For those who know nothing about the KGB’s historical machinations, they accept this projection. They truly think Putin represents some form of Orthodox Christianity repelling the anti-christian culture that has swept the West.

      This is, of course, despite the fact that Putin has praised the Cheka, who perpetuated the most monstrous atrocities upon Christian priests and nuns. But as I said, conservatives are simple-minded people.

      1. Perseus: your first sentence caused me to laugh. Many people are simple-minded, including communists, liberals, socialists and people from all beliefs. A person who can look at all sides and understand them all is a rare breed, and Jeff is one of them.

        Most people think merely the basis of appearances. They look at Russia with its oligarchs and from appearances say that Russia is turning capitalist. There are people on this list who make that claim. But below the surface it’s just a variation on the communist theme. Which is why both Russia and China can still claim to be communist. Europe is called “Christian” based on appearances, while true Christians are rare in Europe. I can go on. Many times appearances belie the truth. Those who are simple-minded think according to appearances without digging below the surface to find the real truth.

        Western society had largely abandoned traditional Christianity long before the Cheka/KGB was founded. The very effective attacks questioning the accuracy of the Bible were started in the first decade of the 1800s, before Karl Marx was born. Those attacks were based on a belief in evolution, before Charles Darwin was born. Those attacks started within the state churches. Yet these neo-pagans are called “Christian” because of appearances.

    3. By *what evidence* do some of you here conclude that Tucker Carlson is ‘pro-Putin? That charge is absurd. He is the most reasoned current voice in the media, and on an across-the-issues basis. He does not root for Russia. He simply questions Pathetic Joe’s policy of rushing to a totally needless war with the world’s prime nuclear armed adversary, which very possibly could (if not would) end your likely comfortable life and mine, leaving us to die in whatever horrid manner, fast or slow. Since when did being anti-war means one is in favor of kissing up to a foreign leader? Carlson’s stance is but one aspect of the whole media approach to the situation. Virtually all the rest of the media has joined in on this insane war-rooting. Whatever happened to the concept of dissent, eh? Up until the last decade, it was always a cornerstone of the left, especially since the Vietnam war cranked up. Up through both the remainder of the Cold War, the Gulf War, and at the outbreak of the Iraq invasion. *Now* who are the ones calling dissenters virtual traitors, hm? Exactly. The same Democratic Party (and now President) that excoriated Ronald Reagan for, among other things, calling the Soviet Union (e.g., the Russians) the ‘evil empire’, and for joking about ‘the bombing starts in five minutes’ are now the ones rushing troops and aircraft and ships to the European theatre as a ‘warning’ to Russia. The same party that couldn’t wait to cut all military aid to the former South Vietnam in 1974 now is all in on stuffing every U.S. weapon they can get away with on Ukranian territory. The same party that so feared nuclear war with the Soviet Union in the 1980s doesn’t give the faintest hoot about the same danger now. Mr. Carlson reiterates only one point: **There is no reason to risk war with Russia over the Ukraine!!** Period. However, now simply wanting to save the US from the worst possible outcome of this situation is considered virtually fifth-column activity by many. Why is that? I fear also how the authorities will handle dissenters if a conflict actually does break out and escalate. Arrest and imprisonment? Seizure of assets? Don’t laugh, it *has happened here*. Both Abraham Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson went after war dissenters with no gloves on. And look what FDR did to Japanese-American citizens. And the relative few who refused to serve during WWII were still imprisoned if they persisted and then eventually searched out and detained. I’ll pass on the Vietnam antiwar movement, because it was indeed riddled with genuine anti-American activists and real or defacto communists. But even the most vociferous ‘dissenters’ like Daniel Berrigan were largely given a pass at the time (the Chicago 7 and the Weathermen notwithstanding). So Vietnam may have been a dissent exception, yet no wonder with all the noise the left made over it. But now, oppose the U.S. risking war and ‘standing up to Putin’, and it’s “No dissent for you!” Scratch a leftist, uncover a fascist, indeed. Worse still, almost all Republicans are falling in line. Madness can indeed be contagious. The general reaction to Covid on part of both the populace and governing authorities proved that. Better hope someone interrupts the same inane reaction with this new brewing fiasco. Right on, Tucker.

  18. What if mobilizing, credibly, to the brink, is the whole point?

    It seems consistent with what appears to be the first wave of China-Russia strategy here at the start of the Biden presidency: introduce and showcase their own “New World Order” – meaning a shift from a unipolar to multipolar balance of power, with China and Russia now the drivers.

    This seems to involve exposing the rot and emptiness of U.S. power. Afghanistan was the first play (show U.S. allies they can’t count on us, gain assets). Now, Ukraine (split NATO, identify potential partners, isolate US).

    By hanging the sword of Damocles over Ukraine, Russia has effectively seared into global consciousness the idea that Ukrainian neutrality, or even reunification with Russia, is inevitable. What’s more, the US, UK, EU and NATO have so beclowned themselves (barking belligerently, while denying the obvious (ie, Ukraine will not join NATO) and refusing any meaningful help) – many are begrudgingly thinking it’s actually fair or “natural” that Ukraine steer clear of the West. Meanwhile, France, Germany, and even Zelensky seem to be quietly imagining how to deal and live with Russian influence over Ukraine, apart from or even in defiance of their wouldbe overlords (EU, NATO). And, China has emerged with open, public support for Russia’s “security priorities” – telegraphing their “moral alliance” based on national sovereign prerogatives.

    In short, by not firing a shot, Russia and China are winning influence and changing assumptions, diminishing the US, and identifying potential transactional or ideological partners. And other players are figuring out where they’ll fit.

    Russia’s gained a lot through this “exercise” that it wouldn’t have gained by brute force, and also wouldn’t have gained without the very real and credible perception of imminent brute force. Everyone now knows Russian influence over Ukraine is possible, likely …. inevitable. Maybe that was the goal.

    We’ll soon know, and maybe it’s fluid. But it seems always more efficient to assert influence through deals and duress rather than open occupation, if possible. And once the mask is dropped, it’s dropped. It seems like China and Russia are still laying the groundwork.

    1. Interesting ideas. Yes. Psychological games are always a possible explanation. At some point, however, something outrageous is going to occur.

      1. The other thing is – if this is a bluff – they’ve now established a precedent for fully mobilizing only to hold off. For a complacent west, imagine how far they could go with barely a yawn from the Western public and even many in charge. No need to hide for the element of surprise, because people don’t believe war is possible and now think Russia doesn’t want one, either.

        This gambit is sort of no lose for them. They make gains without violence, and can be ready for violence at a time of their choosing.

      2. Yet the Russian bear has wanted to swallow all of Europe since the Tsarist days. This posing may gain influence, but ultimately they need boots on the ground to cement their conquest.

    2. If it’s a bluff, the NATO governments and their populaces are now well and truly alerted to the fact that Russia is not a spent force as we were all told for years and that, by the same token, NATO’s armies are weak. In other words, if he has any serious designs on taking down the West with military action, why postpone it any further given that his army is already mobile and that a climbdown and restoration of “normality” would probably be seized upon by the NATO governments as the cue to re-arm and modernize as fast as humanly possible.

      1. I think a Ukrainian reunion with Russia is inevitable because NATO will not defend Ukraine and Russia has the strength to take it. Why wouldn’t they? Perhaps this is a misjudgment on my part; yet it is a simple calculation, according to the totalitarian pkaybook. Moscow wants Ukraine, needs Ukraine, must have Ukraine. Who is going to stop them?

      2. All of your assumptions are based on the idea that “Communists”, as broadly as that term applies for you, are inhuman monsters hellbent on global dominance. This applies to the leaders and many movers/shakers of various nations (China and Russia largely); you envision these people as Evil and motivated by deeply sinister and convoluted plans spanning across multiple generations. Putin’s motivations are so obscured to you because you’re ignoring the fact that he is still just a man, like you and me. He feels and fears the same things as you and me. Would you invade Ukraine? Of course not. But would you take strategic steps to project yourself and your nation as hawkish and ready to throw your military weight around (like America does) in order to maintain your security? Of course you would. If you look at the actions of Russia (and China) from a basic human standpoint, they make logical sense. When you only look at them under a Red Conspiracy microscope, you see nothing but political violence directed at you, your beliefs, and your livelihood. Would you want them looking at America this way? There is a long-standing precedent that the USA will invade whoever it wants and set up military bases there, so they certainly could! Or would you want them to instead see a flawed nation of human beings, much like themselves, simply trying to survive? The answer is easy. Why do you so desperately want it to be hard? If you look at “Communists” as Pure Evil just because you personally believe they are, don’t be surprised when they look at you the same.

      3. These are interesting points, Radiofort. I have known communists that were “sweethearts.” That does not change the dehumanizing outcome in practice, however. The power of a person can make an ideology more than the questionable philosophizing that it is. Benjamin Gitlow, a close friend of John Reed, depicted Reed as a tragic figure who sincerely believed in communism and who, one dark day in Moscow, had an epiphany; namely, that communism was evil, that the leaders of the communist movement were mostly criminals, and that his own actions had been unforgivable. Gitlow published excerpts from the heartbreaking letter of Reed’s wife about Reed’s death. He had poor health and willed himself to die. Here is the measure of Reed’s humanity and his recognition of being on the wrong side. Your own ideological thinking always makes a caricature of what I say, so that you never really address anything that I write about. Please set aside your arrogance regarding what you think I believe. You have no real understanding of how I think. You always get that wrong. You automatically reduce me to a cartoon. Sadly, this turns your discourse into a cartoon .

      4. Unfortunately, though, communism is as much about strategy as it is about ideology. The communists, as a rule, are willing to take a step back to move two steps forward. Putin may just be “a man,” but he is a man who has shown a repeated willingness to use violence or the threat of violence to get his way, including giving his tacit approval to having operatives “off” his opponents or even just dissidents. He has also given his tacit approval to the imprisonment of journalists, protestors, and those who belong to religious minority groups such as the Jehovah Witness adherents. This sort of behavior is inimical to any society that claims to place a premium on personal liberty or respect for a diversity of opinions.

      5. Ahh yes, always ignoring the “ever-humanizing and peaceful practice of Capitalism” that always happens to fly under the radar as “the best there is”. I mean you no disrespect, even though you appear to mean it for me with the assertion, but you turn yourself into a cartoon. Because one man had a revelation regarding his beliefs does not mean it is a universal prophecy. How many Capitalists have had reforming revelations regarding their practices? Does this make Capitalism a mechanism of Satan? You would have us believe so. Regarding what I do and do not take away from your writings, one would think you might come to reason when hypothesizing the future, because of your obvious level of intelligence. Unfortunately your zealotry overpowers reason and sends you back down the conspiracy tunnel you’re so comfortable within. When this Russian military charade fizzles without the great war you always imagine, will that make you consider perhaps these empirical Communist dogs you fear so much are more like you than you’re comfortable believing? Or will you find another hole to chase your fear down? Time will tell.

      6. Every day without this Communist world war is another day you’re proven wrong. In fact, the only way you’ll ever be proven right is if war breaks out and unfolds in the way you anticipate. Because your theory relies on such sinister motives and strategic plans, if any future unfolds to the contrary, you will be wrong. Such deliberate actions cannot be considered successful without the ultimate goal being accomplished, so any Communist plot that falls short of total Capitalist destruction is a failure. Many angry Americans want to blame “Communists” for all the world’s problems, probably much like how angry Communists would blame “Capitalists” instead. Political extremists are all sides of the same destructive coin. They point fingers at the other extremists, ignoring how they themselves fuel the fire of conflict just as vigorously. Extremism is the single most detrimental characteristic of humanity, as it so effectively blinds us to the fundamental similarities we all share, and prevents us from trusting each other and cooperating. Yet, if you just look at America as an example (since this is where we live), you see a modern love affair with extremism of all kinds. From Antifa to the Proud Boys, BLM soldiers to QAnon, Capitol stormers to retail looters; we are a nation drunk on extremism, almost to a point of beaming pride. It automatically drives us against each other. The world’s wars are often an extension of this phenomenon and the sooner we recognize it, the sooner we can all make the choice to step away from it for the sake of our future. Can we agree to step back from our tendency towards extremist belief every time we are drawn to it? Are you willing to join me in this endeavor?

      7. I am not an extremist. You are the one defending communism, a system that killed 100 million people in the twentieth century. Communism is extremism. Because I say the truth about communism, you call me an extremist. Shame on you. I am merely reporting what defectors from the communist world have warned us about (in terms of strategy). In this regard, nothing here is theory. It is sourced testimony which matches what is happening around the world and therefore has a claim to validity. These defectors are people who risked their lives to warn us. Please read Hanna Arendt’s three volume work on totalitarianism. Read the Black Book of Communism. It was written by leftists. Hannah Arendt was a leftist married to a communist. These people described the Stalin regime very precisely. The atrocities of communism are real. Their destruction of businesses and jobs are real. Get an education. Read books that are not written by communists for a change.

    3. This is also about dictating terms to the West. I can’t remember the last time Russia made demands like this and clearly threatened an attack if its demands were not met. You are correct that this is about establishing a new world; establishing new power for Russia at the table of world power, as the balance of military/economic power slowly tips in their favor, expect more and more belligerence and open threats.

      1. When weak act strong. Russia honestly feels threatened by the prospects of a NATO Ukraine, and the Covid Live Exercise, it seems to me. I believe that Putin has been quite candid, but takes advantage of the crisis to drive up the price of oil, which is at an all time high. Seven dollar gas at the pump is in the pipeline. Could go to ten.

  19. Another great article Jeff. Let us hope the Ukraine situation safely de-escalate. Here are reasons I believe many American conservatives including Tucker Carlson take sides with Putin.

    1. They hate Biden/Harris and his admin which was picked by race or sexual orientation not qualifications.
    2. Biden cheated in the election and should be removed.
    3. Putin is seen as a president who cares for his country, his people (Provides fallout shelters), and is a Christian whom some see as the only Christian country that will not allow Muslims to expand or Christian churches to be converted to mosques. I read somewhere that the Dutch are now minorities in their own country due to Islamic migrants and immigration and other European countries will soon follow.
    4. Many want DC destroyed so we can start fresh.
    5 Russia does not allow wokeism to infiltrate their military.
    6 Russia has vastly expanded and modernized its military while the American military worry if pregnant women can fly F35s and we fund free sex changes.
    7. Most conservatives believe Putin hates Hillary and Obama which they also believe have great influence on Biden.
    8 We (America) would not allow S400 or S500 missile systems or Russian nukes in Cuba, Mexico, etc so why should we be suprised Putin doesnt want our military hardware in Ukraine?
    9. Some see Putin as a savior, destroying DC since Americans can no longer trust any election to remove the Democrats.
    These are just the thoughts I have picked up visiting various sites. It is crazy to think Putin will destroy DC and just say “here ya go, start fresh, Love Vlad”!
    I think during Trumps admin conservatives sorta seen Putin as on our side against the Dems.

    I truly worry about Americas future. We will be surrounded by communist countries in the future. Many including myself do not trust Canadian Trudeau who may sell out to China and/or Russia. I have heard for a few years Chinese troops have been seen in various areas of Canada and Chinese military pilots were in Canada to train with Canadian pilots. Trudeau also invited Chinese generals to train but that was cancelled.

    Why in the world are Americans and Canadians allowing China to buy businesses, build runways in Texas?
    We are shooting ourselves in the foot for $$.

    Jeff do you think the situation with Ukraine would be different if Trump was still president or this was going to happen regardless?
    Also do you think there is any truth that China will infect Olympic athletes to spread another virus? It sounds crazy but anything is possible anymore.

    1. Anything has always been possible, so why are you so afraid now of being attacked? Are you always afraid? Have you ever felt safe? How afraid would you be of a Russian man just like you who has always been afraid of American invasion? Would you challenge him to a duel? Is fear the only thing you understand? Courage neutralizes fear. You should try that out some time.

      1. You must never watch Putin interviews; in almost every one, he terrifies the average Russian man that America is plotting to nuke their country. No one can even come close to the fearmongering that the communists do.

      2. Perseus: You do understand that the USA invaded Iraq under completely false pretenses of WMDs, right? You do understand that all the things America is afraid of Russia doing right now…America has already done? Why then do we look at it as though only a purely Evil leader/nation would do something like it? Is George Bush Jr. Evil for invading Iraq? Could other nations have justifiably armed their borders to prevent an American invasion? Would that have justified all out war between nations viewing it as an infraction of Iraqi sovereignty, and those seeing the invasion as necessary for peace? Swinging military might around in order to get what a nation wants is a play taken directly from the American playbook. Why then do we look at it with such disdain when another country does it?

  20. I believe Putin so far has largely lost if this is a bluff. He publicly stated that be believes NATO is overwhelmingly more powerful in potential power than Russia. His exercises so far have avoided the Belarus border with Poland. While NATO is split on what happens outside of the alliance, there is no credible change on NATO’s unity protecting within the alliance.

    His draft security treaty was largely ignored and trampled. He demanded all troops and equipment to be removed from eastern Europe, and instead the West has been adding more. It might be a token amount, but it’s still a slap in the face. Same with NATOs open door policy being unchanged.

    As for discord, a lot more could have been done a lot cheaper and safer through non-military means. Also, I believe a lot of Russian disinformation has been undermined by the build up. Multiple popular independent political pundits have been spouting off Russian propaganda. It became much more obvious since now the stakes are so high. For example, Tucker, Tulsi, Jimmy Dore, Breaking Points, Alex Jones, Mike Adams, even Hasanabi. When Hasan came back from his break to discuss Russia, he got into a major argument with his viewers because he was defending the annexation of Crimea. I think all of this is probably upsetting independent viewers, and making them reconsider how or if they listen to these sources.

    Finally by playing the victim, Russia looks like prey. If Putin doesn’t give a grand gesture to prove otherwise, he will actually be prey instead of a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

    1. I do not think Putin looks like prey. There are two reasons for all this. One is Moscow has been losing its grip on Ukraine. The Kremlin sees Ukraine as belonging to Russia and the Kremlin envisions Ukraine as a vital part of a new union of some kind. The dilemma is how to bring that off. Things have reached a critical juncture and an invasion is a solution that is seriously contemplated. The other problem is the United States and NATO. How can these “structures” be replaced with new ones. Think SARS-CoV-2. Think vaccine fiasco. Think trucker strike, Antifa, civil war, internal divisions fostered by the usual suspects. Russia and China want to create new structures and redraw the map of the world. This is the larger context for Ukraine.

      1. Russia has communication vessels (spy ships) in Havvai’ian waters. China has nuclear armed submarines off the US East and West coasts. The Monroe Doctrine has probably never been enforced. The United States, patrols the waters of the, South China Sea. How did it ever get that name? The US also patrols the, Black Sea, which is quite a detour to sail into that big cove. Okay, touché. Whoever violated who’s sphere of influence first, has probably been hopelessly obfuscated.

        Has anyone publicly speculated, other than perhaps, JR Nyquist on maybe one occasion, or a blogger here, ever speculated that the supposed, Covid virus was engineered, and/or released by Russia?
        Considering the so-called, ‘Great Reset’ (the term ‘Reset’ having been coined by Hilarity Clinton in gesture to Russia) is affecting the entire World, might it not be reasonable and prudent, for Putin to bolster Russia’s borders from potential invasion? How many Americans call for the same on the Southern border of the United States?

        When the Soviet Union absorbed Eastern Europe, Russian citizens were migrated into the adjacent countries. Russian language became mandatory learning. Today after several generations, the original nationalism of each former Soviet member nation state, has been undermined, and Russian nationalists seek autonomy for their ghetto regions. Russia built an extensive wall of cards to insulate itself.

        The challenge for Russia now becomes, how to shore up the crumbling societies, and unify them cohesively in a sustainable productive manor, or else Russia itself might well become subject to the Great Reset, or as President George Herbert Walker Bush called it, The New World Order.

      2. When I was in the Navy back in the early 70s, the Soviets had a “trawler” just outside territorial waters (the 3 mile limit. 200 miles is the EEZ and free navigation is the rule there). Those trawlers were actually intel ships and they were outside every port that had a base or support facility. Many times they were anchored outside the mole at Naples, Italy where my ship was based. The Soviets had some excuse to come into the port, but the Italians would not allow them inside, but they could anchor outside and make short visits inside. They could find what they wanted on the boat trips to the wharf where they could go ashore, or receive goods to supply the ship. They refueled from the same Italian barges we used. It would have been better if they had simply told them they had to stay outside the 3 mile limit and not enter for any reason.

    2. I am familiar with this Hasanabi. He is a Twitch streamer who, for some odd reason, has been promoted quite heavily by the left.

      I’ve seen the Putinist BS from the “right” wing. What does it look like from Hasanabi? What are his arguments? And why and how would he defend the taking of Crimea, considering the plight of the Tatars?

    3. Communists generally do not do bluffs. They set up win-win ultimatums, where either possibility is a win. NATO unilaterally disarming is the bigger win, but do not think that they are not ready to invade. Also do not preclude the possibility of something emerging from these negotiations. Breaking the will of the Europeans is the goal; Russia might just invade a little, Europe buckles, and Russia gets what it wants. They can take Ukraine at any time, make no mistake about that. This is no bluff, simply a choice dilemma they are presenting to Europe.

      1. I suspect the invasion is delayed for unexpected ground conditions. The Russian vehicles are unable to move rapidly because the ground is not sufficiently frozen to support columns of 46-ton tanks.

    1. The biggest problem with Bliken, and the rest of Obama’s minions, is that they have been caught in far too many lies for them to be reliable. If there is an attack, today/tomorrow, then at this point they are planning a night assault, or waiting for daylight tomorrow. The best response I can make to everything being said is, “we’ll see.” But, as Jeff has pointed out, Ukraine has not been mobilizing, so they don’t expect anything to happen.

  21. Jeff, do you believe a war in Ukraine might be a strategy by Russia and China to distract the US from defending Taiwan? What are the chances that Putin and Xi might launch simultaneous attacks?

    1. I do not think China wants to invade Taiwan. They can take the island anytime they want if the USA is collapsed by other means (like biological attacks and internal problems).

      1. Agreed. China already has Taiwan, similarly to how Russia already has Ukraine. They are aiming for bigger game.

  22. Re:
    [ JEFF NYQUIST says:
    FEBRUARY 15, 2022 AT 6:45 PM
    It is interesting how Ukrainians and Russians do not really have the sense that an invasion will take place. What makes them so sure? ]

    Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy, has scolded Biden for alarming Ukrainian’s about a Russian invasion, which Zelenskyy has assured his people is not immanent. It would seem that Ukraine is in negotiations with Russia, and that Zelenskyy intends to compromise.

    1. Based on the latest things I’ve seen from Zelensky, he has not taken joining NATO off the table. The last thing I’ve seen from Putin is that he seems to just want assurances that NATO will not be putting nukes in Ukraine. Frankly, if that’s all Putin wants that’s workable. OTOH, he would still have to get out of all of Ukraine. he can take his Navy and troops down to the naval base they had been building at Novorossiysk.

      Frankly, I think Putin would have a problem with that, and the issue really isn’t nukes, but control of Ukraine.

      1. Read the December 17 ultimatum:

        The communists essentially want to control their enemy’s military movements. They want a removal of all NATO troops from nations that joined after 1997, which is essentially Eastern Europe, Poland, etc.. they also want their enemy to voluntarily move their missiles back.

        They essentially want no NATO soldiers in all of the former Soviet states, so that Russia’s military would have no resistance for their invasion.

        It is a typical communist maneuver: present two choices that are lose-lose for their enemy. Either they surrender or get attacked in some form or fashion. If the communist’s enemy does not voluntarily surrender, the communist raises his hands and says “well we wanted to negotiate”.

        If I had to guess, most of this entire mobilization is getting some kind of percentage of the demands on that list. The communists do not reasonably think they will get it all. In one hand is a full mobilization of their military; in the other, their demands. It remains to be seen if Stoltenberg, NATO, France, Germany et al buckle and kneel on some of these demands. If so, then it is still a win for the communists; they forced their enemy into weakening even further based on nothing more than a threat of force. And the attack will still come, but now their target will be even weaker. There is no limit to how many times they can do this maneuver; remember the completely fabricated Belarus “refugee invasion threat” they created which blackmailed the EU into paying billions? The same play, over and over, except at one point they will actually invade.

    2. If you were Ukrainian and had to choose between joining NATO and becoming a blazing, war zone, or else bonding in union with Russia, to settle for a similar status quo as an pre existing, infiltrated puppet state, and live to renegotiate latter, what would you do?

      1. Bargaining chips. He plays Russia off the US. He already has the US bagged and pocketed. It’s all about how much or how little of Ukraine’s gas revenues must be paid in tribute to Russia, versus how much the US would pay Ukraine for them to join NATO, while managing to escape becoming a war zone. Quite a balancing act. In the end, Ukraine will pay and Europe will pay. The US will sell gas to Europe at a slight discount.

      2. Your money or your life. The Great Reset is about knocking all the chips off the poker table and scrambling for 52 pickup. Those who refuse to take the mRNA lethal injections are out of the game, and those who did are soon to be. The Phoenix that rises from the ashes, as the Masons would say.

  23. A Must Read Report On Ukraine

    Incredibly detailed report on Ukraine by RUSI’s Jack Watling and Nick Reynolds based on what looks like extensive interviews with Ukrainian military and intelligence officers over recent weeks.

    Bottom line.

    “Meeting with Ukrainian security officials there is a widespread acknowledgement that many of their colleagues – even in some quite senior positions – are working for or sympathetic to Russia.”

    The report is here …. The Plot to Destroy Ukraine (Jack Watling and Nick Reynolds, RUSI).

    1. Zelensky will make a deal which will apparently leave Ukraine independent. Ukrainian people won’t even notice the tax Ukraine pays to Russia in gas revenues, because they don’t see any of that now. There won’t be any greater reduction in freedom, because there isn’t any now. NATO countries will remain on the outskirts, and Russia won’t assimilate them. That would be biting off more than can chew. Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine will form a mutual defense and trading bloc. If they take a cue from Henry Ford, they might even develop a sustainable economy. They are not immune from, The Great Reset, but will not become part of, The New World Order.

  24. To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you have people posting who are emotionally invested in anti Russian animosity based on deep seated ethno tribal and religious/cultural identities and beliefs, you are going to get a skewed perspective on the world around you. Alexander Solzhenitsyn would not be welcome here. Nor Dostoyevsky or Sharefevich. Nor even ” Anatoly Golitsyn ” himself, I think. This is where things here have been led to, unfortunately, a kind of echo chamber or even intellectual prison. On its falsifiability, the thesis as generally laid out could only be sure of its threats non existence, if Russia ceased to exist. And no surprise, you have more than a few here who think just that!

    1. You shill for a man who has the blood of Russian people on his hands. A man who praised the Cheka, an organization of sociopathic criminals that brutally tortured the Russian people to death in perhaps the most hellacious brutality in human history.

      You shill for a regime that imprisoned and tortured Solzhenitsyn, that oppressed Dostoyevsky, that murdered Litvinenko for exposing the terrorists who rule Russia, who are the enemy of the Russian people. How dare you say their names.

      We know your predictable communist formulations of language, how the murderers and oppressors of the people pretend to represent them, similarly to how the oppressors of the Chinese people wrap themselves in the flag of representing them.

      This is the kind of things Stannik defends:

      I only wonder and am offended why the KGB deemed Jeff worthy of only one paid shill; he deserves at least 10 more to try and muddy his truth.

      1. I note that you did not actually address what I said, because you can’t: you have to stoop to personal attacks and lies, as if you can silence what I’ve said in people’s minds by drowning it out with venom, spittle, and excrement. And who oppressed Dostoyevsky? You give yourself away with that: you hate not just the new Russias after 1917, but the old Russia before. Your own attacks reveal and confirm what I had just said: emotionally invested in ethno tribal and cultural religious antipathy against Russia. Let me guess: a Muslim? A Uniate? Baltic? Perhaps, perhaps not, but I reckon that its something like that close enough.

    2. All facetiousness aside (not to be confused with Fascism), in my own personal experience in this, which is extensive, you can’t tell nobody noth’n.

    3. I do not see anyone here calling for war with Russia, or calling for the extermination of Russia. You know perfectly well that is not something I advocate. I only advocate prudence in American foreign policy. The hostility you feel here is a reflection of your own hostility to Americans. People here are sometimes against you, personally, because they are suspicious of narratives that are supportive of hostile foreign dictators. You think supporting Putin is patriotic? I think Putin has harmed Russia terribly. I agree with Anna Politkovskaya’s assessment of him. I think you are morally confused, or dishonest, to evade Putin’s criminality and lack of repentance. We have bad leaders here in the USA, and we hate them. Unlike you, we do not support them. Biden is crazy to threaten Russia with sanctions right now. He will split NATO if he does that. I also think Ukraine would be safer if we promised not to admit the country into NATO. Why not? We did it in the case of Austria during the Cold War. Give Putin what he is asking for and see what he does. Peace or war? Attacking me for what other people write, by the way, is something I won’t accept. Readers here have criticized me for letting you post here. Right? In fact, I have lost readers by letting you post here. And I have very serious reservations about you — the intemperate way you wrote about the situation in Luhansk and Donetsk.

      1. There are people here whose ideology of necessity sees the destruction and dismemberment of Russia as a natural consequence. They cling therefore to your ideas and those of Golitsyn as a kind of ” justification ” for their stance. I do not hate America or Americans, at all, criticism is not hatred. And this is why I in turn do not get upset with legitimate criticism-correct or out-of the Russian government. It doesn’t matter whether I support Putin or not politically, when it comes to the primatives and lunatics of various sorts who want to pull apart Russia no matter who leads. There is no rubric in your thinking under which a Russian leader or government would be free of your suspicions, and this gives room for the others to find a home here, with your thesis. I know what I know, but I’m not going to go out of my way to persuade anyone one way or another, because again people are invested for ethnic, cultural, religious reasons to believe in this, it’s part of their identity with its explanatory power to reinforce what they already believe. I also know that you are not going to go too far in a critique of them, either, although I have seen you do it from time to time, to be fair. You know though that a Russian nationalist like Alexander Solzhenitsyn would not be welcome here, although his anti Communism credentials are above reproach. The ” why?” of that, here, is a major issue in my argument. No room for genuine Russian nationalism here, it seems.

      2. Strannik: Please quote a line from someone here saying that Russia should be dismembered. I never saw such a thing here. I would have rebuked such a statement myself, and never saw the occasion to do so. Like our pro-communist visitor, Radiofort, you are making a straw man out of me. This is a dishonest rhetorical tactic. Address what I actually say. But then, you shy away from that. Think of what you have done: You basically come here as a guest and lie about what people here are concerned about. You slander me and many of my readers. You present yourself as a seriously religious person. Then you defend a seriously irreligious regime. And you are completely wrong in saying I would suspect any Russian leader. A leader who brought genuine reform, free speech, and decency to Russia would be fine by me. I would be overjoyed to see such a thing. So please do not come here and put words in my mouth. A leader who has members of parliament murdered, who has journalists murdered, who has whistleblowers like Litvinenko murdered — is evil. The present Kremlin regime is profoundly sinister. The evil men in Washington DC — who want socialism here in America — are in league with Xi and Putin. This is not about Russia. This is about communism and you are dishonestly trying to hide that fact. Your coming here makes no sense otherwise, sorry to say.

      3. And, for what its worth, I do believe that there is an international Communist conspiracy, which I oppose. But I do not see it as ruling Russia

      4. I know how you feel Jeff; honestly I really do. I am the most notorious troll on facebutt, and I don’t permit anyone to post on my pages at all. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that professional journalism must not censor public opinion, and that it’s always best to let conflicting views be expressed in order to perhaps gain new ideas and insights which otherwise might not have come to mind. Liberal talk show host, Phil Donahue, once expressed, that he prefers to let racists, for instance, fall of their own weight. Personally, I don’t find anything that Strannik says, that’s unworthy of reasonable debate. Furthermore, he contributes a great deal of challenging material to keep the reader sharp. It’s to your credit Jeff, that despite your despotic tendencies, you usually manage to demonstrate reasonable restraint.

      5. I have allowed many voices here. But I will cut out sloppy, irrelevant or off-topic items that are disruptive. We have no time now for sensationalist narratives favored by conspiracy theorists. These have been hugely successful in misleading people. And the sensationalists will pay a dear price for being blockheads once war begins. When going to war you must know your enemy. Misnaming your enemy is fatal kind of blunder, and it is not innocent. Where discernment fails, corruption has already taken root. There is a huge audience for that old conspiracy swill, and it is a wide highway to Hell. It is very destructive, very disorienting, and has been used to completely blot out historical subtleties essential for understanding the present crisis. I will not let active measures of this kind prevail here. The enemy wants you to suspect all players but them. They want you to believe in all manner of imaginary plots and cabals — but not theirs. Nobody is to be warned what is, in truth, a conspiracy of the totalitarian left. It is a global revolution. Being perfectly rude I will say, for the record, “It’s communism, stupid.” All other narratives appear crafted to deny this one, simple, truth. Those whose intellects have been corrupted, who will not study history, whose loud ignorance blots out rational discourse, can go watch Alex Jones. He is entertainment, and deserves credit as such. But he misses the mark. Truth can be likened to the center of a bullseye. Missing that bullseye, at this moment in history, can get us all killed. The danger is great.

  25. The fact that we are now wondering “will they, won’t they”, that Russian troops were supposedly withdrawing yesterday, that today was predicted by the European power, that Russia then trolled them on Twitter with the Travolta gif, does nothing but help Russia. It keeps their enemies in a constant, schizophrenic, bipolar back and forth, whim to the every movement of Russia, and simultaneously desensitizing them to actual, legitimate military movements.

    Russia’s entire goal in all of this was to get key concessions on NATO withdrawal and promises regarding Eastern Europe, push the West into further disarmament vis a vis treaties, and some kind of return to 1997 configuration, as Lavrov was informing Putin yesterday.

    The threat is more valuable than the invasion itself, sometimes. Lavrov was bragging to Putin yesterday in his schoolboy report back to him at their impossibly long table that the West was “shook” by Russia’s actions and had been forced into serious negotiations.

    Communists always, always would rather have their enemies unilaterally disarm and surrender than have the communists have to waste blood and treasure. It seems Ukraine has already surrendered; Russia knows it can take it at any time. Therefore they use the threat of invading a nation they already essentially have as leverage for forcing the disarmament of even more territory West.

    Furthermore, as some have said, bringing their military to a full mobilization near Europe’s Eastern border, then backing down, then calling for diplomacy, then mobilizing again, desensitizes European leaders that it may all be a bluff. This is a strategic advantage for Russia to be able to fully mobilize with barely a response from their target.

    It remains to be seen what they will do, but any nation with a survival instinct should NEVER allow an enemy to reach full military readiness and even make the threat. A nation that allows that either has no self-respect or is filled with traitors. At some point, Russia will be fully mobilized and this time it will not be an idle threat. The tanks will move, the city will fall, and the deluded will wake up to a harsh new open air prison like Donbass, where citizens who do not bend the knee are tortured to death.

      1. Da. It’s amazing to me how most people dismiss what Putin says. He has demonstrated weakness by repeating himself, most recently saying that he keeps repeating himself. He says that people should listen to what he says. He’s trying to warn everybody, not threaten them. It seems simple and straight foreword enough to me. Russia places massive troop buildups on Russia’s border. Everyone keeps calling it Ukraine’s border. It’s the border of Russia with Ukraine, to be precise. That’s Putin’s prerogative. He says he has no intention of invading Ukraine. If he wanted to invade Ukraine, he’d have done it already. What Putin says he’s going to do, is invade NATO if it comes to his border.

        This morning a kindergarten was bombed in Eastern Ukraine. Russia is blamed of course. Whether true of false, perhaps it’s food for thought of what would happen if Ukraine were to become an enemy member of NATO? Putin won’t invade Ukraine unless Ukraine joins NATO. He can leave troops on his border for as long as need be, and build cities there if he wants; another Berlin Wall. There is no need to play the invasion card this early in the game. Better to kill with suspense, and save resources for if actually needed. Putin maintains integrity by keeping his word not to invade, while the Globalists get hysterical in fear, trying to distract from the pending, Nuremberg type trials for the genocide of issuing mRNA lethal injections which have already killed hundreds of thousands, by inciting World war.

      2. Yes, I agree. With all due respect, people are giving too much credit to the globalists for some sort of “conspiratorial planning.” The evidence indicates to me, rather, that the “globalists” are motivated solely by profits and greed and the communists know this, so they use these tendencies to make the “globalists” dance to their tune. As far as I can tell, the globalists are working against their own best interests. While mRNA vaccines were good for profits, they have been terrible for the economy and for the health of the people, and more importantly, they have caused people to come to distrust their own government, and this at a time when unity is important to deal with the serious internal and external threats that are thrusting us into an existential crisis. I had the interesting opportunity to meet someone who is now a billionaire and I observed how this guy operated. He was a basket case. He paced around nervously all the day long fretting about his financial interests and was generally one of the most uptight people I’ve ever met. I actually went to school with this fellow and he sat around reading the Wall Street Journal while the other students were busy doing the sorts of things high school students generally do (which is pretty much anything but reading the Wall Street Journal and looking at daily stock prices). I just cannot see these type of people in some smoke-filled room plotting the course of the world. They are too busy looking at their own profit margins. There is no common ideology that ties them all together. On the other hand, for the communists ideology is everything. Every aspect of live is filtered through the lens of their ideology, and in the case of communism, the ideological aspects are so closely tied to strategic concerns that the two are practically inseparable. There will almost certainly be some sort of invasion at this point. Russia is doing everything it can to provoke this outcome.

      3. I’ve posted Operation Lockstep, above. Then there’s Agenda 21 of the UN, along with Agenda 32. Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, George Soros, and others meet and discuss depopulation all the time. The idea is to deliberately destroy the economy, kill people slowly and painfully as possible, eliminating The Bill Of Rights, and anyone with an inkling of them. Ultimately, they seek to conquer Russia. They have to, just as Communism must do to Freedom. This pushes Russia to unify with Belarus and Ukraine. Russia, The Evil Empire, is on the defensive, here. Coincidentally, in the US, illegal immigrant children have been taken from their parents and whisked away in the middle of the night to destinations unknown. As parents continue to die of the mRNA lethal injections, there will be many more orphans. Every child in the World has been traumatized by the Covid Live Exercise. The magnitude of malevolent evil is beyond measure.

      4. The rich probably want to be trendy and hip, just like everyone else and thanks to communist infiltration over a period of years, communist and socialist thinking have permeated the upper echelons of our society. The rich business people know they have to pay lip service to being liberal and socialist in their thinking in order to be left alone to continue raking in the profits, and so they pay lip service to these ideas that are popular in academic settings and among the cultural elite. Perhaps some of them even believe this sort of thing. But at the end of the day, what they are really concerned about is making money, and the communists have understood this for years (the NEP under Lenin, for example), and having taken advantage of this and the cynicism and political amorality of the globalists to achieve their own ends.

      5. Ngaire Woods, founding dean of the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, at The Great Narrative: A call to action, a meeting jointly organised by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) government and the World Economic Forum (WEF). Excerpt from the closing panel discussion streamed live on Friday the 12th of November 2021. English subtitles.

        “The good news is the elites across the world trust each other more and more, so we can come together and design and do beautiful things together. The bad news is that in every single country they were polling, the majority of people trusted their elite less. So, we can lead, but if people aren’t following, we’re not going to get to where we want to go.”

      6. Again, Barth, I just don’t see the collaboration aspect among all the globalists. Certainly, the communists could have easily cultivated a few “billionaires” for the very purpose of promoting policies to destabilize the West. I would actually suggest that Soros is an example of this. He came out of a communist-controlled country, Hungary. But there are also plenty of superrich people that are not a part of this agenda and don’t necessarily like what is going on in the West. You mention a few very influential people collaborating on some agendas, but this certainly does not lead to the conclusion that all of the industrialists are involved in a giant cabal to depopulate the earth. These crazy ideas about there being too many people on the planet to be sustainable are just as popular among the superrich as they are among the general public. We have been subjected to leftist propaganda for many years and the superrich are not immune to its influence. The only difference is that the superrich have money that they can throw at these issues. If there is a vast conspiracy, it is on a spiritual level. Those who reject God become the devil’s playthings. In that sense, and only in that sense, I will agree.

      7. Most notorious kind. Just like here. People who can’t debate, like to delete. On that point I agree with Strannik. I have to keep opening new accounts because facebutt demands a cell phone number. Cell phones cause cancer. I don’t use a cell phone.

  26. There is an invasion underway but it’s not in Ukraine.
    The Kings of the East are solving the American Problem.

    1. XI and Putin are fighting for nothing more than to stay in power and removing the US as the dominate super will be their claim to fame. Pawns in game played by fools, welcome to the winter of our discontent.

      ‘Will Xi Jinping’s ‘End of Days’ Plunge China and the World into War?’

      “Xi’s problems, unfortunately, can become our problems. He has, for various internal political reasons, a low threshold of risk and many reasons to pick on some other country to deflect elite criticism and popular discontent.”

      1. Spot on. Russia is the mask and China is the actual face. But don’t tell that to the average so called Conservatives in lust with the commies, i.e. RO. It appears, the “only” anti-communist country is Sweden. Cheers!

      2. Shipwreck: Xi along with Putin will plunge China, Russia and the world into world war. They are psychopaths who think that the deaths of hundreds of millions, if not billions, are needed to keep themselves in power. Don’t assume that they won’t do it.

        I see Xi as a cornered rat. He has long had popular discontent and now elite criticism is nothing less than a challenge to his power. Striking out in a world war is a way to deflect both challenges.

      3. Is there any proof to support the notion that these two men have some pressing, urgent need to “stay in power” or that their power is under threat whatsoever?

        Is there any proof that Xi and Putin are nothing more than communist functionaries, no more or less equal than other party members?

        Golitsyn wrote that Stalin’s reign was a critical turning point for Soviet communists, and that Chinese communists had long resolved the problem of a single person creating a one-person style communist dictatorship.

        We tend to think that because Putin and Xi are president, that they are somehow the main leaders there. But they are only president because they pretend to mimic democracies. Typically, the communist dictatorships had General Secretaries, who admittedly had power, but they were never all-powerful dictators.

        I challenge this entire theoretical formulation and see no proof of it. Of course there are purges in China; there are always purges in communist dictatorships.

        Western analysts always seem to perceive communist actions as some desperate lashing out, utterly devoid of strategy or foresight. If Putin or Xi commit an act of war, it will not be because they are “desperate to keep power”. It may be a general larger goal of the Party, but not a single individual.

        No, if/when war comes, it will be a thoughtful, measured, strategic decision, planned and decided on well in advance. We must stop underestimating these patient psychopaths.

      4. I’m replying to Perseus comment below. In 2014 the Russian dissidents Lev Timofeyev, and Segrgei Kovalev wrote and open letter which included the following: “Are you being cautious? Naive? Blind? Don’t you see that in our country over recent months the course of politics has not just been changed? In fact what has happened is a change of the political system. At the basis of this new order, at the basis of this official state ideology, the sole permitted one and obligatory for all, have been placed aggressive imperialistic ideas and a cult worship of the unquestioned authority of the single ‘national leader’. You, who know well the history of the past century, are somehow not familiar with this configuration? Perhaps you should watch once more the film ‘Triumph of the Will’ and try to find a place for the ‘systemic opposition’ in the scenes of that great movie.”

  27. I wanted to comment– it seems like the US intel agencies are finally fighting fire with fire by calling out every move Putin is about to make– first stating that there will be a false flag event as a pretext for an invasion (perhaps lives were saved because of this), then predicting that the attack would happen on the 16th (which it sounded like intelligence had indicated), and today, stating that Putin’s new pretext for invasion will be to “prevent genocide.” I’ve included a link to the story on the genocide claims below. Jeff, any thoughts on why the US seems to be upping its game for a change? Do you think this is a hopeful development at all?

  28. Russian trolls going crazy right now claiming “heavy fighting” and illegal use of “heavy weapons in violation of Minsk” by Ukraine, “overcoming our defenses!” with unknown numbers of “victims.” This is being picked up right away by Russian state controlled media, which does not bode well.

    Hopefully nothing comes of it and it is just a full moon thing driving the killers and propagandists of Russia a little crazy tonight.

  29. Im ignorant to the depth of history and the current events spoke in this forum. I gauge the status of the world in one way. Can truth be told or heard? Russia – no, China – no, America – no, Canada – no, I dont know one country that simply tells the truth. I wouldnt know if they did. So on that note We are losing and corruption and communism is winning. My opinion. Chaos is a WIn WIn for Communism. I expect more of it.

    1. The distrust that people exhibit toward their government in the US has been planned and provoked by the communists, in my opinion. There has always been a healthy level of distrust which plays an important role in open and free societies. However, the level of distrust and division we see in the US today has clearly been provoked by communists and their groupies, who infiltrated the world of academia (and to a certain extent the media) long ago to seed the ideas that have come to the forefront in recent years. The ideas promoted by the cancel culture, for example, have been floating around in academia for years. Additionally, there are likely many traitors and infiltrators with ulterior motives who have appealed to the greed and amorality of the business classes and the rich, to achieve their own objectives. Ultimately promoting division, whether along class lines, racial lines, or whatever, is a communist tactic traditionally used to incite hatred and revolution, but in the case of the US, this same strategy has been used to provoke destabilization, since revolutions usually do not succeed in highly industrialized societies.

    2. Leek

      It is more difficult to censor an expression of ideas, than information, which can always be branded “misinformation”.

      No one is stopping you from handing out printed articles by you-should-know-who;
      on any street corner.

      Dial up your financial game, spend a few bucks.

      Or just talk to strangers face to face.

      Thanks for speaking up.


      P.S. You can find many direct quotations at GoodReads dot com

  30. Reading through these posts, it occurs to me that most of you seem pretty well informed. I’m just curious what news sources you all monitor for what’s going on in the world?

    1. To me, history and analysis is more important than news, news is only as good as the contextual frame you can place it in. As such, anti communist analysis like Jeff provides is invaluable, since it is so rare.

      1. Sure, I agree with that. You need to be able to sort through the spin. And understanding context, and being able to read between the lines helps you to do that. But are there news outlets that you have found to be fairly reliable, truthful, and accurate? I realize everyone has their bias, but some are less biased than others.

      2. Guy, I know you weren’t asking me, but I know of some decent sites. Gateway Pundit and Conservative Treehouse are pretty good, but I feel they dont truly grasp the overall picture like Mr. Nyquist. Gates if Vienna is pretty good. Pamela Geller is a fighter. On Twitter, Ann Coulter andJesse Kelly are good. Rebel News is good with Ezra Levant. But who really has time to keep up with everything everyone puts out there? That’s why I always, always read what Mr. Nyquist writes. He and his sincere commenters are very good. Like someone said above, it is good to read history, then you can understand the present better. Last, but preeminent, the Bible. We can learn all about human nature there.

      3. Do you ever read the Conservative Treehouse? He is really good on some things. He doesn’t have the grasp on Russia being the center of so much that is happening in the world like you do though. Also, he thinks Trump is our savior and can do no wrong. If any commenters point out something negative about Trump, or question his motives or actions, Sundance (the blogger) and many of the commenters will really attack them. I’ve never seen such devotion to Trump. But many of the things Sundance analyzes are informative and helpful.

        I have posted comments there two or three times, encouraging people to check out your blog.

    2. Guy, answering your question below, “But are there news outlets that you have found to be fairly reliable, truthful, and accurate?”

      No. there really aren’t. You have to read widely, and work to understand the particular bent and bias of what you’re reading. And find the best people on a given topic. And maybe find news aggregators that tend to reach to the corners of the internet for interesting stuff. And then just start sifting. And know how to read, and read between the lines, of official narrative purveyors.

      For example – I read CNN, NYT and WashPost the same way I read GlobalTimes (China State media for English speakers) RT and Tass (Russian media for English Speakers): those sites tell you the “official line” from a given government or power center. Interestingly, RT has a habit of picking up left-wing journalists dumped by MSNBC, NPR, CNN, usually because they are too critical of democrats from the left. Probably part of a strategy to ingratiate Russia to the disaffected wings of US politics.

      Greyknight mentioned Gateway Pundit and Conservative Treehouse — I frequent both of those. I consider Gateway to be honest, if sometimes over their skis or hyperbolic. Treehouse in particular is unusually smart on domestic politics and the US administrative apparatus. It’s more news analysis than news reporting outlet. A bit too uncritical of Trump, but still the smartest analysis I’ve read on the technical aspects of government/politics.

      I get most of my insight on Russia from Nyquist, who I consider reliable, truthful and accuratee’s not . He’s an analyst, not a news outlet, but my main person on Russia. I watch Bannon’s podcast for Covid and China information — he’s always out front of the pack — but sometimes I wonder who’s funding his show and if some guests have an agenda. I also read Epoch times.

      As I write this, trying to think of good sources, honestly a lot of it is trying to read between the lines of mainstream media and “group think.” For example, I learn a lot about what’s driving our policy by listening to dip-s–ts at the Atlantic Council (they hold a lot of webinars!) — but if I didn’t also read people like Nyquist, I might be woefully misinformed, thinking those doofuses knew what they were talking about.

      Upshot is, smart people telling you the truth tend to have a focus — gotta find the best people on important topics – and usually the mainstream won’t touch them, so you gotta work to find them, and have antenna for posers. It can be tough!

      There are a few news aggregators I go to: Revolver news, Citizens Free Press, Populist Press, Zerohedge. All of these have an angle — but they help fill in the gaps from generic mainstream.

      So anyway, I don’t consider myself among the most informed here, but I try, and since you asked, I thought I’d share. I know I am always looking for good sources!

  31. Putin probably got tired of hysterical harassment.

    [ Russia has expelled the second-most senior American diplomat at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow as tensions between the two countries continue to rise over a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine, the State Department said Thursday.

    “Russia’s action against our [deputy chief of mission] was unprovoked and we consider this an escalatory step and are considering our response,” a State Department spokesman said after U.S. deputy chief of mission Bart Gorman was ordered to leave the country despite having a valid visa.

    “We call on Russia to end its baseless expulsions of U.S. diplomats and staff and to work productively to rebuild our missions,” the spokesman added. “Now more than ever, it is critical that our countries have the necessary diplomatic personnel in place to facilitate communication between our governments.” ]

    1. Western media fails to report. I thought I’d search for something along these lines:

      Russia Will Be ‘Forced to Respond’ if U.S. Does Not Engage on Security Demands
      4 hours ago
      Russia first sent its list of demands to the U.S. and NATO last December. MFA Russia / flickr (CC-BY-NC-SA-2.0.)

      Russia on Thursday said it will be “forced to respond” with military-technical measures if the United States does not agree to its security demands.

      In an 11-page document presented to American officials, the Kremlin slammed the U.S. for not engaging with Russia’s security concerns and called for “legal guarantees” that Ukraine will never become a NATO member.

      “In the absence of any readiness from the American side to agree on firm, legally binding guarantees to ensure our security … Russia will be forced to respond, including through the implementation of military-technical measures,” the document says, according to text published by the state-run TASS news agency.

      Western governments have boosted supplies of hi-tech military equipment to Ukraine since the standoff with Russia first escalated last year. Intelligence agencies have said Moscow has amassed up to 130,000 troops and that an invasion of Ukraine could be “imminent.”

      Moscow has denied it is planning an invasion of Ukraine, a statement it repeated in Thursday’s written responses.

      “There is no ‘Russian invasion’ of Ukraine, which the United States and its allies have been announcing officially since last fall, and it is not planned,” the document said.

      Fresh Shelling Breaks Out in Eastern Ukraine as U.S. Accuses Russia of Invasion ‘Pretext’
      Read more

      Russia also called on the U.S. and NATO to “stop the supply of weapons to Ukraine, withdraw all Western advisers and instructors from the country, stop participating in joint exercises with Ukraine’s armed forces and withdraw all foreign weapons previously supplied to Kyiv.”

      Moscow’s recent announcements of a troop drawdown have been met with skepticism. The U.S. and other NATO allies continue to warn of a possibly devastating Russian invasion and say they have seen little proof of Moscow’s announced withdrawal.

      Russia first sent its list of demands to the U.S. and NATO last December. Western governments responded in January, but Moscow has said the answers “ignored” its key points.

      Russia said its proposals were a “complete package” which could not be discussed individually. The U.S. had offered compromises on areas such as limits on missile deployments — an offer Russia dismissed on Thursday.

      “The Russian proposals are of a package nature and should be considered in the whole, without focusing on individual components. As for the issue of arms control, we are considering them only in the general context of a comprehensive package approach to resolving the general problem of security guarantees,” the document said.

      Russia also repeated its demands that the U.S. pull its troops out of all NATO countries that joined the alliance after 1997, such as the Baltic states and several other eastern and central European members.

      Russia’s response came as it expelled the No. 2 U.S. diplomat in Moscow in another sign of potentially escalating tensions between the two countries.

      AFP contributed reporting.

      1. Western media is reporting. I was able to read some of the documents pages provided by European media. Especially central and eastern.

    1. The U.S. is saying invasion is imminent. But there are obstacles to invading. My guess is the ground is no good for armor. The invasion will be postponed until a window opens for dry or frozen ground. Rasputitsa looks to be early this year. A rainy spring is likely. Postponement until June is possible.

      1. They will likely use this time to see how far the west is willing to go in meeting their demands.

      2. What’s wrong with pulling back to pre ’97 boundaries, if Russia gets out of US waters? Putin didn’t offer that, but why don’t we?

      3. Jeff, can you expound on why you think it is critical that Russia annex Ukraine? I always assumed the communist coalition would eliminate the US first and then mop up the remaining countries. Can you explain why you think Russia needs unification? Does Ukraine have strategic resources that Russia needs for a bigger war? Thanks.

      4. The Kremlin has to crush the growing spirit of liberty and independence in Ukraine. This spirit inconveniences their operatives there, and the ruling elite (which is still functionally Soviet). Furthermore, they cannot allow that spirit to infect Russia. Also, they need full access to Ukraine’s resources and communications infrastructure.

      5. The ground conditions are the main reason why I mentioned above as the tactical reasons for delaying the invasion. Especially if the goal is not to stop with Ukraine alone.

        Secondly, if the Russians invaded Ukraine then stopped at the western border of Ukraine, would that not finally waken up the people of western Europe to the danger in which they find themselves? But if the Russians delay the invasion, after making such preparations, how many Europeans will conclude that all this talk of invasion was like the boy crying wolf, only to be caught by surprise when the real invasion comes? Who believes anyway that the Russians will stop with Ukraine?

  32. On February 17, 2022, US Ambassador John Sullivan, invited to the Russian Foreign Ministry, was given the following reaction to the previously received American response on the Russian draft treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on security guarantees.

    TASS publishes the full text of the statement.
    general characteristics

    We state that the American side did not give a constructive response to the basic elements of the draft treaty with the United States prepared by the Russian side on security guarantees. We are talking about the rejection of further expansion of NATO, the withdrawal of the “Bucharest formula” that “Ukraine and Georgia will become members of NATO”, and the rejection of the creation of military bases on the territory of states that were previously part of the USSR and are not members of the alliance, including the use of their infrastructure for conducting any military activity, as well as the return of military capabilities, including strike, and NATO infrastructure to the state of 1997, when the Russia-NATO Founding Act was signed. These provisions are of fundamental importance for the Russian Federation.

    The package nature of Russian proposals was ignored, from which “convenient” topics were deliberately chosen, which, in turn, were “twisted” in the direction of creating advantages for the US and its allies. This approach, as well as the accompanying rhetoric from US officials, reinforces legitimate doubts that Washington is truly committed to fixing the European security situation.


    1. TASS, state run media. Meanwhile Lukashenko, Russia’s vassal, has been expounding on attacking the Baltics and even using nuclear weapons. Russia has nuclear hypersonic missiles in Kaliningrad right on the borders of those NATO nations. it has been militarising that area for decades. It has military defense treaties with China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, all armed, and all at western borders. Its demands are very one-sided wouldn’t you say? and like a criminal they are holding a nation hostage, while already having killed a member of the family, to force acquiescence to those demands.

      1. Scroll up and see what I said about Russian and Chinese warships in US waters.

        If Jeff tells me that Biden makes me wear a mask and tries to make me take a lethal injection, because Russia and China tells him to, I can accept that. Now tell me why Biden pushes NATO to Russia’s border. There are more than two sides competing for World domination, and if the US isn’t deliberately one of them, tell me who is controlling the United States. Why does Biden patrol the South China Sea and the Black Sea, if he’s a Russian asset. Biden is against the American people, making them take lethal injections, but he’s still adversarial with Russia and China. He isn’t trying to fool the American people, he orders them around.

        Fr Malachi Martin, PhD, writes that The United States, Russia, The European Union, and The Vatican, all compete for World domination. He makes no mention of, Great Britain and China.

  33. Professor Olavo de Carvalho used to call this attitude “The Tweety Bird Syndrome”:
    “I tawt I taw a puddy tat.”
    i. e. I thought I saw a Russian Army at my border.

  34. [ There is no and is not planned any “Russian invasion” of Ukraine, which the United States and its allies have been declaring at the official level since autumn last year, therefore statements about Russia’s “responsibility for the escalation” cannot be regarded otherwise than as an attempt to put pressure on and devalue Russia’s proposals for security guarantees. ]

    [ At the same time, the United States and its allies were moving their military infrastructure to the east, deploying contingents in the territories of new members. They bypassed the CFE restrictions and rather loosely interpreted the provisions of the Russia-NATO Founding Act on the renunciation of “additional permanent deployment of substantial combat forces.” The situation that has developed as a result of these actions is unacceptable. We insist on the withdrawal of all US armed forces and weapons deployed in CEE, SEE and the Baltics. We are convinced that the national potentials in these zones are quite sufficient. We are ready to discuss this topic on the basis of Art. 4 and 5 of the Russian draft treaty. ]

    1. Yes, we saw what Russia did with the “national” potential in those “zones” (nations) in 1940 and 1944.

      1. I believe that Putin will not invade Ukraine. He will coerce Ukraine into a new union with Russia and Belarus, to defend against invasion by NATO.

  35. I don’t think there is any question any more about the intentions of Russia, the real question is how will they undertake actions to achieve their goals. Also what are the intentions of France and Germany and how easy would it to be to convince people in other western democracies to do anything especially after the vaccine mandates. Personally I think the western democracies particularly Canada have made a deep error by going too hard on covid as it has created a space for the tyrannies’ around the world to act and also demoralised the very people you would want to participate in any future military action

      1. I was in contact with New Zealand before Covid. I’m glad I didn’t pay them the million bucks. I’m saying that Putin acts less of a dictator and more civilized, than Australia, New Zealand, and Canadian leaders.

      2. I don’t think so. So far as I know, Western leaders don’t, as a matter of course, send operatives around the world to eliminate dissidents and political opponents. We (in the West) typically are not subjected to long prison sentences for merely exercising our right to protest as is routinely the case in Russia. No one is imprisoned for belonging to the wrong religious sect as the Jehovah Witness adherents are in Russia.
        Journalists are not kidnapped and beaten by state actors on the flimsiest of pretexts as is the case in Russia today. The West has its own share of problems, but these still pale in comparison to the sort of things that happen in places like Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, etc. I know people in Venezuela and there the government actually sent buses around during the height of the pandemic to round up people caught outside after the curfew. These people were then sent to “render service” in the local hospitals in the Covid wards. Of course, we don’t hear much about this in the West, because these other places are closed societies. Yes, our own governments have become more tyrannical in recent years, but this does not mean that Russia and China are shining bastions of freedom. That is simply ridiculous.

      3. GreyKnight says:
        February 17, 2022 at 7:29 pm

        Jeff deleted the link I posted to immigration New Zealand where anyone, even you, can apply for economic citizenship, if you gotz da dough. It used to be a pretty nice place. One Summer they had a flood, though. Power was off for six months. It was a test for the pending Carbon Lockdowns, which you can read about above where I posted the Rockefeller Foundation link to Lock Setp.

  36. Tired of the trolls and ideological debates. We really need to stay focused on what’s going on. The world is on the verge of a world war. We need to hear what Jeff is hearing and thinking concerning the latest information that he’s receiving.

    Update: Moscow demands U.S. to withdraw US troops from Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, warning that it will take military-technical measures if Washington is unready to negotiate.

    It seems to me there’s a lot more going on than Russia wanting to take eastern Ukraine. This sounds like a declaration of war against the United States.

    1. Barth

      Putin needs to respect the US sphere of influence and stop building military bases in Nicaragua and Venezuela. Period.

  37. Jeff.

    Any opinions on the recent statements by Dr. Li Meng Yan ? Concerning possible bioweapon no. 2, hemorragic fever being sent out from Olympics.
    I,m not sure what to think about that.

    1. I do not know whether her information is valid. There are some very knowledgeable, sharp, analysts, who think she is not a reliable source.

      1. I understand. I used to follow Jones many years ago, but once bitten twice shy, as the saying goes. Jones appeals to people on a visceral, emotional level. That is, he correctly identifies many issues that get folks’ ire up, and then spins a sort of all-encompassing hodgepodge of conspiracy theories and not-too-subtle innuendos that provide a tidy explanation of the cause of all of these ills — the globalist cabal. Mainly, he is an entertainer and opportunist. I actually met him once when I was living in Texas, and frankly he is one of the most arrogant, obnoxious people I have ever had the displeasure of meeting. The most important thing to Alex Jones is Alex Jones. Yet, despite his being wrong over and over again, he remains popular due to his folksy appeal to people on an emotional level. He expresses their anger and frustration and then identifies a nebulous enemy against which they can direct this anger. Unfortunately, many if not most of his claims are inherently unverifiable. It’s a clever business strategy, actually. Above all else, he is an entertainer and I suspect that the majority of the people the listen to him rant and rave, if they were to be honest with themselves, do so for that very reason. Who needs analysis when you can shout your guests down? I don’t know if his style has changed, but that’s they way his program was many years ago.

      2. I heard her interview on JD Rucker and Jones. FWIW, she’s saying release at Olympics is something CCP would have contemplated and could have done — not that they necessarily DID do it. The claim that it happened has been amplified – but it’s not exactly what she said.

        Back in early 2020, I read her paper on the origins of Covid, and was pretty blown away (though the science was over my head). And frankly, what she claimed about lab origin has been borne out, was always believable, and honestly if that much is true, who can honestly rule out that it was deliberate.

        The thing is, for a scientist, she pretty quickly started filling in the political narrative too (ie, CCP wants to take over the world through bioweapons), and frankly I wonder how she was able to safely move to the US just in time to be a whistle blower. I don’t know what to make of her. Impeccable credentials, her facts are very specific, and historically have largely checked out … but something about her situation — being able to safely airlift into US covid-skeptic culture — just seems fishy. Given what we’re living through how can we not be cynical.

    2. I have learned — the hard way — that the best way to analyze people like Yan is to write down their predictions and statements and then make note of whether or not these things actually materialize or not. When I see that a person has a track record of making false or inaccurate predictions or statements, I tend to discount what they say as misinformation and analyze their comments from that perspective. I don’t know about Yan, but I also heard about her information that the Chinese were using the athletes to potentially spread a virus with a long incubation period causing hemorrhagic fever.

      1. Good point. In her case, I saw a clip and then the analysis of someone else, so possibly her original claim was exaggerated. I should also add that even when someone has proven to be incredibly accurate, such as Golitsyn, who, as you have stated elsewhere, made over one-hundred and some odd falsifiable predictions, with an accuracy rate of over 90%, and yet most don’t believe him. On the other hand, when someone like an Alex Jones makes wild, unverifiable claims, people are quick to accept these things as the gospel truth. I’ve even heard people say ‘such and such prediction didn’t come to fruition, because I alerted the public, thereby averting certain disaster.’ This explanation for failed predictions and prognostications tends to wear thin after a bit.

      2. I was told by a “friend” the other night that my work is not of interest to him because Alex Jones has predicted everything that is now happening. One only has to follow Jones to understand the world. I said, “Excuse me?” But this is what I continually run into. Of course, I could never get this fellow to read anything. He says reading books is unnecessary since the Wikipedia came along. He just looks everything up and it saves time.

      3. He just didn’t want to have to criticize your narrow opinions, because knows how thin skinned you are.

      4. I scroll through all but a few of your shortest comments, Barf. It only took reading a few to realize what an arrogant bore you are. YAWN.😴

      5. Hi guys, just wanted to chime in. I, too, am interested in Dr. Li-Meng Yan’s latest allegations. I admit I am very partial towards her – but ultimately the true test is whether any of her predictions come to fruition. So far as I understand them, her allegations are:

        (1) The CCP will use the Winter Olympics to disseminate a new round of biological weapons – specifically, modified hemorrhagic fever viruses (eg. ebola, hanta, Lassa, Marburg…)
        (2) The viruses have been modified to increase their incubation period, so as to avoid detection until the vectors (athletes) return to their respective countries
        (3) The CCP has identified a cancer-treatment drug manufactured by Johnson & Johnson, that is also effective in combating the deleterious effects produced by the viruses.

        I believe that is the gist of it. If nothing else, we will soon have an answer as to how reliable the good Dr. Yan is as a source.

  38. Is there some NSA technical means to observe when a nuclear device is set off on the earth ?

    I saw a picture on a website of a couple of supposedly nuclear explosions. Article writer thinks in Syria but some say Ukraine.

    For real ? Or just confusion / fear mongering ?

    Your opinions would be interesting Jeff.

    1. This could go on and on and on, like the Iran hostage crisis, with extensive daily coverage of nothing new to report. Again, everybody benefits from the high price of oil due to mass hysteria. Unless, of course, you drive a car. Next stop, a new, mini, Soviet Union.

    2. Since the Russians were failed to invade by having so many tanks stuck in the mud, it’s good to divert attention from the fiasco. Hope nobody noticed the banana peel under Putin’s left shoe.

      1. Mr Nyquist, all jokes aside, I take you for a serious person, and I’d like to think that you see me as one also. I have not been attacking you, nor presenting you with strawman arguments. Whereas, you try to place me in a binary choice mode, constantly. I framed it rather simply before, so I will do so again: can you imagine a Alexander Solzhenitsyn being welcome here, with his expressed public views? I think not. For I haven’t said much more or less than he would have. I am not a ” Putinist” or a Communist for protecting my civilization and what I hold dear. You want to hold to your thesis, fine. But you know as well as I do what dark forces can hide behind almost any idea, even good and correct ones much less the bad. I saw the dismemberment of Serbia, and now I am seeing the same attempt in the Russias for similar reasons. Time will tell which side is right, and which side has more scoundrels and fools than the other.

  39. BNO News
    BREAKING: British government believes Putin has decided to invade Ukraine – The Times
    5:52 PM · Feb 17, 2022

Comments are now closed.