MIKE MIHAJLOVIC—At the start of the war, the Ukrainian Air Force had about 120 functional combat aircraft. The attrition level reduced this fairly large force to just a fragment, with no more than a few dozen or even fewer available at the time of writing. The opponent’s force is far superior. The Russian planes are far more modern, and equipped with long-range missiles that give them a decisive advantage in air-to-air combat. It can be said with certainty that the Russian Air Force controls the sky over the battlefield. The commander of the Ukrainian Air Force, Mykola Oleschenuk, said in an interview that the Ukrainian planes are under threat of attack immediately after takeoff from the airfield. According to him, one Ukrainian aircraft is attacked simultaneously by up to 9 Russian ones (this can be taken with a grain of salt). He also stated that the strike range of the Russian Su-35 aircraft is 200 km, while the Ukrainian MiG-29s strike at 25-30 km.
AMERICAN PROPAGANDA
-
-
ALEKS—Much of what we will discuss in this article will deal with the number of Russian casualties, as alluded to in the introduction. Russia suffered a horrendous number of dead soldiers within the first few weeks of the conflict, maybe up to 10,000. That’s the price of big arrows on modern battlefields with full intelligence/information/reconnaissance/artillery/drone coverage of the battlefields.
However, (up to) 10,000 dead is still a price that would have been worth paying to achieve the goals in Ukraine without going into a full-scale war. Had there been an agreement in Istanbul that would have terminated the conflict, ensured the rights of Russians in Ukraine, and kept Ukraine out of NATO and NATO out of Ukraine, one could remotely argue that “it was worth it.”
We all know what happened instead. As with all agreements that are not guaranteed with a gun on the West’s head, the West will ignore or scrap it at will. As happened with the Istanbul agreement.
-
Oh, Looks Like Bombing Hospitals Is Bad Again
20 minutes readCAITLIN JOHNSTONE—“Russia’s missile strikes that today killed dozens of Ukrainian civilians and caused damage and casualties at Kyiv’s largest children’s hospital are a horrific reminder of Russia’s brutality,” tweeted whoever runs the US president’s Twitter account, adding, “It is critical that the world continues to stand with Ukraine at this important moment and that we not ignore Russian aggression.”
-
NATO SUMMIT: Alliance’s Endgame Appears to Be Nuclear War
22 minutes readCHRIS WRIGHT—As Benjamin Abelow notes in How the West Brought War to Ukraine, the missile launchers that the ABM system uses can accommodate nuclear-tipped offensive weapons like the Tomahawk cruise missile.
“Tomahawks,” he points out, “have a range of 1,500 miles, can strike Moscow and other targets deep inside Russia, and can carry hydrogen bomb warheads with selectable yields up to 150 kilotons, roughly 10 times that of the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.” Poland now boasts a similar ABM site.
American assurances that these anti-missile bases are defensive in nature, to protect against an (incredibly unlikely) attack from Iran, can hardly reassure Russia, given the missile launchers’ capability to launch offensive weapons.
-
Print this article The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and…