The End Of White Air Supremacy

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Indrajit
INDICA.CA


Resize text-+=

USAf's F-22 "stealth fighter". Such hardware is not impressing the Axis of Resistance any longer, despite the fact they can wreak horrific destruction on defenceless populations.


A
merica has lost white air supremacy. They bet the farm on stealth fighters and they're a long way from Kansas now. Cheap drones and accurate rockets have made a mockery of western air defense and offense. This is a real sea change in air warfare. We are now in the age of unmanned missiles, not manned fighter jets, and America has missed the boat entirely.


Planes Vs. Missiles


As an illustration, look at the image above. On one hand, 'Israel' has to send $100 million dollar jets to drop million dollar bombs, and worry about getting their planes home in one piece. On the other hand, Iran can fire waves of drones, cheap missiles, and highly accurate missiles, turning the Iron Dome into the Iron Sieve. Both sides have air defenses, but Iran only has to defend against 100 bogeys, compared to the thousands hitting 'Israel'. Meanwhile 'Israel' has to park its planes somewhere as sitting ducks, while Iran can hide its missiles underground until they're needed. This is a complete game changer. The rules of air warfare have changed.

The big paradigm shift is from planes to missiles. This is part of the global trend of putting microchips in everything. Bombs are really smart now, and drones are really cheap. Rockets are basically consumer technology, evolving rapidly, while American aircraft are like Faberge eggs, ordered decades in advance and extremely delicate. America's latest airframe (the F-35) is nearly 20 years old and is somehow expected to be relevant till 2070. It's irrelevant already. The F-35 is a liability more than an asset, except to American arms dealers, who have orders booked for 50 years. America won't even be around by then, inshallah, and this strategic inflexibility (re: corruption) is a big reason.

On the other hand, Hamas and Iran and Yemen and Hezbollah come out with new missiles every year (every time America martyrs someone, they name the next missile after them). Iran has hypersonic missiles (which fly unstoppably fast, low, and funny), Yemen fired the first rocket through space, Hezbollah has drones that hit Netanyahu's bedroom window, and Hamas has rockets that can hit Tel Aviv. The Resistance made a strategic bet on rocket and tunnel technology 30 years ago and it's playing out now. America made a corresponding bet on jets and avarice and now les jeux sonts faits. The strategic decisions leading to this war happened in the 1980s and neither side is changing. As Lenin didn't say, there are years when decades happen, and these are those years indeed.

American aircraft are like Faberge eggs, ordered decades in advance and extremely delicate.

I'm reminded of the moment, which I may be making up, when the Chinese met the Mongols. The Chinese had been perfecting and fetishizing a highly ritualized form of archery, more ballet than battle, splitting silk with perfectly shot arrows. Then the Mongols rode in and just shot the hell out of them. Like the Mongols—who shot from horseback and disappeared—the Resistance can shoot from trucks and be gone in an instant. Like the Mongols, the Resistance does one thing really well (hit targets) and it does it often. The past 30 years have been a quantum leap in 'archery', and the latest decrepit empire is just not built for it.

Manned Vs. Unmanned

Last century—which might as well be the days of air knights—manned aircraft dominated the skies. These air knights operated out of castles (aircraft carriers, airbases) and could bomb any weaker castle, though they spent most of their time slaughtering peasantry. They could even make themselves invisible, such was their sorcery. This sounds like a distant fairy tale because it is.

Now the days of air knights are gone, these are the days of air shaheed (martyrs). Missiles and drones can rise from their earth and exact vengeance kamikaze style. These are not human soldiers, they don't have to make a two-way trip. Air defenses can stop some of these missiles, but they can't stop swarms of them, which can be produced quite cheaply. Iran and Hezbollah have used these missiles in layered attacks (sometimes spanning months), first drawing air defense missiles with dogshit, then hitting air defence batteries, then unloading the good stuff on precise targets. Some of these missiles—like hypersonics and drones—are functionally invisible to Cold War era defense systems. And planes can't do shit about it. Expensive, elaborate air knights are no match for air shaheed.

$ Vs. $$$$

Another big problem is cost, the $$$ markers in the infographic. For every incoming missile—which could be a $20,000 drone—air defense systems must fire at least two interceptors missiles, which range from $100,000 to multi-millions each. And these missiles are produced in tiny, bespoke quantities, sometimes just 10 or 12 a year. America can print money but they can't print missiles, they've deindustrialized so much they'd need China's help to bomb China.


The US has frequently threatened China with its attack carrier force, but carriers are now sitting ducks to modern missiles. Extravagantly expensive to build and operate, and with armaments similarly exhorbitant in price, they are now obsolete to project "persuasive force" as the Houthis have already demonstrated.


The stealthy jets America bet the farm on in the 1980s are cool, but built for another war. Stealth fighters not that stealthy, and are completely vulnerable on the ground. As former US General Frank McKenzie said, “the thousands of short-range missiles that Iran possesses are a factor here. There is no strategic depth. An F-35 is very hard to hit in the air. On the ground it is nothing more than a very expensive and vulnerable chunk of metal sitting in the sun. America's whole defensive strategy is based on expensive air defense systems, but these are overwhelmed by cheap missiles and can't even defend themselves anymore. America's rapidly depreciating military assets have become liabilities now.

The End Of Supremacy

America's strategic problems go deeper than missiles vs. planes. The bigger problem is that America is an invading army. The Resistance are fighting for their homes, while the Americans are 11,000 km from Kansas. The Resistance does not need an air force because it's their turf. They can literally dig in and follow Sun Tzu's dictum, “To excel at defense means hiding oneself away in the deepest recesses of the earth. To excel at offense means striking from the highest reaches of the heavens.” The combination of unmanned missiles and tunnels is a complete blind spot to the US military, and they're too big and corrupt to change course.

America has a military base in Bahrain, but that's too close to Iran and Gen McKenzie recommended retreat. But retreat to where? 'Israel' requires daily arms deliveries from America, it's just another liability, not an asset. The IOF are just delivery boys for American munitions, like Uber for genocide, and they're wasting them on civilians. So this is how white air supremacy ends. Choking on its own cruelty and arrogance, taking hundreds of thousands of innocent souls with them, with the threat of global irradiation upon us all.

For decades America and the greater White Empire had white air supremacy and used it with such violent prolificacy. They imposed no-fly zones wherever they wanted, and rained death from above whenever they felt like it, which was often. America's whole strategy was based on the manned plane model, and unmanned technology has upended it all since October 7th. As Professor John Mearsheimer said in an interview with an absolute moron,

What I'm telling you, is the conventional wisdom in the West, that 'Israel' is on a roll, that 'Israel' is in the driver's seat, is simply wrong. If you look at what's happening in Gaza, if you look at what's happening with regards to Hezbollah, and Iran, 'Israel' is in trouble. And I want to point out here, that the key variable is the coming of sophisticated missiles and rockets. When I was very young and used to study the 'Israeli'/Arab conflicts, what we focused on in those days was army to army and air-to-air engagements. And the 'Israelis' invariably defeated the Arab armies, whether you're talking about '48, '56, '67, '73, those big wars. And it looked, up until October 7th, like the 'Israelis' were really in the driver's seat. That they faced no serious threat. Then October 7th happened and what became manifestly apparent to all sorts of people, including me, was that there was this really wicked rocket and missile threat against 'Israel' that 'Israel' had no way of dealing with.

Mearsheimer is talking about a tectonic shift in military technology. The age of the manned plane is out and the age of the unmanned missile is in. This is like the discovery of the longbow or gunpowder or diesel. It makes an entire generation and tradition of warfare obsolete. This is not to say that fighter jets will disappear (horses were used well into World War II), but the idea of humans flying planes is becoming as archaic as horse cavalry. America is completely lost in this brave new world, and its enemies have leapfrogged them technologically. White Empire may look like it's fought to a tactical draw (still good for bombing refugees), but for a superpower, this is strategic defeat.



Lili News 029
  • In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
  • Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
  • Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.


RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License • 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS




Empire Forever

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


OLIVER BOYD-BARRETT
Empire, Communication and NATO Wars


Resize text-+=

 
A Harris victory in the US presidential election [would have] likely meant a continuation of the same, tired, old, neocon foreign policy of forever wars and forever losing them at the cost of obscene numbers of dead and wounded in almost every case.

US in Libya

The report of USAID activity in Libya, from Tunde Osazua of Black Agenda (Libya) is one reminder among many of the permanency of US regime interference operations-by-NGO of which Harris, and perhaps Trump too, will be a likely standard-bearer. Osazua explores the connection between USAID and the Global Fragility Act by which the US pretends to be helping “fragile” nations that the US itself made fragile in the first place.

“The GFA seeks to create long-term, sustained involvement in “fragile” regions, under the pretext of preventing conflict and promoting stability. This is done by connecting the Department of Defense, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and USAID. But in reality, this sustained involvement is about ensuring that U.S. geopolitical and economic interests are protected. In Libya, this means maintaining control over oil production and thwarting the influence of rival powers like Russia and China…

“As we scrutinize USAID’s role in Libya, it becomes clear that development aid is being weaponized to serve imperial interests. The campaign to shut down AFRICOM and remove U.S. forces from Africa is intimately tied to dismantling the soft power mechanisms, like USAID, that sustain imperialism. The Global Fragility Act is not a path to peace or stability for Libya—it is a tool designed to ensure the continued exploitation of Libya’s resources and the suppression of its people’s right to self-determination”.

US and UK in Sudan

In Sudan, The Canary Reports on one of the latest instances of staggering imperial inhumanity (Sudan). Sudan is being torn apart in a war fuelled by foreign interests in gold, resources, and Red Sea access, with global powers pulling the strings.

“The UAE’s documented military support for the RSF has largely escaped scrutiny, while the UK’s role remains overlooked. Accusations suggest the former Conservative government suppressed criticism of the UAE, with recent reports indicating UK Foreign Office “secret talks” with the RSF, risking the legitimisation of a group responsible for genocide, mass rape, and ethnic cleansing.

“As a key global stakeholder and the penholder for Sudan, the UK has a crucial responsibility to address this crisis. Yet, the current Labour Party government’s silence has enabled the UAE’s abuses to continue unnoticed, undermining the UK’s own human rights commitments.

“Similarly, the US continues to shield the UAE from accountability, recently naming it a major defence partner, thereby allowing unchecked operations in conflict zones. This deepened alliance with the UAE comes at the cost of countless Sudanese lives.

“The US has also worked with the Khartoum establishment to legitimise Israeli influence in the region. This includes supplying militias with surveillance equipment, fueling violence against civilians, undermining ceasefire efforts, and contributing to regional destabilisation”.

France in Western Sahara

And in Morocco, France (Pavan Kulkarni in Popular Resistance - Morocco) Macron has decided on French recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. This contravenes the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

“In a ruling earlier that month on October 4, CJEU reiterated that the fisheries and trade agreements between the European Union (EU) and Morocco involving natural resources extracted from Western Sahara were illegal because Morocco has no sovereignty over this territory.

“The judgment requires these illegal agreements to cease within a year. In less than a month, Macron entered France into fresh deals worth USD 10.8 billion, pledging “investments” he claimed would “benefit local populations” in Western Sahara.

“Past international investments in Western Sahara’s resources, such as in the [extraction of] phosphates and fisheries,” have yielded little benefit to the Sahrawi people. The influx of foreign capital only tends to further entrench the occupation by supporting Morocco’s infrastructure and military presence in the region.

Most of the jobs created in the process are handed to Moroccan settlers to incentivize them to stay put in the occupied territory. The remaining jobs are doled out to a few in exchange for their “loyalty and obedience”, while the Sahrawi masses are condemned to live under “poverty, oppression and abuse”, added Babouzeid Lebbihi, President of Collective of Sahrawi Human Rights Defenders (CODESA)”.

France’s official legitimization of Moroccan occupation occurs in the context of the losses it has suffered in Africa after its troops were marched out of its former colonies – Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger.

“It is no secret that France has come to compensate for its losses” by preying on “my country’s rich natural resources like phosphate, marine fishing, gold, oil discoveries etc,” Babouzeid told Peoples Dispatch. Morocco, he added, is more than welcoming. To insure its illegal occupation, it is keen on internationalizing it, drawing in the participation of Western countries.

And then there’s Trump:

“In December 2020, Trump announced the US recognition of “Moroccan sovereignty over the entire Western Sahara territory,” in exchange for Morocco’s normalization of ties with Israel, legitimizing the apartheid settler colonial state’s occupation of Palestine”.

MAGA Foreign Policy

Trump may very well abandon Ukraine after a feint of trying to force Russia to the negotiation table, and leave Europe to the business of its perpetually failing attempt to save Ukraine and to “stop” a Russian invader that hasn’t the slightest intent of invading anything that it doesn’t now have to, at the very costs of European de-industrialiation, very high energy prices, drained weapons stocks, military weakness, and impoverishment of the working classes.

When it is only the Irish economy that gleams in the dark, then dark it must be.

Trump’s abandonment of Ukraine does not, however, signal the end of US support for genocide against Palestine, nor demonstrate any wisdom whatsoever in the matter of Iran’s potential for regional hegemony, nor a determination not to go to war with China.

On the contrary, Iran must be ready for the existential attack to save itself and to save West Asia in general. Nuclear China likewise, together with its nuclear-powered ally, Russia, and a nuclear North Korea and, quite possibly, a nuclear Iran.

China

China) opines today, has the wherewithal to mount a global challenge to US hegemony.

It notes that China has improved the effectiveness of its arms to such an extent that, in some areas, it has already matched or surpassed America. China’s navy is the world’s largest, and has the newest vessels. Around 70% of Chinese warships were launched after 2010, compared with a quarter of America’s. Chinese ships are in many cases comparable to America’s, says the US Office of Naval Intelligence, “and China is quickly closing the gap in any areas of deficiency.”

In terms of vertical launch system (VLS) cells, advanced missile launchers, American ships, on average, had 222 VLS cells for each Chinese one in 2004. This is now down to around two to one, and , is expected to tip in China’s favour between 2026 and 2027. America has nothing like the hybrid propulsion systems in China’s Zhou-class submarine. A Chinese amphibious assault ship under construction, called the Type 076, will be the world’s largest such vessel and the only one to boast a catapult to launch drones.

China now produces war plances close to NATO caliber. It likely out produces America in terms of stealth fighters. China has the world’s leading hypersonic arsenal. China has already deployed multiple hypersonic-weapon systems.

Some surveys suggest that in 2024 China ranked top in six out of seven crucial defence-related areas: advanced aircraft engines, drones and collaborative robots, hypersonic detection and tracking, advanced robotics, autonomous systems and space-launch systems. America was ahead only in small satellites.

Yet China spends less than 2% of its GDP on the armed forces, compared with more than 3% in America.

West Asia

Iran keeps saying it will strike Israel, but only when the results of the US election are known. What sense does that make? Does it make any difference to Israel whether Trump or Harris is in power? Is the sight of a woman president going to strike compassion in the steely heart of Israel?

Israel says it will strike back. I find this game of telling your oppenent you are going to attack - giving him plenty of time to prepare for your attack and then attacking, but maybe not so much as you said you would, and then waiting for the retaliation - somewhat quaint, to say the least.

It is reminiscent of seventeenth century style war-by-the-square tactics of bright uniforms, gleaming bayonets, chess-board moves and a death toll accounted for almost solely by civilians (unless you were Cromwell beseiging, starving and burning Irish towns, or European imperialists putting down the revolting natives).

What good are your friends if they stand by waiting for the next so clever, finely-tuned calibration, while your family is splattered across concrete and shrapnel?

Maybe there’s better hope that disarray in Israel’s cabinet as Netanyahu fires Gallant, a scandal that exposes Netanyahu’s manipulation and abuse of intelligence, and the IDF’s heavy losses under Hezbelloh fire in Lebanon, will do the job.

The word “pre-emptive” appears nowhere in popular discussion about what for both Iran and Israel are existential implications of their escalation. In the past couple of days Western mainstream media have been boosting Israeli claims to have inflicted significant damage in its strike on Iran on October 26th. I think these are almost certainly pre-election puffery intended to disguise real anxiety on all sides.

Given that some independent experts such as Alastair Crooke are saying that in fact Israel aborted its attack, the claims from Tel Aviv faithfully parrotted by Western media with reverential deference to “satellite evidence” (which always has to be interpreted by someone “official”) sound preposterously adventurous.

One important thing that serious analysts will now have learned following Western media coverage of US wars in defense of forever hegemony is that the public are right to accord even less respect for their media than they do for their Congressional representatives (i.e. very, very, very little) even if their reasons are problematic.

The Economist, ever hopeful on behalf of the Collect West, concludes that Israel would probably need America’s assistance in a full-fledged assault on Iranian nuclear sites. Why? Because of the number of munitions involved, which “would tax even Israel’s large and capable air force.”

In other words, Israel, pampered in extremis by Washington generosity, does not have the stuff, and Washington is running low on a lot of the stuff because it has given a lot of stuff to Zelenskiy. The Economist, that ever-enterprising warrior of neoliberal investigative journalism, notes that America’s Central Command worked exceptionally closely with Israel in planning the latest strikes, according to Israeli security officials (my emphasis).

“On October 4th Donald Trump encouraged Israel to go after nuclear facilities: “That’s the thing you want to hit, right?” Should Mr Trump be re-elected on November 5th, Mr Netanyahu might decide that the moment is ripe for such an attack. Iran would now find it much harder to parry it.”

And that is why there is no good news in this election for the cause of peace.

Ukraine

There is still a great deal of untrustworthy chatter about North Koreans in Russia. The New York Times takes pains to tell us that North Korean troops are a ragtag bunch of poorly trained country bumpkins. Only, that is what they wanted us to believe about Russian troops in 2022 isn’t it?. Now they are fessing up to the reality that Russia’s couuntry bumpkins are in fact winning the war and with better trained forces, superior weaponry and more of it than their opponents in Ukrain and in the Collective West. All the other Western mainstream media lies remain intact and taxpayers of the Collective West are suspended in what they think are safe intellectual cocoons in which they feel assured as to their innate superiority and goodnesss, the progeny of a pure and well-meaning civilization of piano recitals, French language, Oxford debates, well-leafed copies of Thomas Mann, cricket, and tea on the lawn.

The greatest strength of the Collective West is the strength of its self-delusions.

Dima of the Military Summary Channel who seems to be giving strange weight to Ukrainian sources on the subject tells us that the West is cautioning Ukraine from attacking North Korean soldiers in Sudja because then North Korea would enter into a direct war with Ukraine where it would doubtless meet the shells supplied by South Korea.

At some point soon I need to get back to more granular reports of the continuing Russian offensives in Ukraine. The basic story is one of consistent Russian advancement and Russian territorial gains. Even in Vovchansk, Russia now appears to be in control of the northern sector of the city, while in Kursk it persists in its gradual expulsion of Ukrainian forces whose presence in Kursk, Zelenskiy kindly explains, was never, ever, ever, anything to do with the Kursk nuclear power plant, because Ukrainians are nice people who never do things like that, except for when they try to shell, bomb or invade the Zapporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Which is something entirely different, one supposes.

Poland

For Global Research Andrew Korybko reports that Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski proposed that Ukraine could order military equipment from his country on credit and then pay it back once the conflict ends.

“This was in in response to Zelensky complaining about Poland supposedly withholding some of its armaments such as the MiG-29 fighter jets. Sikorski also reminded Zelensky that Poland has done more for Ukraine than any other country in reference to President Andrzej Duda’s disclosure over the summer that it already gave 3.3% of its GPD to the cause”.

But:

“There is no scenario in which we hand over weapons that we have recently bought for billions of zlotys from the pockets of our taxpayers. These weapons must serve the security and defense of the Republic of Poland.”

Sikorski has expressed support for Zelensky’s proposal that Poland intercept Russian missiles over Ukraine, but only with support from NATO. Polish society, meanwhile is shown by polls to be getting fed up with the proxy war. 

“The only reason why Poland is wising up is because of next year’s presidential election that the ruling liberal-globalist coalition wants to win. Outgoing President Duda is a (very imperfect) conservative-nationalist who’s served to check returning Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s ideologically driven domestic agenda. It’s therefore imperative for the ruling coalition to replace him one of their own, which could end up being Sikorski as he himself recently hinted in response to speculation about his candidacy”.

It seems that Sikorski is courting conservative-nationalist support for his possible candidacy for the Polish presidency next year.



Lili News 029
  • In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
  • Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
  • Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.


RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License • 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS




How the U.S. Government & Its Colonies Deceive Their Public

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Eric Zuesse


Resize text-+=


5 November 2024, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

Ever since 25 July 1945, the U.S. Government has had, as its #1 objective, to take control ultimately over all other countries (“hegemony”); and its main targets to conquer have been the world’s largest country, which is Russia, and then the world’s most populous country, which has been China. In order to do this, the U.S. regime needed to deceive their public to believe that ‘freedom and democracy’ were what they spread around the world by their coups and invasions, but most of their successful “regime-changes” actually replaced popularly elected democraticGovernments, such as Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, and Allende in Chile, by imposing there instead decades-long murderous military dictatorships such as The Shah in Iran, a long succession of brutal juntas in Guatemala, and the fascist (Milton Friedman acolyte and propagandist for ‘freedom’) Pinochet in Chile. The deceits by the U.S. regime and its colonies, have enabled the U.S. regime to impoverish, torture, and murder, millions of people throughout the world, extracting wealth from the conquered countries for America’s billionaires, all the while pretending to be “a force for good in the world.”

By Glenn Diesen, 3 November 2024

The Economist magazine reports this week that “Russia is slicing through Ukrainian defenses” and Ukraine is subsequently “struggling to survive.”Across the Western media, the public is being prepared for defeat and painful concessions in future negotiations. Journalists are changing the narrative as reality can no longer be ignored. Moscow’s coming success has been obvious since at least the summer of 2023, yet this was ignored, to keep the proxy war [between America and Russia] going.

We are witnessing an impressive demonstration of narrative control: For more than two years, the political-media elites [agents of U.S.-and-allied billionaires] have been chanting ‘Ukraine is winning’ and denounced any dissent to their narrative as [being] ‘Kremlin talking points’ that aim to reduce support for the war. What was ‘Russian propaganda’ yesterday is now suddenly the consensus of the collective elites. Critical self-reflection is as absent as it was after the Russiagate reporting, following the 2016 US election.

Similar narrative control was displayed when the media reassured the public for two decades that the US was in control of Afghanistan, before it fled in a great rush with dramatic images of people falling off an airplane [it happened not only in Afghanistan but also in the regime’s rushed evacuation from Vietnam, both planes and helicopters losing people].

Journalists deceived the public over the past while by presenting the stagnant front lines as evidence that Russia was not gaining an edge. However, in a war of attrition, the direction of the war is measured by attrition rates – the losses on each side. Territorial control comes after the adversary has been exhausted as territorial expansion is very costly in such high-intensity warfare with powerful defensive lines. The attrition rates have throughout the war been extremely unfavorable to Ukraine, and they keep getting worse [and U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media lied to say that Russia’s attrition-rates were higher than Ukraine’s]. The current collapse of Kiev’s front lines was very predictable as its manpower and weaponry have been exhausted.

Read more: Secrets and Lies: This is how the West doomed Ukraine

Why has the former narrative expired? The public could be misled by fake attrition rates, yet it is not possible to cover up territorial changes after the eventual breaking point. Furthermore, the proxy war was beneficial to NATO [and to U.S.-and-allied armaments-manufacturers] when the Russians and Ukrainians were bleeding each other without any significant territorial changes. Now that the Ukrainians are exhausted and are beginning to lose strategic territory, it is no longer in the interests of the US-led bloc to continue the war.

Narrative control: Weaponizing empathy

Back in 2022, the political-media elites [billionaires-controlled ‘news’-media] weaponized empathy to get public support for war and disdain for diplomacy [for ending this extremely profitable violence]. The Western public was convinced to support the proxy war against Russia by endless messaging about the suffering of Ukrainians and the injustice of their loss of sovereignty [as-if Ukraine hadn’t already lost its sovereignty when Obama’s coup grabbed Ukraine in February 2014].

Those who disagreed with NATO’s mantra that ‘weapons are the way to peace’ and instead suggested negotiations, were quickly dismissed as puppets of the Kremlin who did not care about Ukrainians. Support for continued fighting in a war that cannot be won has been the only acceptable expression of empathy.

For the postmodernists seeking to socially construct their own reality, great power rivalry is largely a battle of narratives. The weaponization of empathy enabled the military narrative to become impervious to criticism. War was virtuous and diplomacy treasonous as Ukraine was allegedly fighting Russia’s “unprovoked” war with the objective to subjugate the entire country. A strong moral framing convinced people to deceive and self-censor in support of this noble cause.

British anti-imperialist Matt Kennard: We must resist US Hegemony at all costs.


Even criticism of how Ukrainian civilians were dragged into cars by their government and sent to their deaths on the front lines was portrayed as supporting ‘Kremlin talking points’, as it undermined the NATO war narrative.

Read more: The West is trying to pressure Russia through Iran, but is it possible?

Reporting on high Ukrainian casualty rates threatened to undermine support for the fighting. Reporting on the failure of sanctions threatened to reduce public support for the sanctions. Reporting on the likely US [blame for the] destruction of Nord Stream threatened to create divisions within NATO. Reporting on the US and UK sabotage of the Minsk agreements and the Istanbul negotiations threatened the narrative of the West merely attempting to ‘help’ Ukraine. The public was offered the binary option of adhering either to the pro-Ukraine/NATO narrative or the pro-Russia narrative. Anyone challenging it with inconvenient facts [that presented Russia as being right and America as being wrong in the war in Ukraine] could thus be accused of supporting Moscow’s objectives. Pointing out that Russia was winning was uncritically interpreted as taking its side [as-if, in a war, the side that wins is necessarily the better side in a moral sense, and not ONLY in a military sense].

There are ample facts and statements that demonstrate NATO has been fighting to the last Ukrainian to weaken a strategic rival. Yet, the strict narrative control entails that such evidence has not been permitted to be discussed.

The objectives of a proxy war: Bleeding the adversary

The strict demand for loyalty to the narrative hides the fact that US foreign policy is about restoring global primacy and not an altruistic commitment to liberal democratic values. The US considers Ukraine to be an important instrument to weaken Russia as a strategic rival.

The RAND Corporation, a think tank funded by the US government and renowned for its close ties with the intelligence community, published a report in 2019 on how the US could bleed Russia by pulling it further into Ukraine. RAND proposed that the US could send more military equipment to Kiev and threaten NATO expansion to provoke Moscow to increase its involvement in Ukraine:

“Providing more US military equipment and advice could lead Russia to increase its direct involvement in the conflict and the price it pays for it… While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development.”

However, the same RAND report recognized that the strategy of bleeding Russia had to be carefully “calibrated,” as a full-scale war could result in Russia acquiring strategic territories, which is not in the interest of the US. After Russia launched its military operation in February 2022, the strategy was similarly to keep the war going as long as there were not significant territorial changes.

Read more: Here’s why Russia won’t talk to Ukraine

In March 2022, Leon Panetta (former White House chief of staff, secretary of defense, and CIA director) acknowledged: “We are engaged in a conflict here, it’s a proxy war with Russia, whether we say so or not… The way you get leverage is by, frankly, going in and killing Russians.” Even Zelensky recognized in March 2022 that some Western states wanted to use Ukraine as a proxy: “There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin outlined the objectives in the Ukraine proxy war to as weakening its strategic adversary:

“We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine… So it [Russia] has already lost a lot of military capability. And a lot of its troops, quite frankly. And we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability.”

There have also been indications of regime change as a wider goal of the war. Sources in the US and UK governments confirmed in March 2022 that the objective was for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin,” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime.” US President Joe Biden suggested that regime change was necessary in Russia: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” However, the White House later walked back these dangerous remarks.

A spokesperson for then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson also made an explicit reference to regime change by arguing, “the measures we’re introducing, that large parts of the world are introducing, are to bring down the Putin regime.” James Heappey, the UK minister for the armed forces, similarly wrote in the Daily Telegraph:

Read more: Will Kiev’s backers wake up to the reality of its neo-Nazi problem?

Fighting to the last Ukrainian

Chas Freeman, the former US assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs and director for Chinese affairs at the State Department, has criticized Washington’s decision to ‘fight to the last Ukrainian’.

Meanwhile, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham outlined the favorable arrangements the US had established with Ukraine: “I like the structural path we’re on here. As long as we help Ukraine with the weapons they need and the economic support, they will fight to the last person.”   The Republican Senate leader, Mitch McConnell, cautioned against conflating idealism the hard reality of US objectives in the proxy war:

“President Zelensky is an inspiring leader. But the most basic reasons for continuing to help Ukraine degrade and defeat the Russian invaders are cold, hard, practical American interests. Helping equip our friends in Eastern Europe to win this war is also a direct investment in reducing Vladimir Putin’s future capabilities to menace America, threaten our allies, and contest our core interests… Finally, we all know that Ukraine’s fight to retake its territory is neither the beginning nor end of the West’s broader strategic competition with Putin’s Russia.”

Senator Mitt Romney argued that arming Ukraine was “diminishing and devastating the Russian military for a very small amount of money… a weakened Russia is a good thing,” and it comes at a relatively low cost as “we’re losing no lives in Ukraine.” Senator Richard Blumenthal similarly asserted: “we’re getting our money’s worth on our Ukraine investment”because “for less than 3 percent of our nation’s military budget, we’ve enabled Ukraine to degrade Russia’s military strength by half… All without a single American service woman or man injured or lost.” Congressman Dan Crenshaw agrees that “investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea.”

Retired US General Keith Kellogg similarly argued in March 2023 that “if you can defeat a strategic adversary not using any US troops, you are at the acme of professionalism.” Kellogg further explained that using Ukrainians to fight Russia “takes a strategic adversary off the table” and thus enables the US to focus on its “primary adversary which is China.”Former NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also argued that defeating Russia and using Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia “will make it easier” for the US “to focus also on China… if Ukraine wins, then you will have the second biggest army in Europe, the Ukrainian army, battle-hardened, on our side, and we’ll have a weakened Russian army, and we have also now Europe really stepping up for defense spending.”

Read more: This EU leader is a rare voice of sanity when it comes to Russia

In search of a new narrative

A new victory narrative is required as a NATO-backed Ukraine cannot realistically defeat Russia on the battlefield. The most obvious is to claim that Russia has failed in its objective to annex all of Ukraine to help recreate the Soviet Union and thereafter conquer Europe. This spoofery would enable NATO to claim victory. After Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive in summer 2023, it was flagged by David Ignatius in the Washington Post, where he argued that the measurement of success is the weakening of Russia:

“Meanwhile, for the United States and its NATO allies, these 18 months of war have been a strategic windfall, at relatively low cost (other than for the Ukrainians). The West’s most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the additions of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself from dependence on Russian energy and, in many ways, rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall, this has been a triumphal summer for the alliance.”

Sean Bell, a former Royal Air Force air vice marshal and Ministry of Defense staffer, argued in September 2023 that the war had significantly degraded the Russian military to the point it “no longer poses a credible threat to Europe.” Bell therefore concluded that “the Western objective of this conflict has been achieved” and “The harsh reality is that Ukraine’s objectives are no longer aligned with their backers.”

The Ukrainian proxy has been exhausted, which ends the proxy war unless NATO is prepared to go to war against Russia. As NATO is preparing to cut its losses, a new narrative is required. Soon it will be permitted to call for negotiations as a display of empathy for Ukrainians [thus completing its deceit of their own supporters].


Obama with two major hegemonic war harpies: Susan Rice (center) and Samantha Power.


PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.


Lili News 029
  • In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
  • Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
  • Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.


RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License • 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS




2024: The Least Consequential Election Of My Life

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Indrajit


Resize text-+=

I like the slogan “Country Over Party” because it describes the actual state of America. The country's over, and the oligarchs are having one last bloody orgy party for the road.



Genocide is a consequence, and it will continue whoever Americans elect. Climate collapse is a consequence, and they're both candidates are committed to more drilling. Slavery is a consequence and both are committed to out-deporting and out-incarcerating the American underclass. Whether America elects an obvious charlatan or a corporate automaton, who gives a shit? The consequences are the same, making the election entirely inconsequential.

The Lesser Evil Is Trump

By any objective measure, Trump is actually the lesser evil. Trump has not (yet) committed genocide, he sickened less people with COVID and offered more relief, he drilled less than Biden/Harris, and deported fewer passport slaves. The appeal of someone like Kamala Harris is purely subjective, she makes liberals feel superior while still participating in white supremacy. It's not that both candidates are the same, it's that the Democrats are objectively worse. If anything, they're more dangerous because they're better organized, they are the more efficient evil, and better at covering their tracks. Trump is at least an honest liar. He looks evil and he is. As Malcolm X said,

In this way, Trump is the lesser evil because he's transparently evil. Objectively, also, he has simply done less evil in the evil office. Look for yourself. Biden/Harris have accelerated the corrupt incineration of Ukraine on the altar of fighting a Russia which need not be fought. Biden/Harris have committed livestreamed genocide for over a year now. Biden/Harris have sickened and killed more people with COVID, while gutting all protections and social support. Biden/Harris have accelerated the trade war (re: siege) against China, while reinforcing illegal sieges against Cuba, Iran, etc. Biden/Harris have deported more people, built more wall, dumped more carbon into the atmosphere, and cracked down on speech and assembly even harder than the supposed fascist candidate. Fascism is already here, you morons! Americans are seriously debating 95% Hitler vs 96% Hitler, not understand that this makes them all Nazi, all around. America has been a totalitarian genocide state for its whole existence, regardless of who's President.

I'll say it again and again because it generally goes unsaid. By any objective measure, the Democrats are worse than the orange bogeyman, they just subjectively make liberals feel better, which makes things worse in and of itself. Liberals don't deserve to feel good. They deserve someone that actually represents them, an openly wicked and venal man like Trump.

All Democrats have to offer this election cycle is what Hannah Arendt called pious banalities, long past their sell-by date. As Arendt said about Weimar Germany,

Since the bourgeoisie claimed to be the guardian of Western traditions and confounded all moral issues by parading publicly virtues which it not only did not possess in private and business life, but actually held in contempt, it seemed revolutionary to admit cruelty, disregard of human values, and general amorality, because this at least destroyed the duplicity upon which the existing society seemed to rest.

Arendt has her own problems, like being a racist and anti-communist (Diet Hitler), but she was at least a more self-aware liberal. She understood the appeal of mob vulgarian like Trump in a way modern liberals cannot. With Trump, WYSIWYG, whereas Democrats miss the other programming point, POSIWID:


The purpose of a system is what it does (POSIWID) is a systems thinking heuristic coined by Stafford Beer, who observed that there is "no point in claiming that the purpose of a system is to do what it constantly fails to do."

The Democrats still think they're the good guys while committing genocide. Liberals today say well, Trump would genocide more, with no idea of how deranged they sound. Forget the Democrats, American democracy itself is irredeemable. It's Genocide or Diet Genocide, with no water in sight.

Great Evil

If you look at the American election objectively, Trump and Harris are both the same picture. They are both American Presidents (re: Heisenberg) and thus great evil, with little tribal differences that only make sense to Americans.


Reagan was as evil as he was hypocritical, another valuable trait in US presidents.

Americans flatter him, to say Trump will be their Hitler. Hitler was actually a below-average evil as European rulers go.  American Presidents are all Hitlers, with Ronald Reagan being the last incarnation they've been stuck on for decades. Since then, every American President has been some poor Reagan impersonator, AKA Hitler. Bush I was nerd Reagan, Clinton was cool Reagan, Bush II was nepo Reagan, Obama was black Reagan, Trump was clown Reagan, and Biden was Reagan except somehow more senile and trigger-happy. America hasn't had an original idea in decades, and every election since 1980 has been a reboot. Today, Harris is running as a Reagan Democrat next to the Cheney family, tapping into a rich base of 50,000 in Wyoming and assorted torture enthusiasts. History is truly repeating as farce. American politics is still centered around Reagan, who sucked.

Americans, stuck in a time loop, keep saying that this is the most consequential election ever and it isn't. That was supposedly the last election, but what happened then? As I've said and as you can look up, Biden/Harris killed more people with COVID, they deported more people, drilled more fossil fuels, and started more wars, up to livestreamed genocide for months now. Biden is visibly dead in office and Harris is visibly dead inside and it doesn't seem to matter who sits in the seat, as long as endless blood keeps it warm. American oligarchs have become even too lazy for a convincing season of the reality TV farce they call elections. They're just re-running the last election, with one candidate simply selected by consultants.

America today is on autopilot, bombing babies on pure muscle memory. This continues regardless of who occupies the offensive office, which is inherently offensive to man and God. The only satisfaction you can get is kicking the currently ruling bums out, but the ruling class just turns the other cheek and the same shit comes out.

This is why 2024 is, in fact, the least consequential election of my life. A pox on both your houses. Vote Jill Stein if you want to feel moral, or join the Resistance and actually pay for it if you actually want to do something. The Americans are going to continue killing either way, unless we kill the very idea of America. Supporting a peaceful transfer of power within America is supporting their endless violence within and without. God-damn America, as Obama's preacher said, before that soulless charlatan disavowed him. Neither side of America deserves to win. This is like asking the neck which side of the knife it prefers. To outsiders like me, this is all like debating whether Goebbels or Göring replaces Hitler. Who gives a fuck? Cyanide and the Red Army are the only moral choices, when faced with such immorality seeking to reincarnate itself.



Lili News 029
  • In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
  • Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
  • Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.


RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License • 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS




Jeffrey Sachs + Q&A | Cambridge Union

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Jefrey Sachs
Opening the eyes of the children of the privileged


Resize text-+=

As a recovering neoliberal economist who tutored the late Soviet Union in savage capitalist dogma just a generation ago, an interesting question to Prof. Sachs these days, never asked, would be what kind of economics would he teach now, if he had the freedom to speak frankly?


Lili News 029
  • In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
  • Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
  • Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.


RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License • 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS