Last night and this morning I’ve been thinking about some things that don’t quite make sense about this Russian intervention in Ukraine, so let me copy-paste some bits from the comment section:
“I’m working with the assumption that the Russians know the same thing all the analysts were saying before this, and that Ukraine is not a worthy goal; nothing there but a potential quagmire to get stuck in, and the only reason to go there is to neutralise a threat. Also, it is unlikely that you can just go in and neutralise threats without all hell breaking loose, so it must all be a part of a bigger strategy, or otherwise the price would be too great. Essentially, the question I’m asking is, if the real goal is neutralising America, where does lack of control over Ukraine become a fatal issue, so that it absolutely must be dealt with first?
Also, this created lots of disturbance, so I’m trying to see what we’re not seeing, or noticing.”
“I’m wargaming a scenario with a NATO conflict with Russia, and I see a two-pronged ground attack, from Ukraine towards the Rostov region at first, but eventually all the way to the Caspian sea, and from the Baltic states to St. Petersburg, which would force Russia to be on a constant defensive with its forces preoccupied by ground attacks, its important military infrastructure exposed to attack, its military intelligence flooded by information, while America completely controls the scene. By eliminating the southern prong of the attack now, Russia is protecting vital assets and significantly reducing noise in any conflict. Also, he who attacks first will basically hold all the cards, as we can see now with Ukraine, and the Russians are quite obviously refraining from use of any kind of weapons of mass destruction, protecting the civilian population even at the expense of military effectiveness. If they wanted to really hurt someone, that would be a different sight.
Note that I didn’t mention the far east; I think that part is protected through the recently formed alliance with China, so that they can now focus on the European theatre.
Also, I’m looking at the wider picture now: the Kazakhstan event that took place earlier was a part of the American scheme of attack on Russia: if it were controlled by US and UK agencies and proxies, attack from this direction could be directed simultaneously with the other two, creating a desperate situation for Russia. It seems that the war started much earlier than I gave it credit for, and the Russians know what they are doing, and the Americans not so much. Kazakhstan has been pacified, now it’s Ukraine’s turn, and I think the next possible move would be the mopping up of former Soviet republics and Warsaw pact countries of American advanced weaponry. Alternatively, Russia will feel safe enough from ground assault to deal with America directly.”
You see where I’m going with this, and some things are finally making sense now; I had the impression that I’m missing the strategic importance of the Kazakhstani “color revolution” attempt, and several other smaller things make sense now that I’m starting to develop a wider picture, which is this:
America is preparing a war against all possible rival powers that might emerge and take over the global supremacy in the period where America will suffer consequences of its complete economic breakdown. They are trying to basically degrade/decivilize their competition, so that everybody will be even worse off than they are, and after they are done recovering from the economy/dollar collapse, they will emerge as the dominant power once again, a “bright city on a hill” surrounded by a burning world. They will then repeat what they did after WW2 – attract all the brightest and most competent minds from the world, and have another technological and economic surge.
Everything we’ve been seeing since 2008 has been part of this wider, strategic picture of America preparing the world for the collapse of its economic system and, therefore, its geopolitical influence and military power, which was seen as inevitable in the light of the real-estate market collapse which was irrecoverable; the “recovery” was a short-term trick achieved by money printing at the expense of the future, because it was deemed that there isn’t a future in any case, so as long as a crash was inevitable, they started working on arranging the world so that it would be on their own terms. It is possible that they started planning this earlier, even a decade earlier; I can’t tell.
So, who’s the competition? We need to understand that the strategic planning changed over time, as the world situation changed, and one huge change was re-emergence of Russia as a major world power, under the expert leadership of Vladimir Putin who, against all odds and expectations, managed to overcome the entropy that apparently consumed his country in the 1990s, built a healthy economy from agriculture up, gradually rebuilt the industrial and military capabilities, and basically produced a trend that is the exact opposite to that of American recent decline. As America became incapable of fielding sophisticated systems or even maintaining its infrastructure, Russia asserted itself as a major technological power. You will not hear much about it in the Western media, but that’s how things are. Russian military capabilities at this moment are such that the entire NATO, including the USA, would fare only slightly better than Ukraine, if it came to open war.
China is next. America thinks it made China as an economic power by outsourcing its manufacturing there, and buying its economic output; if that changed, China would economically crumble. It is actually possible that this is mostly correct, and America was working on introducing mechanisms that would kill-switch Chinese economy by sanctioning its foreign trade on cue, for instance by provoking an intervention in Taiwan, making big noise about it and introducing sanctions (this includes European markets). They think that without its massive foreign trade, the Chinese internal structure that was maintained by enormous economic prosperity will crumble in some kind of a civil war, and China will no longer pose a threat to American re-emergence.
Islamic world. The problem is that America made a very bad deal that allowed the former Western colonies to function as states and receive money for oil that was geologically located near the local tribes. This is, basically, like paying Penguins for all the ice in the Antarctica, as if they have anything to do with it. This fortified Islam that was otherwise completely crumbling ever since WW1, and would otherwise have vanished by now, and immensely enriched the backward tribes of Muslims, who received a big percentage of the entire economic product of the Western civilization, at least the part of it that is petroleum-powered. As a result, those primitive tribes are now doing their primitive tribal things, only with deus-ex-machina resources they could otherwise never have amassed with the level of participation in the global economy they are capable of normally, for instance they are using money to promote Islam through various NGOs, politicians, journalists and other corrupt venues. If left alone, the end-result would be an Islamic world control, which would be a dark pit nobody could ever recover from, so the Americans basically worked on decivilizing the Middle East, and de facto returning it to its normal level of world influence if there were no oil money to begin with.
Europe. America had a very easy job degrading Europe’s power and influence, by introducing the worthless and counterproductive ideologies, such as the anti-industrial, pro-refugees, white-guilt nonsense that is now prevalent. Also, they made sure to poison Europe’s relations with Russia, which would otherwise naturally thrive and benefit both parties in ways that would surely result in creation of a vast Eurasian market that would unite energy, production and consumption in ways that would guarantee American post-emergence marginalization.
I think everything we’ve seen is a part of this picture, and now let’s return to Russia.
America initially thought that Russia was basically finished, that it has no chance of emerging as a global power. When this proved false, they tried degrading it with sanctions, only to find this accelerating the process of Russia’s internal reconstruction and self-sufficiency. They tried luring Russia into a quagmire of Ukrainian war, which didn’t work for 8 years, but something changed now, because Russia decided to mop up America’s evil client states in its neighborhood, eliminating potential threats on its borders in order to fortify its situation before the inevitable confrontation with America. I think this process of mopping up of American-controlled shitholes in Europe is not over and, now that Russia has nothing to fear (because apparently open war became inevitable), the process might accelerate. The so-called sanctions to Russia are in fact sanctions to Europe, further degrading its economy and leading to internal conflicts in the near-term, further lessening the chance that Europe will ever take America’s place.
Basically, America is everybody’s enemy and is actively working on keeping everybody enslaved, poor and at war, so that if America goes down, everybody else needs to go down more.