Labels

Tuesday, January 31, 2023

Expert Steven Starr Explains Why Nuclear War Is Planetary Death | Paul Craig Roberts

 For more than two decades US presidential administrations have been increasing the likelihood of nuclear war with Russia.  It began with Bill Clinton violating the word of the US government not to move NATO to Russia’s border.  SuccessiveUS presidents since have undone all the trust-building agreements achieved during the 20th century Cold War.  The provocations of Russia since the US overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014 have completely destroyed Russia’s trust of Washington.  The atomic scientists say it is 90 seconds before Midnight. I think it is one nano-second.  We have reached the point where all it takes is one false alarm of incoming missiles.

You can see the triumph of evil in the deployment of weapons that if used will destroy life on Earth.  The prospect of their use has risen dramatically in the 21st century.  Democrat Hillary Clinton declared the President of Russia to be “the new Hitler.”  Republican Senator Lindsey Graham called for President Putin’s assassination.  Instead of keeping to President Putin’s Minsk Agreement to maintain peace in Ukraine, Washington used it to deceive President Putin while building a Ukrainian army with which to attack the Donbass republics.  Instead of working with President Putin to create a mutual security pact, Washington provoked and widened the conflict in Ukraine in order to further enlarge NATO by bringing in Finland and Sweden, thus multiplying NATO’s presence on Russia’s border.  The US and NATO are now so heavily involved in the Ukraine conflict that the question is what does Washington do when the reinforced Russians overrun Ukraine’s defenses?  Do US and NATO soldiers rush to Ukraine’s rescue?

Only incompetent, irresponsible, and totally stupid, indeed, totally evil, US and European governments would think their prestige in Ukraine justifies nuclear war.  If the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, CIA, and US politicians had the least bit of intelligence they would understand that in today’s climate of preemptive nuclear strikes, nuclear weapons jeopardize America’s existence.  They do not protect us.

The notion that Russia or China want to rule us is insane.  It is the US that has the expansionist ideology and agenda of world hegemony.  The Russian and Chinese governments have their own problems and do not want those of a morally bankrupt country like the US where men marry men and women marry women and “doctors” mutilate the genitals of youngsters  in order to transgender them.

During the 20th century Cold War warning times were longer and the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction could be regarded as deterring nuclear attack. Today the hypersonic speeds of the Russian missiles and ability to unpredictably change trajectory in flight has changed the emphasis to preemptive strike.  It only takes one false warning to initiate nuclear Armageddon as there is no time to determine if the warning is false.

Everyone needs to understand that once Washington followed by Russia changed their war doctrines from no first use of nuclear weapons to preemptive attack, nuclear weapons ceased to be a deterrent.  The doctrine of preemptive attack guarantees their use if there is a single false alarm.  The American war planners responsible for this change should be immediately arrested, tried for crimes against humanity, and the doctrine repudiated.

What we should be witnessing throughout the West is a campaign to destroy all nuclear weapons.  The weapons do not protect us.  They weapons endanger us.  To have weapons deployed that can only achieve your own total destruction is insane.

During the Cold War there were those who thought “better Red than dead.” Today the expansionist Communist ideology is dead.  It is the American neoconservatives who control US foreign policy who have the expansionist agenda of US hegemony.  It is insanity for the neoconservatives to believe that the US can exercise hegemony over Russia and China.

If we want to survive, we must immediately stop being insane.

Steven Starr explains that nuclear war means planetary death:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn4STJEGP3Y 

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2023/01/30/expert-steven-starr-explains-why-nuclear-war-is-planetary-death/

Sunday, January 29, 2023

Alfred the Great – WHY? Lessons Learned!

Alfred, also spelled Aelfred, byname Alfred the Great, (born 849—died 899), king of Wessex (871–899), a Saxon kingdom in southwestern England. He prevented England from falling to the Danes and promoted learning and literacy. Compilation of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle began during his reign, circa 890.

When he was born, it must have seemed unlikely that Alfred would become king, since he had four older brothers; he said that he never desired royal power. Perhaps a scholar’s life would have contented him. His mother early aroused his interest in English poetry, and from his boyhood he also hankered after Latin learning, possibly stimulated by visits to Rome in 853 and 855. It is possible also that he was aware of and admired the great Frankish king Charlemagne, who had at the beginning of the century revived learning in his realm. Alfred had no opportunity to acquire the education he sought, however, until much later in life.

He probably received the education in military arts normal for a young man of rank. He first appeared on active service in 868, when he and his brother, King Aethelred (Ethelred) I, went to help Burgred of Mercia (the kingdom between the Thames and the Humber) against a great Danish army that had landed in East Anglia in 865 and taken possession of Northumbria in 867. The Danes refused to give battle, and peace was made. In this year Alfred married Ealhswith, descended through her mother from Mercian kings. Late in 871, the Danes invaded Wessex, and Aethelred and Alfred fought several battles with them. Aethelred died in 871, and Alfred succeeded him. After an unsuccessful battle at Wilton he made peace. It was probably the quality of the West Saxon resistance that discouraged Danish attacks for five years.

Alfred

In 876 the Danes again advanced on Wessex. They retired in 877 having accomplished little, but a surprise attack in January 878 came near to success. The Danes established themselves at Chippenham, and the West Saxons submitted, “except King Alfred.” He harassed the Danes from a fort in the Somerset marshes, and until seven weeks after Easter he secretly assembled an army, which defeated them at the Battle of Edington. They surrendered, and their king, Guthrum, was baptized, Alfred standing as sponsor; the following year they settled in East Anglia.

Wessex was never again in such danger. Alfred had a respite from fighting until 885, when he repelled an invasion of Kent by a Danish army, supported by the East Anglian Danes. In 886 he took the offensive and captured London, a success that brought all the English not under Danish rule to accept him as king. The possession of London also made possible the reconquest of the Danish territories in his son’s reign, and Alfred may have been preparing for this, though he could make no further advance himself. He had to meet a serious attack by a large Danish force from the European continent in 892, and it was not until 896 that it gave up the struggle.

The failure of the Danes to make any more advances against Alfred was largely a result of the defensive measures he undertook during the war. Old forts were strengthened and new ones built at strategic sites, and arrangements were made for their continual manning. Alfred reorganized his army and used ships against the invaders as early as 875. Later he had larger ships built to his own design for use against the coastal raids that continued even after 896. Wise diplomacy also helped Alfred’s defense. He maintained friendly relations with Mercia and Wales; Welsh rulers sought his support and supplied some troops for his army in 893.

Alfred succeeded in government as well as at war. He was a wise administrator, organizing his finances and the service due from his thanes (noble followers). He scrutinized the administration of justice and took steps to ensure the protection of the weak from oppression by ignorant or corrupt judges. He promulgated an important code of laws, after studying the principles of lawgiving in the Book of Exodus and the codes of Aethelbert of Kent, Ine of Wessex (688–694), and Offa of Mercia (757–796), again with special attention to the protection of the weak and dependent. While avoiding unnecessary changes in custom, he limited the practice of the blood feud and imposed heavy penalties for breach of oath or pledge.

Alfred is most exceptional, however, not for his generalship or his administration but for his attitude toward learning. He shared the contemporary view that Viking raids were a divine punishment for the people’s sins, and he attributed these to the decline of learning, for only through learning could men acquire wisdom and live in accordance with God’s will. Hence, in the lull from attack between 878 and 885, he invited scholars to his court from Mercia, Wales, and the European continent. He learned Latin himself and began to translate Latin books into English in 887. He directed that all young freemen of adequate means must learn to read English, and, by his own translations and those of his helpers, he made available English versions of “those books most necessary for all men to know,” books that would lead them to wisdom and virtue. The Ecclesiastical History of the English People, by the English historian Bede, and the Seven Books of Histories Against the Pagans, by Paulus Orosius, a 5th-century theologian—neither of which was translated by Alfred himself, though they have been credited to him—revealed the divine purpose in history. Alfred’s translation of the Pastoral Care of St. Gregory I, the great 6th-century pope, provided a manual for priests in the instruction of their flocks, and a translation by Bishop Werferth of Gregory’s Dialogues supplied edifying reading on holy men. Alfred’s rendering of the Soliloquies of the 5th-century theologian St. Augustine of Hippo, to which he added material from other works of the Fathers of the Church, discussed problems concerning faith and reason and the nature of eternal life. This translation deserves to be studied in its own right, as does his rendering of Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy. In considering what is true happiness and the relation of providence to faith and of predestination to free will, Alfred does not fully accept Boethius’ position but depends more on the early Fathers. In both works, additions include parallels from contemporary conditions, sometimes revealing his views on the social order and the duties of kingship. Alfred wrote for the benefit of his people, but he was also deeply interested in theological problems for their own sake and commissioned the first of the translations, Gregory’s Dialogues, “that in the midst of earthly troubles he might sometimes think of heavenly things.” He may also have done a translation of the first 50 psalms. Though not Alfred’s work, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, one of the greatest sources of information about Saxon England, which began to be circulated about 890, may have its origin in the intellectual interests awakened by the revival of learning under him. His reign also saw activity in building and in art, and foreign craftsmen were attracted to his court.

Alfred visiting a monastery school

In one of his endeavours, however, Alfred had little success; he tried to revive monasticism, founding a monastery and a nunnery, but there was little enthusiasm in England for the monastic life until after the revivals on the European continent in the next century.

Alfred, alone of Anglo-Saxon kings, inspired a full-length biography, written in 893, by the Welsh scholar Asser. This work contains much valuable information, and it reveals that Alfred laboured throughout under the burden of recurrent, painful illness; and beneath Asser’s rhetoric can be seen a man of attractive character, full of compassion, able to inspire affection, and intensely conscious of the responsibilities of kingly office. This picture is confirmed by Alfred’s laws and writings.

Alfred was never forgotten: his memory lived on through the Middle Ages and in legend as that of a king who won victory in apparently hopeless circumstances and as a wise lawgiver. Some of his works were copied as late as the 12th century. Modern studies have increased knowledge of him but have not altered in its essentials the medieval conception of a great king.

 

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-king-of-Wessex

 

What were Alfred’s military achievements?

Written by Julia Martinez

Fact-checked by The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

© SeraphP/Shutterstock.com

Much of Alfred’s reign as king of Wessex was consumed with defending his kingdom against Danish invaders. By the time he was king, Danish armies had overrun the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of Northumbria, East Anglia, and most of Mercia, gaining political power in those regions and establishing settlements of armies. Alfred’s kingdom was thus in a precarious position.

Alfred began battling the Danes in 870, months before he acceded to the throne. He lost more battles than he won but put up enough resistance to be left alone for several years. In 876, however, a large Viking force under the Danish king Guthrum began to make attacks on Wessex. Though these initial efforts did not result in significant gains, in 878 Guthrum made a surprise assault on Alfred and his army at Chippenham that nearly brought about the total submission of Wessex. Basing himself in the Somerset marshes, Alfred later that year assembled an army and laid siege to Guthrum at Edington in what came to be known as the Battle of Edington. The Danish army surrendered, and Guthrum and his important followers were baptized. They afterward settled East Anglia, a region that came to be known as the Danelaw.

Although Alfred was faced with further Danish invasions later in his reign, the victory at Edington marked a hiatus in the struggle that lasted until 885, and, moreover, it proved that Wessex would not be as easily vanquished as other kingdoms in England. The last Danish army of Alfred’s reign came in 892, but these invaders found it much harder to break into Wessex. They were repeatedly blocked, beaten back, and besieged, and their advances ceased in 896. The failure of the Danes to penetrate the kingdom was largely due to Alfred’s excellent defensive strategy, which involved a network of burghs (forts) that stretched throughout his kingdom. The burghs were sites that he built up and fortified during the war, ensuring that they were continually manned. There was such a stronghold within 20 miles of every settlement in Wessex. In addition, Alfred later ordered ships built of his own design to use against the Danish coastal raiders.

 

What was Alfred like as a governor of his kingdom?

Written by Julia Martinez

Fact-checked by The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

© photos.com/Getty Images

As king of Wessex, Alfred administered his kingdom very efficiently, organizing his finances and precisely measuring services and payments due from tenants of his burghs. The burghs that he had erected and fortified as a defense against Danish attacks were divided into hides, a form of land measurement used in Old English times. These divisions of land were the foundation of Alfred’s taxation and conscription system; fractions or totals of hides measured payments and services owed. The number of men that would defend the wall of a burgh was judged based on the number of hides. These careful calculations helped to keep Alfred’s kingdom secure. The king’s administrative skill also extended to his household, as both his will and the account in a biography of him written in 893 reveal a meticulous allocation of labour and corresponding payments to his family members and secular followers.

Alfred was an assiduous ruler in matters of law and the execution of justice. He scrutinized the judicial processes of his kingdom and required judges to be literate and have a good education; in his view, ignorance made a man unfit for such an office. His special concern in this was the protection of the weak, as it was in his law-giving. The king himself drew up an important law code, after studying the principles of law-giving in the biblical book of Exodus and the codes of other Anglo-Saxon kings. Criminal jurisdiction became severe during Alfred’s time and was rigorously enforced by his successors. 

 

What was the importance of literacy and learning to Alfred’s rule?

Written by Julia Martinez

Fact-checked by The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

© traveler1116— DigitalVision Vectors/Getty Images

Alfred’s avid dedication to learning defined the years of his reign as king of Wessex following his victory at Edington in 878, after which he sought to improve his own knowledge and promote educational reform in his kingdom. Although he had displayed a desire for learning in his youth, he was unable to commit himself to these interests until later in his life. His unexpected accession to the throne foisted heavy military responsibilities upon him, and the early years of his reign were consumed by repelling ruthless Danish assaults. During an interlude in these invasions (878–885), however, Alfred began to assemble a court of scholars in order to remedy the illiteracy and lack of learning that he observed in England at large. In Alfred’s mind, learning was essential to his kingdom because it resulted in the acquisition of wisdom. The king considered this wisdom not a simple knowledge of law and letters but an understanding of how to live according to God’s principles; moreover, he believed that such wisdom was necessary for the proper execution of justice in his realm.

The scholars Alfred invited to his court were largely from abroad, notably two from the Carolingian realm, which had recently enjoyed its own cultural renaissance. These scholars assisted Alfred in learning Latin so that he could translate Latin books into English (a project that they likewise took part in) for the benefit of his subjects, who by his day had for the most part lost all knowledge of the Latin language. Alfred translated such books as he believed were “most necessary for all men to know,” including Pope Gregory’s Pastoral CareSt. Augustine’s Soliloquies, and Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy. Many of these contain Alfred’s own meditations on the meaning of kingship.

As many in his kingdom were illiterate even in their native tongue, Alfred also established a school at court where freedmen of adequate means (not only noblemen) could learn to read. While literacy in English was meant to serve as a foundation for learning Latin, Alfred’s educational system had the effect of elevating the vernacular, allowing English to become a language of prose literature.

When the Plan Fails - Vox Popoli

 A Rand report published in April 2019 laid out US strategy vis-a-vis Russia, which as you can see in hindsight, was followed fairly closely to the letter. Note that “extending” Russia is shorthand for “causing the Russians to overextend and unbalance themselves”.

This report examines a range of possible means to extend Russia. As the 2018 National Defense Strategy recognized, the United States is currently locked in a great-power competition with Russia. This report seeks to define areas where the United States can compete to its own advantage. Drawing on quantitative and qualitative data from Western and Russian sources, this report examines Russia’s economic, political, and military vulnerabilities and anxieties. It then analyzes potential policy options to exploit them — ideologically, economically, geopolitically, and militarily (including air and space, maritime, land, and multidomain options). After describing each measure, this report assesses the associated benefits, costs, and risks, as well as the likelihood that measure could be successfully implemented and actually extend Russia. Most of the steps covered in this report are in some sense escalatory, and most would likely prompt some Russian counter-escalation. Some of these policies, however, also might prompt adverse reactions from other U.S. adversaries — most notably, China — that could, in turn, stress the United States. Ultimately, this report concludes that the most attractive U.S. policy options to extend Russia — with the greatest benefits, highest likelihood of success, and least risk — are in the economic domain, featuring a combination of boosting U.S. energy production and sanctions, providing the latter are multilateral. In contrast, geopolitical measures to bait Russia into overextending itself and ideological measures to undermine the regime’s stability carry significant risks. Finally, many military options — including force posture changes and development of new capabilities — could enhance U.S. deterrence and reassure U.S. allies, but only a few are likely to extend Russia, as Moscow is not seeking parity with the United States in most domains.

Key Findings

Russia’s weaknesses lie in the economic domains

  • Russia’s greatest vulnerability, in any competition with the United States, is its economy, which is comparatively small and highly dependent on energy exports.
  • The Russian leadership’s greatest anxiety stems from the stability and durability of the regime.

The most promising measures to stress Russia are in the realms of energy production and international pressure

  • Continuing to expand U.S. energy production in all forms, including renewables, and encouraging other countries to do the same would maximize pressure on Russia’s export receipts and thus on its national and defense budgets. Alone among the many measures looked at in this report, this one comes with the least cost or risk.
  • Sanctions can also limit Russia’s economic potential. To be effective, however, these need to be multilateral, involving (at a minimum) the European Union, which is Russia’s largest customer and greatest source of technology and capital, larger in all these respects than the United States.

Geopolitical measures to bait Russia into overextending itself are likely impractical, or they risk second-order consequences

  • Many geopolitical measures would force the United States to operate in areas that are closer to Russia and where it is thus cheaper and easier for Russia than the United States to exert influence.

Ideological measures to undermine the regime’s stability carry significant risks of counter escalation

  • Many military options — including force posture changes and development of new capabilities — could enhance U.S. deterrence and reassure U.S. allies, but only a few are likely to extend Russia, as Moscow is not seeking parity with the United States in most domains.
Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground, RAND, 24 April 2019

This was followed up by a report five months later, which provided specific actions intended to achieve the objectives identified in the initial report, entitled Overextending and Unbalancing Russia: Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options.

Insert deep movie trailer voice: They did not correctly assess the impact of the cost-imposed options.

What’s fascinating is that now RAND is rapidly backtracking on the idea of extending Russia, because the US attempts to extend Russia have turned out to extend the USA, its NATO proxies, the other European states, and Clown World itself. Remember what I said in the previous post about NATO needing to win fast? That’s why Rand wants to pull a Vietnam/Afghanistan, call it a win, and get the US military out of Eastern Europe as quickly as possible.

The Andrew Anglin committee has correctly assessed the situation.

Here’s the deal: everyone understands that Russia is only a power capable of competing with the US because it is backed by a much larger and much wealthier country called “China.” Russia needs their economy to survive. India wouldn’t be standing up to the US, nor would Saudi or any of the other former allies pushing back, if they weren’t getting cover from China.

The think tanks were all pushing for China to be the target of the next US war.

However, Pentagon people said Russia is much weaker, so they went with that. Now it’s a boondoggle. The West is destroying its economy, they are alienating the whole world, and they’re accomplishing what exactly? Russia can keep fighting indefinitely. It’s not costing them anything…

The US can’t possibly open up the China front while the Ukraine is ongoing, and time is on China’s side over there.

This is why RAND is mad.

However, wars do not take place in a vacuum and they have a way of creating a new reality that is unforeseen even by the architects of the best-laid warplans. There is no reason for Russia to let NATO and the US military off the hook just because it suits RAND, and there is absolutely zero chance that Xi Xinping and the extremely astute Chinese warplanners are going to be blind to the advantages of making sure that the first front stays active until the second one is opened by one of the two parties concerned.

Remember, the failure of a plan doesn’t mean it never existed, it simply means it didn’t work.

DISCUSS ON SG

https://voxday.net/2023/01/29/when-the-plan-fails/

RAND Think Tank Says Ukraine War No Longer Beneficial for Jewish “Double-Anal Agenda”, by Andrew Anglin - The Unz Review

 So, there you have it. You’ve probably heard of RAND. I’m not going to give a full summary, but you can look it up if you don’t know what it is. This is the real view of the foreign policy sorcerer: the US is losing the war and they are going to keep losing and it is going to destroy their plan to take down China.


You people don’t read the think tanks. I read the think tanks. Then I look like some kind of wizard explaining events. But basically, the news media is completely useless. It literally serves no purpose other than to spread disinformation. Meanwhile, in their arduous language, the think tanks give all the details of the agenda clearly.

Here’s the deal: everyone understands that Russia is only a power capable of competing with the US because it is backed by a much larger and much wealthier country called “China.” Russia needs their economy to survive. India wouldn’t be standing up to the US, nor would Saudi or any of the other former allies pushing back, if they weren’t getting cover from China.

The think tanks were all pushing for China to be the target of the next US war.

However, Pentagon people said Russia is much weaker, so they went with that. Now it’s a boondoggle. The West is destroying its economy, they are alienating the whole world, and they’re accomplishing what exactly? Russia can keep fighting indefinitely. It’s not costing them anything. Maybe there is some war wariness, but that really gets wiped out by just how disgusting and brutal the Hohols are. If Russians start to get sick of the war, Solovyov gets up and does a segment on the latest video of the Hohols torturing and murdering POWs, and you’ve got another week of hardcore support for the boys fighting these satanic monsters.

The way Wanger is now running the war, it’s just not costing very much.

But the US can’t possibly surrender at this point. They just have to keep going and going. We’re a year in and as a statistic rule, if a war between two countries that border each other lasts more than a year then lasts more than 5 years.

Who is going to lose more in that 5-year period?

The US can’t possibly open up the China front while the Ukraine is ongoing, and time is on China’s side over there.

This is why RAND is mad.

RT:

While both Moscow and Kiev think they will benefit from continued fighting, such a turn of events does not serve Washington’s best interests, the Pentagon’s think tank RAND Corporation argues in a new report published on Friday.

Authored by Samuel Charap and Miranda Priebe, “Avoiding a Long War” accepts the prevailing premises about the conflict, but notes that US interests “often align with but are not synonymous with Ukrainian interests.”

According to the authors, the conflict has already inflicted significant economic, military and reputational damage on Russia, so its “further incremental weakening is arguably no longer as significant a benefit for US interests.”

This is them saying “just call it a win and get out.”

Eventually, it is going to have to come to some point where both sides are able to declare victory. So why not work to figure out a way to end it and save as much face as possible?

The price to the West has not been insignificant either, from the disruption to energy, food and fertilizer markets to the cost of “keeping the Ukrainian state economically solvent,” which will only “multiply over time.”

NATO’s military aid to Ukraine “could also become unsustainable after a certain period,” while Russia may “reverse Ukrainian battlefield gains,” they said. The conflict is “absorbing senior policymakers’ time and US military resources,” distracting Washington from other global priorities, such as China, while pushing Moscow closer to Beijing.

Yeah, that is the whole point of the paper. They are all publishing these papers saying exactly this.

Meanwhile, Brandon has all but promised to send in the Gundams.

In short, the consequences of a long war – ranging from persistent elevated escalation risks to economic damage – far outweigh the possible benefits.”

The study describes President Vladimir Zelensky’s vision of victory, in which Ukraine would recover all the territories it lays claim to and force Russia to submit to war crimes trials and reparations, as “optimistic” and “improbable.”

So, there you have it. You’ve probably heard of RAND. I’m not going to give a full summary, but you can look it up if you don’t know what it is. This is the real view of the foreign policy sorcerer: the US is losing the war and they are going to keep losing and it is going to destroy their plan to take down China.

Just ignore all of this gibberish you see on CNN and in the NYT. It’s all just fake news, like Iraqi WMDs or the Holocaust.

Yes, it’s true everyone thought Russia would do this much quicker. I see people criticize me for saying it was likely to be quick as if this is some huge gotcha, but everyone was saying that, including most of Washington. No one expected the West to go all in to this extent, although in hindsight it was kind of obvious based on how much they militarized the country since they did that coup in 2014. Everyone was just thinking “well, the US didn’t lose any significant reputation points when they lost Crimea, so why would they collapse their economy over this?”

Maybe the militarization was just leaving their options open, we thought.

Because as RAND says: there are no real benefits to the West here. It’s just an extremist Jewish hate agenda.

What are they doing, other than wasting money and proving to the world that they are psychos?

If I try to put myself in their shoes: I can see how it was worth a shot to try to collapse the Russian economy and then do a color revolution to oust Putin and just win outright. But that didn’t happen and the risk of it happening is past. There is no way they are taking Crimea or the Donbass back at this point, which means Putin isn’t going to be forced out of office.

Escalating it any further gives China an extreme advantage. If they take Taiwan, they’ve officially won Sid Meier’s Civilization. Meanwhile, what these think tanks are saying is so obvious: if you bring down China, then Russia, Iran, North Korea and all the others on the enemies list fall immediately.

If you could somehow beat Russia, what happens then? If it takes five years. Where is China gonna be at that point? Where is the Western economy going to be at that point? Frankly, at that point – in 2028 when the US theoretically forces the collapse of the Russian government by taking back the Donbass – China will be in a position to invade Russia from the other side and prop up a nationalist government to put down the Anal Riot Squad.

Be Positive!

RAND saying the US is losing is a very big deal.

Stop letting these various outlets confuse you about what is happening.

Russia is winning because this whole thing is a lot bigger than the shooting war, which is really just a small part of the geopolitical happenings going on.

Russia is the last Christian country.

Russia is Jesus’ Whip.

May the Archangel guide her.