1

Will There Be A Nuclear War?

Please share this article as widely as you can.


DEFEAT CAPITALISM AND ITS DEADLY SPAWN, IMPERIALISM
ecological murder • endless wars • ingrained racism & social injustice • worker exploitation • incurable via reforms

Jim Kavanagh
THE POLEMICIST


Will There Be A Nuclear War? 


At this point, I put the chances at 50-50.

Read on, and see why.

On February 22, the day after Russia recognized the independence of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, I said a situation had now been created in which the second most likely reaction by the US/NATO would be to “Launch a military effort to take back LPR, DPR, and Crimea—using Ukrainians as cannon fodder, or, if they dare, bringing in US/NATO troops directly,” and that would result in a “loss for US/NATO, before or after a devastating, probably nuclear, world war.”

Ten days later, on March 3rd, right after the Russian army entered Ukraine, I wrote: “WWIII is not a remote possibility. We are already in it. The only question is: How much worse will it get?

At that time, I would have put the chances of nuclear war at more than 0 but less than 30%.

By mid-April, I noted that it was now clear that Ukraine was an entirely dependent ward of the US/NATO, which is the principal in this fight, and whose weapons, as well as military and intelligence officers—in Washington, Brussels, and personally in Kiev—are effectively waging this war. I also insisted that the notion that some shrewd, mutually face-saving compromise can be negotiated to end this conflict is wishful thinking, and that the decisive question in this battle between Russia and the US/NATO is not “What compromise can they negotiate?” but “Who is going to accept defeat?” 

Since then, things have gotten much worse. It is now clear that US/NATO personnel are heavily involved in every aspect of the fighting in Ukraine. The Intercept reports of “a broad program” of:

clandestine American operations inside Ukraine are now far more extensive than they were early in the war…There is a much larger presence of both CIA and U.S. special operations personnel and resources in Ukraine than there were at the time of the Russian invasion in February….Secret U.S. operations inside Ukraine are being conducted under a presidential covert action finding…[T]he president has quietly notified certain congressional leaders.

This program is part of an “international partnership with the special operations forces of a multitude of different countries” These international—i.e., NATO—forces are there to help remedy Ukraine’s “most acute” problem: the fact that it “is losing its most battle-hardened and well-trained forces.”

The New York Times also reports on reports on the “secretive operation involving U.S. Special Operations forces hints at the scale of the effort to assist Ukraine’s still outgunned military,” including “commandos from other NATO countries, including Britain, France, Canada and Lithuania…working inside Ukraine.”

All of which is confirmed by Ukrainian POWs, like the guy below, who said “at least 100 foreign fighters, including from the USA, Poland and Great Britain, helped the Ukrainian military in Kharkiv: ‘If the foreigners had not helped us we would have disintegrated immediately.’"


This is not a matter of a few random "volunteers." These are US/NATO personnel, directing and participating in combat, being paid directly or indirectly by their governments and seconded to the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU). If they are not presently on active duty, they were allowed/recruited to “retire” into more lucrative “private” legions, contracted and paid for by their governments. They are actively fighting in coordination with and under the direction of those governments, moving US/NATO participation beyond the supply of weapons and real-time targeting and intelligence.

In April, Bruce Fein, constitutional and international law specialist and former deputy attorney general, said that  the “systematic and massive assistance to [Ukraine’s] military forces to defeat Russia” constitute “systematic or substantial violations of a neutral’s duties of impartiality and non-participation in the conflict,” and means that “the United States and several NATO members have become co-belligerents with Ukraine against Russia.” It’s gone way beyond that now. As Scott Ritter said in September: “Russia is no longer fighting a Ukrainian army equipped by NATO, but a NATO army manned by Ukrainians.”


The countries Russia is fighting


Indeed, a couple of weeks ago, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, echoing the “in it to win it” stance of the U.S. leadership, made it explicit that the Kiev regime is a proxy for the US/NATO: "Russia's victory in the war against Ukraine will be a defeat of NATO. This cannot be allowed."

As existential an imperative as it gets. So, as far as US/NATO leadership is concerned—and they are correct—this is a war between the US/NATO and Russia, the very existence of NATO is at stake, and a Russian victory over the Kiev regime cannot be allowed.

Except if nuclear weapons are needed to prevent it   No, I don’t hear that in there either.

On the other side, from the beginning, Russia’s offensive in Ukraine was precisely a reaction to actions it cannot accept—the threat of de facto NATO expansion into Ukraine and the fascist-dominated Kiev regime’s ongoing attacks against the Donbass republics. Russia’s determination to end that unacceptable state of affairs has only been strengthened by the costs and achievements of its combat, and by the reactions of its Kiev/US/NATO adversary. Having seized a large swath of territory, and—after Washington and London quashed negotiations that could have limited Kiev’s loss to Donetsk, Lugansk, and Crimea—and having annexed those regions plus Kherson and Zaporizhzhia via referenda, Russia now considers that it is fighting to protect the territory of the homeland. Having seen the US/NATO pour weapons, real-time intelligence, combat and control personnel into the fight, carry out and sanction assassination and sabotage attacks on undisputed Russian territory and Crimea (Kerch bridge) as well as on the civic infrastructure of its own members (Nord Stream), Russia is well aware of who its adversary is and how difficult and imperative the fight will be. Every day Russia does not attack Kiev’s co-belligerents is a day of Russian restraint. That will not last forever, especially if the level of direct combat participation by US/NATO increases, which it will have to in order to have any chance of defeating Russia.

When Putin, correctly, says:

The goal of that part of the West is to weaken, divide and ultimately destroy our country. … Today our armed forces…[are]fighting not only against neo-Nazi units but actually the entire military machine of the collective West…. Washington, London and Brussels are openly encouraging Kiev to move the hostilities to our territory. They openly say that Russia must be defeated on the battlefield by any means, and subsequently deprived of political, economic, cultural and any other sovereignty and ransacked.

He, too, is saying that the victory of that adversary would be an existential defeat that cannot be allowed.

Except if nuclear weapons are needed to prevent it?

It is true, as Scott Ritter and Moon of Alabama have pointed out, that—contrary to the characterizations of Western politicians and pundits—in his extraordinary September 21st speech, Vladimir Putin did not threaten the first use of nuclear weapons.  In fact, he spoke in response to what he perceives—not without reason—as “nuclear blackmail” by his Kiev/US/NATO adversary:

They have even resorted to the nuclear blackmail. I am referring not only to the Western-encouraged shelling of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, which poses a threat of a nuclear disaster, but also to the statements made by some high-ranking representatives of the leading NATO countries on the possibility and admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction – nuclear weapons – against Russia.

I would like to remind those who make such statements regarding Russia that our country has different types of weapons as well, and some of them are more modern than the weapons NATO countries have. In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff.

The citizens of Russia can rest assured that the territorial integrity of our Motherland, our independence and freedom will be defended – I repeat – by all the systems available to us. Those who are using nuclear blackmail against us should know that the wind rose can turn around. [my emphases]

So, while it’s true that Putin here is not initiating, but responding to, a threat of nuclear weapons use—and suggesting a response with “different types of weapons” to boot—it’s also true that he explicitly and emphatically (“This is not a bluff”) warns that all, including nuclear, weapons systems will be used to defend the “our people” and the territory of “our Motherland”—which now includes Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. In that speech, Putin was neither threatening nor abjuring the use of nuclear weapons.

It is certainly true that Russia’s explicit military doctrine puts much stricter limits on nuclear weapons use than does that of the United States.  Russian doctrine only allows the use of nuclear weapons in two circumstances:  1) “[I]n response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies,” or  2) “in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.”

The U.S., on the other hand, is all about keeping its nuclear options open. In the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), cited by Ritter—which Biden promised to revise but didn’t—the U.S. maintains a “range of flexible nuclear capabilities needed to ensure that nuclear or non-nuclear aggression against the United States, allies, and partners will fail to achieve its objectives.” This echoes the 2001 NPR: “U.S nuclear forces will continue to provide assurance to security partners, particularly in the presence of known or suspected threats of nuclear, biological, or chemical attacks or in the event of surprising military developments.” For the U. S. military, “desirable qualities for nuclear weapons in flexible, adaptable strike plans include options for variable and reduced yields” [my emphasis]. Thus, since the George W. Bush administration, the U.S. has developed dial-a-yield nuclear weapons whose “variable and reduced yields” provide a wide range of use options.

It’s important to know these doctrinal differences. They demonstrate what the current media narrative deliberately hides: that it’s not Russia, but the U.S.—which has been planning a nuclear attack on Russia since before WWII ended—that is explicitly planning and willing to use nuclear weapons to overcome battlefield “surprises.” As Mark Sleboda put it: “The Pentagon has been openly and proudly developing and deploying what they call ‘more useable’ battlefield nuclear weapons, specifically for use against Russia and China” [my emphasis].

Still, in the current context in Ukraine, given that Russia considers the battle of existential importance, and the terrain of actual combat its “homeland” territory, Russia’s use of a nuclear weapon is possible even within its more restrictive explicit policy. This is a very dangerous situation, and no “doctrine” here guarantees against the use of nuclear weapons.

Nor, I regret to inform you, does any explicit “doctrine” anywhere. The actual policy for nuclear weapons use of any state that has them, and the danger to the entire world as long as any nation does, is: We will use them when we judge that it's absolutely necessary to do so. And we will determine what “absolutely necessary” means.

The question in this dangerous situation is: Which party is more likely to find it absolutely necessary to use nuclear weapons to stave off what it considers an existential defeat? The insistent Western political and media narrative has raised the specter of nuclear weapons use upon the assumption that it is Russia who will have to use nuclear weapons to stave off the defeat it is already suffering. Because they know no one would believe the party that’s winning would use nuclear weapons, they must get you to believe Russia is losing—so you’ll know who must be to blame in case a nuclear “surprise” happens.

With all due caution about the unpredictability of warfare, the unexpected tenacity of Ukrainian soldiers, the willingness of western leaders to pour money, weapons, personnel, and other resources into the conflict, the setbacks that Russian forces have experienced, et. al., the idea that Russia is on the verge of defeat in Ukraine is ridiculous. And they—the US/NATO/Ukrainian managers of this war—know it. If you’ve come to believe Russia is losing, it’s because they’ve lied to you, and got you to believe a narrative they know is not true. They told you they are lying about this conflict, and they are still confident you’ll believe them.

The analysis of the current situation I find persuasive is that Russia quickly captured and still holds a large swath of territory (~116,000 sq. km). Ukraine recaptured a small portion (5-8%) of that territory (~9000 sq. km. according to CNN, ~6000 sq. km., according to BBC) by throwing its best troops and equipment into two major offensives that “relied heavily on U.S. intelligence and high-tech weaponry,” as well as larger numbers of foreign forces (without whom “we would have disintegrated immediately”). The Russians, outnumbered by 4-5 to 1, made an orderly retreat to more defensible lines, preserving their own forces while at the same time decimating the cream of the Ukrainian army—"its most battle-hardened and well-trained forces.” Ukraine’s attempts to extend their gains around Kherson and Kharkov have been repulsed.

In parallel attacks, the US/NATO/Ukraine “side” undertook the assassination of a Russian intellectual in Russia, the sabotage of the Crimea bridge and the Nord Stream pipeline, and various attacks on Russian cities close to Ukraine.  In response, Russia—the largest country in the world, whose strategic depth (size and materiel of armed forces, fighting-age population, industrial capacity, etc.) dwarves that of Ukraine—has mobilized 300,000 more men, began the campaign of destroying Ukrainian electrical and other dual-use infrastructure that it had previously abjured (to the surprise of shock-and-awe American warmakers who blow all that stuff up first thing), and amassed troops and planes at multiple border sites. Russia has also set up a special council to coordinate industrial resources and military needs on a wartime scale. Russia has only just begun.

There is a major Russian air and land offensive coming and it is very unlikely that what’s left of the AFU will be able to repulse it. To have any chance for that would require the direct, massive, and quick intervention of US/NATO forces. And even that may not be enough. In this theater, it would be very difficult for anyone—and certainly for Kiev itself—to win a conventional-arms war against Russia.

While nothing is inevitable, it is not Russia but the US/NATO/Kiev that is more likely to have to use nuclear weapons to stave off defeat. For Russia to be faced with the need to use nuclear weapons to stave off an existential defeat that threatens “the very existence of the Russian state,” it would require that the Armed Forces of Ukraine push Russia out of all the territory it has gained, and be posing an imminent threat to Crimea and other Russian territory. The possibility of that happening is on another planet many orders of magnitude less than the possibility that Russian forces will rout the AFU and put the US/NATO/Kiev regime in a position where it would have to use nuclear weapons to prevent its existential defeat and demise.

And they know it. It is exactly for that kind of possibility in that kind of theater that the U.S. developed its “flexible” nuclear weapons policy, “deploying…‘more useable’ battlefield nuclear weapons, specifically for use against Russia and China.”

Russia is not losing this war, and is in no position where it has to consider using nuclear weapons.  Zelensky isn't begging every week for more weapons and more money, and for preventative strikes on Russia, because Russia is losing. The US is not sending the 101st Airborne into Romania a few miles from the Ukraine border because Russia is losing. It is because they know that Kiev is in existential danger that they need to get you thinking that Russia is.

The idea that Russia is about to use nuclear weapons, which would only be harmful to its own forces and territory, is another fantasy scenario, along with Russia shelling its own nuclear power plant, bombing its own POW camp, sabotaging its own pipeline, or blowing up its own dam. In fact, it’s a projection of US/NATO/Kiev’s fears and plans.

The tell on that is the suggestion that Russia might explode a “demonstration” nuke in the Black Sea or somewhere, as a gesture of intimidation. Russia doesn’t do gestures. It acts. If it needs to use nuclear weapons, it will use them, without bluff, intimidation, or “demonstration.” That’s the American game, and specifically with nuclear weapons. The only nuclear weapons use in the world was by the United States, precisely as a demonstration—blowing up militarily meaningless civilian targets (cities!) in order to intimidate its present (Japan) and future (USSR) enemies, to show them what we could do. The U.S. is projecting its own nuclear strategy on Russia, revealing what it does and is thinking about.

Ditto, Russia staging a “false flag” nuclear explosion. It’s interesting that the notion of “false flag” operations is suddenly not dismissed as unthinkable “conspiracy theory,” but presented as a possibility that everyone should seriously consider. False-flag allegations are at once important to take seriously and intrinsically difficult to untangle. Anyone might do a false flag, but, again, that’s typically America’s, not Russia’s, game. You want false flags? Remember the Maine, and the Maddox (Tonkin Gulf), and Operation Northwoods, and Syrian chemical weapons attacks, and Saddam’s WMDs, etc. Sleboda again: “False flags and/or WMDs are after all the indisputable standard US MO and playbook for pretexts for military action from the Spanish American War, to Vietnam, to Iraq, to Syria.”  More projection.

In this case, Western media managers are confident they can convince you that Russia is more likely than Kiev to false-flag blow up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and the Kakhovka dam, both of which Russia controls and Kiev has been attacking; they are confident they can persuade you that Russia is more likely to false-flag explode a nuclear weapon than is Kiev—although the White House and Pentagon say there is  “there is no evidence” and “no indication” for such a senseless action on Russia’s part; and they are certainly confident they can get to dismiss the possibility of a Ukrainian “dirty bomb” false-flag, although Ukraine has the materiel, means,  motive, and absolutely no doctrine of restraint, and Shoigu and Lavrov claim to have “specific information” they are willing to present to the UN. Because Western media managers are confident they can make you believe anything.  And so often—just about every time it was crucial to them—they have. Really, if they can get people to believe this was a Russian false flag:



(Courtesy Matt Orfalea)


The US/NATO/Kiev punditocracy and media apparatus is positing for us a situation in which nuclear weapons use has kinda-sorta, you-can-bet-on-it, already been decided upon, by Russia, because it is losing. They hope, if you believe that, you will accept direct, overt, massive US/NATO military intervention. They know American and European publics will not accept such dangerous intervention unless they’re convinced that it’s not about some prior plan to destroy Russia and preserve U.S. hegemony, but about saving the world from the nuclear threat Russia has unleashed (as well as saving the brave Ukrainian regime which would have defeated Russia fair and square if Russia hadn’t cheated with those nukes). They will produce the evidence for that, if it’s absolutely necessary. It won’t be any harder than getting people to believe that Russia blew up Nord Stream.

Of course, overt US/NATO intervention will include the “flexible” use of nuclear weapons, if battlefield surprises make it absolutely necessary—i.e., if they are losing. Which is very likely.

Any way you cut it, the way this war is going, it is reasonable—if not optimistic—to posit a 50-50 chance of nuclear weapons use.

Here are the three scenarios, in order of likelihood:

Scenario one: Without overt, direct US/NATO intervention, with just the current level of borderline co-belligerency from NATO states, the Kiev proxy regime drives Russia back to the February 21st lines. That means Kiev is on a roll, and there is nothing in the militant, fascist, Russian-hating ideology driving that regime that will stop them from continuing on at least to Crimea. At that point, if not sometime shortly before, Russia will conclude that “the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.” Russia will not accept that existential defeat. At least a 50-50 chance Russia will use nukes to prevent it.

Fortunately, we are nowhere near this scenario. It is extremely unlikely. The chance of it occurring is less than 10%.

Scenario two: In a renewed offensive, Russian forces rout the AFU, and the US/NATO decline to intervene with countervailing military force.  Combat ends without the use of nukes. Whoever’s left in Kiev capitulates on Russian terms. US/NATO try to preserve a rump regime in Kiev that can support an eventual revanchist insurgency. Because this would be exactly the clear defeat for US/NATO that Stoltenberg said cannot be allowed, I do not think they’ll just let it happen. This non-interventionist scenario can only occur if Russia routs the AFU very quickly. I put the chances at less than 50-50.

Scenario three: Under whatever pretext, US/NATO forces enter the battle as overt co-belligerents. Any way this occurs—from no-fly zone to the 101st Airborne and US-European infantry and tank brigades—it will result in US and European casualties and US and European ships, bases, and cities being destroyed. Russian targets, too, of course, but Russia will not allow this fight to be contained in its territory or neighborhood. This will be the inescapable, worldwide, fight to the finish of either NATO or Russia. For either side, defeat cannot be allowed.

At least a 50-50 chance that the losing side will use nuclear weapons to stave it off.

Please understand that this scenario—“a large scale war with Russia and joining NATO as a result of the defeat of Russia”—is what Kiev desired and planned for (“The coolest thing”), as Zelensky adviser, Oleksiy Arestovych, said in 2019, giving the date it would occur and details of how it would unfold:


Zelensky advisor Arestovitch talks about the need for large-scale war with Russia to bring in NATO. Describes in detail and gives date.


“A large scale war with Russia and joining NATO as a result of the defeat of Russia. The coolest thing”

The chance of this scenario occurring is increasingly likely. I would say 50-50 and getting worse. The dynamic will only reverse if there is political upheaval in Europe that causes the internal fracture of NATO. I wouldn’t have thought this scenario so likely in March or April, but the US/NATO leadership has committed itself in every way, and talked itself into a tight box. (They have already sent the 101st Airborne and are talking up nukes!) 

This scenario is made more possible by the fact that the West—especially the US—has no idea what kind of danger they face in getting into it. Americans think they can bluff, intimidate, and escalation-dominate any adversary. They do not think it’s possible that they will suffer a nuclear attack, because they think their nuclear weapons are the thing that has protected and always will protect them from that, when it’s actually been the admirable caution of Soviet submarine and early warning officers who prevented their annihilation. This time, there will be no bluff.

What will not happen, Scenario Null, is some Solomonic negotiation that stops the fighting before it gets out of hand. There will be no Minsk/Musk 3. Been there, done that. Gone, baby, gone. The military conflict that’s happening now is because those negotiations failed. The negotiations that were taking place after this military conflict started, which could have resulted in a Minsk/Musk 3, with Ukraine only losing Donetsk and Lugansk and Crimea, were nixed by the UK, under the orders of the US, with the acceptance of the EU—because they will not (permit Kiev to) give up an inch of territory, unless forced to do so by military defeat—which cannot be allowed.

The only negotiation will be over terms of surrender once things are settled on the battlefield. The result will be that one side or the other suffers a decisive, unallowable defeat. If Russia returns to its February 21st position, it is defeated. Donetsk and Lugansk will be overrun by Kiev fascists, Crimea will be under threat, and the dismemberment of Russia will begin in earnest. A rainbow of color revolutions! If US/NATO/Kiev does not irreversibly recapture Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and maybe even Crimea, it is defeated. The Zelensky government will collapse amidst a fascist melee, Ukraine will become a neutered rump state, and NATO will be a laughingstock, on the road to dissolution.

Both sides know this. The principals on both sides have eliminated any possibility of mutually acceptable compromise and are fully invested in fighting to win a definitive victory. There's no outside force—no international organization or group of domestic anti-war politicians (who do not exist in the US., anyway)—that is going to impose a peace. All the powers that could do so are the principal protagonists in this conflict, too heavily invested in it to accept anything less than decisive victory, and too rightfully afraid to accept the unacceptable defeat that is the only alternative.

As I said previously, (”Many more loose variables, and many more profoundly stupid actors”), we are at a greater risk of nuclear war than during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Today, the two major nuclear powers are in ongoing combat. Today, the president is Joe Biden.

The only element that could bring an abbreviated end to fighting would be a political and social uprising of people in particular nations that would force their political leadership to withdraw prematurely and accept defeat. That would of course be in a country whose side in Ukraine is losing. If you want to think that means Russia, have at. We’ll see. In my understanding, the greatest possibility for that is in European countries, whose populations are being hammered by suicide sanctions, who will be the first to be devastated by the expansion of combat, and who are not fully brainwashed by the neocon/neoliberal US media apparatus. It’s only a slight chance, because it will require real street battles against a determined political leadership that knows its capitulation would bring that unallowable defeat to the side it is aligned with in Ukraine.

So, there’s at least a fifty-percent chance that a military situation will arise in which one of the parties in this conflict faces an imminent existential defeat that it cannot allow. (I think that’s most likely to be the US/NATO/Kiev. We shall see.) And there’s at least a fifty-percent chance that the party threatened with such a defeat will use every weapon in its arsenal to stave it off. Therefore, there’s a fifty-percent chance of nuclear war. If you want to argue otherwise, in this war between the US/NATO/Kiev vs. Russia, please tell me: Who will accept defeat?

We all know that such an outcome is irrational. It will not be confined to the Ukraine theater, will devastate humanity, and render any “victory” pointless. Unfortunately, war is not a rational enterprise.

Nobody will accept defeat, so everybody will lose.


Related articles: Ukraine Negotiation KabukiStop Believing: Be Skeptical of the Civilian-casualty Narrative,  The Battle of Ukraine and the War It’s Part OfPath to War, New World Order. The US Lost.  From 2014: Charge of the Right Brigade: Ukraine and the Dynamics of Capitalist Insurrection,  Good for the Gander: Ukraine's Demise Accelerates. From 2018:  The Warm War: Russiamania At The Boiling Point.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR / SOURCE
Jim Kavanagh edits The Polemicist. Follow him on Twitter @ThePolemicist_


Print this article


Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW



 

[/su_spoiler]

Don’t forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.


Up to You.

^3000US citizens have no real political representation.

We don't live in a democracy. And our freedom is disappearing fast.

I don't want to be ruled by hypocrites, whores, and war criminals.

What about you? Time to push back against the corporate oligarchy.

And its multitude of minions and lackeys.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

NOTE: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读



The U.S. and NATO Are Waging War With Russia in Ukraine… But Russia Is Assured of Victory – Russell Bentley

Please share this article as widely as you can.


DEFEAT CAPITALISM AND ITS DEADLY SPAWN, IMPERIALISM
ecological murder • endless wars • ingrained racism & social injustice • worker exploitation • incurable via reforms

Finian Cunningham
THIS IS A REPOST  • FIRST RUN IN MAY, 2022

OPEDS


Russell Bentley, an internationalist hero, and from Texas, no less.


Russell Bentley has been living in the Donetsk People’s Republic for eight years where he now has obtained official citizenship.

W

estern news media are spinning wild delusions about Russia facing failure and defeat in Ukraine, says Russell Bentley, a former American soldier who has been fighting and living in the Donbas for the past eight years. In the following interview for Strategic Culture Foundation, he says Russia is assured of a stunning victory to defeat not just the Kiev regime but also its handlers in the U.S. and NATO powers.

This week, the New York Times and BBC, for example, belatedly and begrudgingly admitted that Russia had “triumphed” in Mariupol, the southern port city where for weeks the same Western media have been lionizing the “brave defenders” belonging to the NATO-sponsored and openly Nazi-affiliated Azov Battalion.

Russell Bentley has gained an international following for his courage and truth-telling. In this interview, he also bears testimony to the ravages and war crimes committed by what he calls the Nazi Kiev regime against the civilian population. He says it was vital that Russia launched its special military operation (Operation Z) on February 24 because the Kiev regime and the United States in concert with other NATO powers were planning a major deadly offensive against the Donbas. That offensive was pre-empted by Russia’s intervention. He says that while Russia has the military upper hand, the NATO powers are up to their necks in this conflict in a way that threatens a full-on world war. And the Western media are misleading the public about the grave dangers, cynically spouting lies about “defending Ukraine” instead of the reality that the U.S., NATO and the European Union are supporting Nazis and war criminals. He traces a historical political line back to the Second World War and how the Western powers assimilated German Nazi remnants into their power structures with baleful consequences that are manifest today.

Originally from Texas, Russell Bentley has been living in the Donetsk People’s Republic for eight years where he now has obtained official citizenship. He left the United States in late 2014 to join the DPR army to defend the breakaway republic from the NATO-backed Kiev regime. He said the suffering of innocent people at the hands of “NATO Nazis” compelled him to volunteer. Bentley has fought on the frontlines where he has seen many of his comrades-in-arms killed. He recently attended the funeral of one of them, Sergey Lysenko, a fighter and poet who was killed in the battle for Volnavaha on May 9, Victory Day. More recently, he has been broadcasting and working in communications to convey to the world what is really happening in the Donbas and Ukraine. He wryly points out that his broadcasting videos have been censored by YouTube while the U.S.-owned media platform continues to permit Ukrainian Nazi battalions to pump out their propaganda.

Interview

Question: Western news media have been full of reports on how Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine is a failure. From the perspective of people on the ground in Donbas, how is Russia’s campaign going?

Russell Bentley: A lot of people in Donbas and Russia are concerned about the pace and even the conduct of Operation Z, especially in its early stages. In the beginning, some serious mistakes were made, but this is inevitable in every war. Russia has genuinely made every effort to minimize civilian casualties and destruction of infrastructure, what U.S. Nazis call “collateral damage” when their military invades and destroys countries. The U.S. regime has had total control of all political and military policies and decisions in Ukraine since 2014, and that includes the Ukrop [Ukrainian military] Nazis’ decision to use civilian human shields and to maximize death and destruction. Russia has faced an absolutely ruthless, even diabolical enemy while trying to maintain honor and morality by upholding and conforming to the laws of war, and setting a humane example. It is like a boxer using Marquis de Queensbury rules trying to fight an MMA fighter who also has brass knuckles and a knife. But the boxer is winning – militarily, economically, and politically.

Russia is winning, and we will win. Neither the Ukrainian military nor all of NATO can or will stop Russia from the complete accomplishment of all of the goals set for Operation Z. Nazified Ukraine, under the control of U.S., EU and NATO Nazis, is an existential threat to Russia, and Russia will deal with it as such. Ukraine will be de-nazified and de-militarized as far as Russia deems necessary. Of that, you can be certain.

The fact is that Russia has actually achieved a stunning victory. Standard military doctrine dictates an assault force requires a 3-to-1 numerical superiority to have a reasonable chance of victory, and Russia has achieved all its strategic goals thus far with an assault force of less than 1-to-1. The casualty reports from both sides should be taken with a grain of salt, but no serious observer can deny that Russia has dealt strategic losses to Ukrop army men and equipment while maintaining their own numbers at militarily acceptable and operational levels. Russia has used a small fraction (about 15 percent) of its military capabilities so far in Ukraine. The armchair Generals and keyboard commandos who criticize Russia’s military operations in Ukraine are for the most part far too ignorant of military tactics and strategy to even be considered qualified to have an opinion on the subject, so they should be silent. Don’t worry, we got this.

Question: There have been muted admissions in Western media that the United States is supplying intelligence to help the Kiev regime forces to target Russian troops. Have you seen much evidence of the U.S. and NATO providing intelligence to enable Kiev military operations?

"Without U.S. and NATO’s continuing support, Ukraine’s quisling regime would have already surrendered, the war would have ended, and thousands of lives would have been spared. So the absolute moral, legal and practical responsibility for the start, escalation, and continuation of this war lies with them. Russia doesn’t start wars, we finish them. And we will finish this one as well, victoriously, one way or another..."

Russell Bentley: Yes. The U.S., along with their EU and NATO henchmen, have had complete political, economic and military control over Ukraine since 2014. Every dead civilian and soldier, every person crippled for life, every blown-up or burned-down house, every psychologically traumatized child, every hungry, homeless dog and cat, on both sides, are absolutely and primarily the criminal responsibility of the genuine Nazis who own and control the U.S., EU, and Ukrainian regimes, and their militaries. The entire Ukraine war, ongoing since 2014 is in reality a proxy war of Western fascism against Russia, because Russia is the main obstacle to their objective of world domination.

The U.S. and NATO have had their Special Forces and highly trained mercenaries (including ISIS terrorists) in Ukraine since 2014. I can confirm this personally. The provision of intelligence to Ukraine from satellite, AWACS, drones, ELINT and SIGINT is a major force multiplier, as is the provision of expert advisors and instructors who also have been directly involved in frontline combat operations since 2014, which I can also personally confirm. The provision of multi-billions of dollars worth of weapons and ammo, along with Western orders to “fight Russia to the last Ukrainian”, lays bare the Western Nazis’ intent to leave Ukraine an irrecoverably failed state, just as they have done in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia and Yemen among other countries. Ukraine is currently under genuine foreign Nazi occupation, absolutely no less than it was from 1941 to 1943. The Ukrainian army today does not “defend” Ukraine, it deliberately destroys it, on behalf of a foreign and genuinely fascist regime that controls Ukraine from Kiev, but is actually based in Washington, London and Brussels. And Tel Aviv.

Without U.S. and NATO’s continuing support, Ukraine’s quisling regime would have already surrendered, the war would have ended, and thousands of lives would have been spared. So the absolute moral, legal and practical responsibility for the start, escalation, and continuation of this war lies with them. Russia doesn’t start wars, we finish them. And we will finish this one as well, victoriously, one way or another. It is up to our enemies in the U.S. and NATO to decide how much destruction and suffering they will cause Ukraine before their inevitable political de-nazification and military defeat.

Question: In areas of the Donbas that were formerly under the control of the Kiev regime forces but are now under the control of Russian forces, what has been the reaction of citizens to the changing circumstances?

Russell Bentley: I have made multiple trips to newly liberated areas, particularly Volnavaha and Mariupol, where some of the heaviest fighting and destruction occurred. Of course, no one is happy to see their home or large parts of their city destroyed, but the vast majority, I’d say more than 90 percent, of the people there, are happy to be liberated from the oppression and occupation of Nazi terrorists. The reports of rape, robbery, murder, torture, and human and organ trafficking are legion, but these crimes have now ceased, and are now being counted and investigated, and the perpetrators will be brought to justice.

Russia is bringing in hundreds of tonnes of humanitarian aid per day, every day, and the electric, gas, and water infrastructure is already being repaired or replaced in many of the liberated cities. Meanwhile, the West sends Ukraine billions of dollars worth of lethal military aid, but not a single dollar has been sent to people in the areas that the Kiev regime still claims there are Ukrainian citizens that they are “defending”. The people of Mariupol in particular saw for themselves how Azov Battalion Nazis used civilians as human shields and even slaughtered them in order to try to blame on Russia’s alleged “aggression”. Russia has liberated them from unaccountable Nazi rapists, torturers and murderers. Russia is the only one bringing in humanitarian aid and assisting with reconstruction and repair. Of course, all sane and decent citizens in the liberated zones are very glad to see them. Only the Nazis and war criminals are not.



Question: During the eight years after the CIA-backed 2014 coup in Kiev, what was life like for the people in the separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk (DPR and LPR)?

Russell Bentley: Life in a war zone is never easy. Since the people of the Donbas republics stood up and refused to submit to foreign fascist rule in the spring of 2014, they have been under constant military attack, economic blockade and political persecution. And yet we have prevailed, not only survived but thrived, in spite of very difficult conditions. By literally every metric of human life quality, from the cost of living to political freedom, the Donbas republics have fared far better than people in the parts of Ukraine under the Kiev regime.

In Ukraine, the quality of life began a steep decline immediately after the Maidan coup d’état in early 2014. After the new regime was filled with stooges hand-picked by the U.S. State Department and CIA, the Ukrainian military and Nazi terrorist battalions were unleashed against any and all Ukrainian citizens who protested against the coup. This led to massacres in Odessa, Mariupol, Kharkov, Lugansk and Donetsk (among many other places) along with terrorist oppression against any political dissent. Foreign Gauleiters were brought in and installed, such as Ulana Suprin, an American-born physician from a pro-Bandera family who was appointed Minister of Health, and then proceeded to gut the Ukrainian national healthcare system. U.S.-born “investment banker” and State Department employee Natalie Jaresco was appointed Minister of Finance of Ukraine and from 2014 to 2016, looted the Ukrainian treasury with impunity. The fugitive ex-President of Georgia, Mikhail Saakashvili, (who is now in prison for corruption in Georgia) was appointed Governor of Odessa Oblast (state) from May 2015 to November 2017. Under his reign, Odessa became a major hub for sex slavery and human-organ trafficking, as well as the illegal and unregulated import of toxic waste.

As elsewhere, since the Covid-19 pandemic economic disruptions, prices in the Donbas republics have risen significantly, and even more so in recent months. Wages have to some degree kept pace with prices, and some prices such as rent, utilities and fuel have actually remained static. In spite of an economic blockade by the Kiev regime and the West, the Donbas republics continue to enjoy a very normal and generally satisfactory standard of living. Medical care and education remain free in the republics, and both are of comparable quality to Russia. Wages are higher in Russia, but so are prices, so the standard of living in the republics is generally better than in Ukraine and on par with Russia’s. Russia has a strong military, economic, energy, and food security, so the republics can expect the same in the future. Practically and politically (if not officially) we are part of Russia, and expect and continue to have similar living standards.

Question: Has the security situation improved for the populace of the DPR and LPR since Russia launched its military intervention on February 24?

Russell Bentley: The most important thing to understand about the Russian intervention into Ukraine is that it was a preemptive defensive move that prevented an imminent and massive military attack by the Ukrainian army on the main cities of the republics – Donetsk, Makeevka, Yasynuvata, Gorlovka and Lugansk. All of these cities are literally on the frontlines, with the city centers a scant 10 or 12 kilometers from Ukrop military positions. Had the Russians hesitated, and the attack occurred as planned, and had the Ukrops made it into our city centers, or even into the heavily populated urban areas on the outskirts, their human-shield strategy would have been immediately implemented, and they would have used our civilian population as shields against Russia’s main military advantages, namely, Russian artillery, missile and air power.

It was (and is) also clear that the second wave of the assault forces, made up of the most ruthless Nazi war criminal battalions, were tasked with genocide and ethnic cleansing of the cities, which would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, through not only the ensuing urban combat but from intentional and targeted mass murder of ethnic Russians by Ukrainian “Einsatzgruppen”, exactly as the German Nazis had done in these same cities 80 years before. And it is an undeniable fact and proven beyond any doubt, that the strategy of human shields, genocide and ethnic cleansing was designed and ordered by U.S. and NATO war criminals. So the Russian intervention saved the populations of our cities that otherwise would have been doomed had Russia hesitated.

Since the beginning of Operation Z in late February, the Ukrainian shelling that has been ongoing since 2014 has significantly increased, especially targeted attacks on civilians, such as open-air markets and residential areas where our military do not operate. There has been an increase in both shelling and civilian deaths, but compared with the mass slaughter that was planned, there can be no doubt that the Russians saved our people in the tens or hundreds of thousands. Which is certainly an increase in our security.

Question: Do you think Russia should have intervened sooner than 2022 to prevent aggression from the NATO-backed Kiev regime?

Russell Bentley: Many people do, and for a while, I did too. I now see things differently and much more clearly. Vladimir Putin is the president of Russia, and as he has clearly stated, his job is to protect Russia and the Russian people. Everything else comes second. In 2014, Russia was not prepared militarily, economically, or politically for an incursion into Ukraine, because it must be understood that any incursion into Ukraine risked, and in fact, continues to risk, a full-on confrontation with NATO, which would have been, and still is, not only military but economic, political and informational. Had he overtly intervened in the earlier years, he would have fallen into the trap set for him (and Russia) by the Western Nazi powers. Putin played his hand brilliantly, avoided the trap, and intervened only when Russia was ready, and in fact, has created a counter-ambush into which the U.S. and EU have inescapably fallen.

The Russian economy may not be bigger than the U.S. or EU’s, but it is much stronger than either, even both. Russia’s economic, energy and food security ensure that it will not only survive the economic war that is already in the process of going global, but will emerge victorious while the U.S. and (even more so) the EU’s economic and political demise (if not destruction) are already inevitable.

Europe and Ukraine will face a food crisis this year that will border on famine, and exactly because the citizens allowed their rulers to design such a situation. It was the completely voluntary sanctions on Russian fuel and fertilizer by the mis-rulers of the EU and Ukraine that allowed a situation to develop wherein a loaf of bread may realistically cost 10 euros by the end of the year, and there may not even be enough bread for those who can afford it. Because the ruling class of the EU obeyed the U.S. orders to refuse to buy Russian gas, European fertilizer production has been brought to a standstill. The amount of fertilizer needed for adequate agricultural production to feed the population is simply not produced. That means that this year, there will just not be enough food for all the people in Europe. People will face drastic food shortages and price inflation and even hunger.

This all could have been avoided, easily, if the EU masters had any consideration for their citizens. They don’t. And they are not stupid, nobody can be that stupid. The only realistic conclusion is that they are creating hardship and famine on purpose. They are.

Russia is now prepared to face off with these monsters and either defeat or destroy them. Russia’s military is prepared, and Russia’s economic, energy, and agricultural sectors are prepared. Russia has cemented its alliance with China, as well as other strategic countries, such as Iran and India, and much of Africa, South America and the Middle East. Russia is ready to fight the Third World War, whether conventional or nuclear. As I have said since 2015, “As goes Donbas, so goes the world.” It is true.

It can honestly be said that Russia, under the brilliant leadership of Vladimir Putin, picked the perfect time to strike, not one day too early or too late. Anyone who thinks they can second-guess Vladimir Putin makes themselves ridiculous by saying so and only proves they are too ignorant to be qualified to have an opinion on the subject, much less state it. Unfortunately, there are quite a lot of people who fall into that category.

Question: Russia has emphasized the “de-nazification” of Ukraine as an objective for its intervention. How is that effort progressing and what will prevent the return of the Nazi influence over the Ukrainian state in the future?

Russell Bentley: The first part of the de-nazification process is obviously the neutralization of their military capabilities, the capture of the Nazis and war criminals, and the investigation of their crimes. This process is proceeding apace, and will continue and accelerate as Russia liberates more and more of Ukraine, especially Donbas and Kiev.

The trial and execution of the major war criminals is an imperative part of the de-nazification process. Examples must also be made of the minor “foot soldier” war criminals. Justice, as well as practical reason, also demands their execution. A Nazi is like a mad dog or poisonous snake, or any other unrepentant mass murderer who has acquired a taste for killing and human blood. There is no way to reason with them, there is no way to appeal to compassion or humanity that they are devoid of. They must be put out of their misery.

One of the Soviet Union’s biggest mistakes, which we are paying for now, was to allow so many German Nazi war criminals to escape to the West and continue to incubate and procreate the malignant virus of Nazism. Unrepentant advocates of Nazism, the philosophy of “herrenvolk” (master race) and “Untermenschen” (subhuman), that some people are superior, and that those they consider to be “inferior” human beings can be used as livestock or slaves, or exterminated like insects, pass this vile philosophy on to their spawn, who continue the traditions.

Whether German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s grandfather was an SS General is quite possible, but not proven. That Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland’s grandfather was a Nazi collaborator in Ukraine, and that Freeland continues the legacy of her Banderist predecessor is beyond dispute. She herself has openly admitted it. That some of the worst Nazi war criminals were not only aided in their escape from justice but given positions of wealth and political power in the West is likewise a proven fact. Prior Nazi connections in business or family are not just no obstacle to the entrance to elite oligarchic and political circles, in many cases, they certainly seem to be an advantage, if not a prerequisite. Just ask the Board of Directors of Monsanto/Bayer, descended from I.G. Farben, or the scions of Prescott Bush or Henry Ford. The philosophy of Nazism must be eradicated. Permanently.

Question: Is a peaceful coexistence between Ukraine and the Donbas republics possible in the future?

Russell Bentley: Yes, not only possible but highly probable. After the liberation and absolute de-nazification of Ukraine, at least as far as (and including) Kiev, the political and military leadership of the Donbas republics will take responsibility along with Russia for the political, economic, and infrastructure rebuilding of Ukraine. Ukraine was once the industrial and agricultural powerhouse of the USSR. It can again be the same in the Russian Federation. There are many fraternal people in Russia and Donbas who would be happy to see it be so, and will gladly help to make it so. Those who do not want to be a part of building the New Ukraine with us can move to whatever part of western Ukraine we might allow the West to occupy, or they can go to the EU to be immigrants and second-class citizens themselves. There may not be any more strawberries to pick in Poland, but in the EU, there will always be jobs for prostitutes and hitmen, jobs that pro-Bandera Ukrainians are naturally qualified for.

Question: Why are there two separate Donbas republics, DPR and LPR? Could they coalesce into one unified state in the future? Do you see them eventually joining the Russian Federation as Crimea did in 2014?

Russell Bentley: That there have been two separate republics for all these years is usually and superficially explained by the story that the FSB [Russian state security service] has responsibility for the DPR, and the GRU [Russian foreign military intelligence] for the LPR, and that there is a bureaucratic rivalry between them. I think there may be some factual basis for this theory, but I am sure it is not the whole story. While the regular folks in both republics have a great deal in common, there are major economic, demographic and even political differences between the two. But we are, above all, fraternal comrades, and we know we could not survive without each other.

I do not think and do not hope, that the Donbas republics will be absorbed by the Russian Federation. We will be needed here, desperately, to help build the New Ukraine, and I can say with certainty that it cannot be done without us. Furthermore, many here in Donbas are proud of our roots, and as much as we love, respect, appreciate and need Russia and its fraternal friendship and support, we would prefer to maintain our own identity, much the same as my native Texas maintains its own identity vis-a-vis the USA. I do not speak for everyone in this matter, maybe not even a majority, but I speak for many, including myself, my family and most of my friends.

Question: Do you think the U.S.-led NATO bloc will confine their proxy war with Russia to Ukraine or will the war expand to include other European countries?

Russell Bentley: Operation Z in Ukraine, while a real war, and the biggest war in Europe since the NATO attack on Yugoslavia more than two decades ago, is still at this point, mostly symbolic. The military outcome is already beyond question, and Russia can crush as much of Ukraine and its military as it wants, anytime it wants. Their gentle kid-glove prosecution of the war so far is the proof. As is the fact that while Ukrop Nazis bomb civilian targets daily, the Ukrainian military has so far not targeted the administrative buildings or the top political and military leaders in the capitals of the Donbas republics. Likewise, political and military leaders in Kiev and Lvov, domestic and otherwise, have not been targeted by Russian missiles. It appears to me there is a quid pro quo agreement in place. “War is politics by other means”, and I am convinced there is still a lot of politics going on behind the scenes that not even the most genuinely well-informed public pundits have any clue about.

The real war is economic, has already begun, and is already global, and Russia has already delivered a crushing blow to her enemies. Politically, militarily and above all, economically, Russia is ascendant, and the Nazi West is headed for its well-earned Götterdämmerung. Nuclear weapons are the wild card, and either side can use them at any time. Russia, if it perceives an existential threat; the Western Nazis could use nuclear weapons probably in a false-flag provocation, or in the demented fulfillment of their depopulation program, thinking that the oligarch scum hiding under mountains can survive a full-force nuclear exchange. Doctor Strangelove in real life…

I believe that the chances that this conflict/confrontation will end in an all-out nuclear war are more probable than not. Maybe not this year or next, but as more time passes, I think the chances increase until they become inevitable, without divine intervention or some other natural disaster that precludes the use or need for it. I hope I am wrong. But I am quite sure things will get worse before they get better.

Question: Your personal journey from the United States to take up arms and fight for the defense of the Donbas back in late 2014 is quite a remarkable story of adventure. Yet the only media attention you have received from the U.S. has been to smear you as a “Russian propagandist”. What do you make of the lack of open-minded interest in your life journey from the American media?

Russell Bentley: Ninety-eight percent of Western media are professional liars and propagandists. What they write and say is almost always the exact opposite of the truth, and when it’s not, they are only using a fragment of truth, out of context, in order to deceive. Like former White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki, they will lie, straight-faced, knowing that they are lying, and knowing that you know they are lying, and knowing that you know they know you know they know they are lying. Can there be a more contemptible creature on this Earth? Lord, I hope not.

These scum are well-paid “presstitutes”, but even whores have more honor, humanity, and dignity. Western propagandists are like whores who work knowing they have venereal disease, and willingly and knowingly pass it on to their clients. It has correctly been said that “respect for the truth is the basis for all morality”, and this saying is really, really true. And these Western media whores are the mortal enemies of the truth, and thus, morality. I do not pay any attention to what they say about me. Their words are like the buzzing of flies to me.

Question: Can you explain what made you decide to take up the cause of the Donbas people?

Russell Bentley: I had been following developments in Ukraine since the beginning of the Maidan protests in 2013-2014 and U.S. envoy Victoria Nuland handing out cookies to the protesters. On May 2, 2014, there was the Odessa Massacre, and a month later, on June 2, there was an airstrike by the Ukrainian Air Force (on U.S. orders) against the Administration Building in Lugansk. A woman named Inna Kukurudza was hit in the strike, and both her legs were blown off. A man came up filming the aftermath of the strike with his phone. Inna was still alive, but dying, and asked the man to use his phone to call her family. She did not live long enough to make the call. An iconic photo was made from that film of Inna Kukurudza looking straight into the camera. When I saw that photo, it was as if she was looking directly into my eyes, into my soul, and asking me personally and directly, “What are you going to do about this?” At that exact moment, I knew I was going to Donbas to protect people like Inna and to kill people like the ones who murdered her, an innocent civilian, on a nice summer afternoon. And I have done it. Six months after seeing her photo, I was in Donetsk, in the Vostok Battalion, heading to the frontline. Here is her photo. So my question to people now is, “What are you going to do about it?”


Inna Kukurudza : One of the thousands of victims of deliberate Ukrop shelling of Donetsk city—a terrorist crime that Western media and international bodies have refused to acknowledge.


Coming here, I was not only taking up the cause of the Donbas people, who defend Donbas, and defend Russia. Who defends Russia, defends the future of humanity. And humanity includes all good people of all nations. The vast majority of people in the West these days are coprophagous zombies who are too brainwashed to ever redeem themselves. They eat shit, and have learned to like it, and are angry and offended if you suggest they change their diet. But the two percent who are not “woke”, but aware, who know history, can actually perceive reality, who understand what is at stake, and are willing to do more than hit “Like” on a Facebook page to do something about it, these are our audience and the hope for humanity. And there still is hope, because two percent in the U.S. and EU are still tens of millions of people. All good people must stick together and work together. If we do, we can still win and make a better world for everyone. And even if we can’t, let’s give it our best shot. What else better do we have to do?

Question: You have made your life in the Donetsk People’s Republic, having obtained citizenship and started a family there. How have local people taken to the “man from Texas” in their midst?

Russell Bentley: When I came here in December 2014, I honestly did not expect to live through the winter, and had good reason for that expectation. I was 54 years old, out of shape, didn’t speak Russian, coming to the small side of a big war, the People’s Militia versus the entire might of the NATO-backed Ukrainian army, the third most powerful army in Europe. But I came anyway, and it was the best move I ever made in my life. I had a hard life growing up, and spent five years in U.S. federal prison for marijuana smuggling, but I also did a lot of cool things, a lot of travel, adventure, a lot of fun, and a lot of pleasure. But the last eight years here in Donbas have been the best years of my life. I’ll be 62 years old next month, and how many men in the U.S. or EU, or anywhere, can say that at 62 they are living the best years of their life?

It took a lot of courage to come here to join the DPR army, to fight, to willingly face death, not expecting to win. I’m not bragging, it’s just a simple fact. And by doing so, I learned and proved one of the most important lessons in life: courage is the key to happiness. Because it is impossible to be happy when you are afraid. So do not be afraid. By being brave, I brought myself to the best part of my life. You can do the same.

When I came here, I had no idea or imagination or ambitions about being an “internet star” or a correspondent or anything like that. But I am a poet and singer-songwriter, I have a talent for communication and inspiration and my work with a camera and computer has had more impact than my work with a Kalashnikov or RPG. People know my work and my name and respect me in China, Australia, South Africa, South America, every country in Europe, and, of course, all over the USA, Texas, and Mexico. And Donbas and Russia. But I did not come here looking for fame or fortune. The thing that I am proudest about in my whole life is the respect and friendship of the soldiers I fought with, and the citizens I live with. They know who I am, and really appreciate me being here, and that is my greatest honor.

Question: What are your thoughts on how the Western news media has been censoring Russian media and any critical opinion on how the U.S., NATO, and the European Union bear major responsibility for creating conflict with Russia?

Russell Bentley: It proves their cowardice and mendacity. Fools hate the wise, cowards hate the brave, and liars hate the truth. The truth is being drowned in an ocean of lies these days, but the truth is still out there, and it is still the truth. It is our most powerful weapon, and that is why they fear it and try to erase it. They know a dollar worth of our truth can overcome a billion dollars worth of their bullshit and lies, so that is why we must defend it at all costs. Courage, truth, solidarity, these are our weapons. We must be ready and willing to die, and to kill who and what needs killing. We are not just fighting for nationality or a race or political philosophy, we are fighting for the future of humanity. Davai!

 


 

 



Print this article


Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW



 

[/su_spoiler]

Don’t forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.


Up to You.

^3000US citizens have no real political representation.

We don't live in a democracy. And our freedom is disappearing fast.

I don't want to be ruled by hypocrites, whores, and war criminals.

What about you? Time to push back against the corporate oligarchy.

And its multitude of minions and lackeys.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

NOTE: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读



Endgame Ukraine; Putin’s Battleplan

Please share this article as widely as you can.


DEFEAT CAPITALISM AND ITS DEADLY SPAWN, IMPERIALISM
ecological murder • endless wars • ingrained racism & social injustice • worker exploitation • incurable via reforms

Mike Whitney


Ukraine’s unquestioned strategic center of gravity is its western corridors to the Polish border where the vast majority of its war support enters the country. Their operational center of gravity is their resupply lines emanating eastwards from Kyiv to Ukraine’s various frontline positions. Without those two corridors, it would be nearly impossible for Kyiv to sustain wartime operations for more than a few weeks. Putin, therefore, may calculate the best use of those 218,000 additional troops will be to launch a three-pronged axis to cut both of those supply routes.” Lt. Colonel Daniel L. Davis, Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and Contributing Editor at 1945 (website)

I want to emphasize again that all tasks of the special military operation… will be unconditionally fulfilled.” Russian President Vladimir Putin 

Another day of large-scale missile attacks on Ukraine’s hobbled energy infrastructure has plunged much of the country into darkness. The relentless attacks—which continued through the night and into the early morning hours—have intensified dramatically as Russian combat troops continue to join their units along the perimeter in preparation for a major winter offensive. Russian President Vladimir Putin has waited patiently for the Zelensky regime to grasp the gravity of their situation and press for bilateral negotiations. But the Ukrainian president has stubbornly rejected diplomacy at every turn opting instead to fight til the bitter end. He is fully supported in that decision by his backers in Washington who see the conflict as an opportunity to weaken Russia so it cannot obstruct US plans to “pivot” to Asia. The transformation of Ukraine into a frigid, uninhabitable wastelands is largely the result of Washington’s voracious geopolitical ambitions. This is from a post at the website Moon of Alabama:

Previous attacks had limited the distribution capacity to some 50% of demand. Controlled blackouts over several hours per day allowed to give some electricity for a few hours to most parts of the country. The attack today created a much larger problem. Not only were distribution networks attacked but also so the elements that connect Ukraine’s electricity production facilities to the distribution network. All four nuclear power stations of Ukraine with their 15 reactors are now in shutdown mode. Kiev along with most other cities of Ukraine no longer has electricity.” Ukraine – Lights Out, No Water And Soon No Heat”, Moon of Alabama


Ukraine Plunged Into Darkness—As of the morning of November 24, more than 70% of Kiev remains without electricity. There is no water in half of the capital. Power outages continue in all regions throughout the country….”Kiev goes Dark as NATO Sacrifices Ukraine”, Southfront


The widespread power outages are accompanied by freezing temperatures that will inevitably lead to an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. Millions of Ukrainians will be forced to flee across the border seeking refuge in Europe. Others will be left to hunker-down in makeshift emergency shelters that are sporadically heated by diesel-powered generators. There is no prospect that Ukraine’s dilapidated power-system will be fixed quickly if ever. And even if it could be cobbled-back together in some improvised capacity, it would only be a short-term fix. The fact is, the Russians have identified the main substations, terminals and auto-transformers across Ukraine and are picking them off one-by-one. Unable to defend itself against the daily barrage of precision-guided missiles, Ukraine is gradually being bombed into the Stone Age. 

The objective of the Russian operation is to undermine Ukraine’s ability to wage war. The attacks on Ukraine’s power-grid, railway hubs, fuel deports, bridges and command-and-control centers are merely Phase 1 of a 2-phase operation that is designed to defeat the enemy and bring the war to swift end. Russia has gathered roughly 500,000 troops in a combat Strike-Force that will traverse the country along three main axes annihilating Ukrainian Forces wherever they are encountered and seizing key cities along the way. Critical supply-lines from Poland will be blocked, leaving troops at the front cut-off and vulnerable to attack. Eventually, the regime and their Right-bloc security forces will be killed or captured. Moscow will not allow a government that is openly hostile towards Russia to rule the country. This is from an interview with Colonel Douglas MacGregor:

There are now 540,000 Russian troops stationed around the outskirts of Ukraine preparing to launch a major offensive that I think will probably end the war in Ukraine. 540,000 Russian troops, 1,000 rocket artillery systems, 5000 armored fighting vehicles including at least 1,5000 tanks, hundreds and hundreds of tactical ballistic missiles. Ukraine is now going to experience war on a scale we haven’t seen since 1945.” Colonel Douglas MacGregor, Rumble

MacGregor again—Everything has now changed… the large probability of offensives beginning in the next few weeks, whenever the ground freezes completely and the Russians judge their forces to be ready. and they will move in and they will finish off this Ukrainian state, let’s not kid ourselves, The regime in Kiev is likely to be annihilated along with the remainder of its armed forces….

The biggest mistake we in the west could make is to involve ourselves. We’ve done enough damage….and I think what we are going to see…. is the total destruction of this rump Ukrainian state. Now, what happens afterwards, I don’t know. I’m quite confident that Russians do not want to remain in western Ukraine …Russia is now treating Ukraine as a real enemy. Previously they were not. and this is not understood in the west.” “Ukraine is about to be annihilated”, Colonel Douglas MacGregor, youtube


(Question—Is there any chance that US combat troops will be sent to fight in Ukraine?)

MacGregor—We’re in no position to go to war with Russia, and anything we would do on the ground would fail miserably and we’d be embarrassed. But obviously no one in Washington is listening…There’s no real understanding of how desperate the situation is in western Ukraine. So what we can look forward to along with this massive (Russian) offensive is the migration of millions of more Ukrainians into Europe because they have no place else to go….. The Ukrainians know what’s coming. There’s not much they do about it at this point, but instead of throwing them a lifeline, we’ve essentially told them to sink with the ship that they’re on.” Col. Douglas Macgregor“Ukraine is about to be annihilated”, youtube; 6:35 min

Note—So, when the missile strikes end and the ground freezes, the Russian offensive will begin. But what is the plan? How will the Russians deploy their troops and what tactical objectives will they seek to achieve?



While no one can say with certainty how the offensive will evolve, two recent posts at the military website 1945 provide a compelling and detailed explanation of what might take place if Putin decides to deliver the knockout punch to the Ukrainian armed forces and the political leadership in Kiev. The articles were written by 1945 “Contributing Editor, Daniel L. Davis who is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who deployed into combat zones four times.” Here are a few excerpts from the two pieces:

If Putin orders an all-out attack, it will most likely start with a massive air, missile and drone attack to complete the destruction of the Ukrainian electric grids, substations, fuel storage facilities, rail yards, diesel locomotives, and communication facilities. Intent will be to make it intensely difficult to support the UAF, complicate communications, make intra-country movement of troops much harder, diminish their capacity to logistically support troops in disparate fronts with food, water, medicine, ammunition, and spare parts.

By increasing the burden on Kyiv to take care of the civil population throughout the country, there will be yet fewer resources to allocate to supporting the war. If Kyiv prioritizes supplying the combat units, civilians could freeze to death or starve as a result, putting the government in a terrible no-win situation….

The key to understanding what Putin’s objectives may be is to assess what an additional 200,000 troops could reasonably accomplish in Ukraine: a three-pronged axis of advance designed to sever Ukraine’s life blood – the supply corridor from the Polish border through which all NATO supply and equipment enters Ukraine.“ (“Putin could launch an all-out attack on Ukraine but it could be his downfall” Daniel Davis, 1945)

Much of what Davis anticipates has already taken place, so we will move on to his more stunning scenarios. The post below was published just one day after the article above. Here’s what he says:

In this final edition, I will lay out what I contend is the most dangerous course of action Ukraine could face: a ground campaign to deprive Ukraine of its lifeblood from the West…. What I represent in this analysis…. represents the gravest danger to Ukraine ...

In this scenario, Putin recognizes that the number of troops he has for the task remains insufficient to capture large cities – and that he doesn’t need to capture major cities to succeed. Instead, what he may seek to do is identify and then take out the Ukrainian center of gravity. (which) military theorist Carl von Clausewitz. (defined as.. “the hub of all power and movement (of the enemy), on which everything depends.”

Meaning, in war, the overall objective should be to deprive the enemy of the one thing he must maintain to win the war..

In my assessment, Ukraine’s unquestioned strategic center of gravity is its western corridors to the Polish border where the vast majority of its war support enters the country. Their operational center of gravity is their resupply lines emanating eastwards from Kyiv to Ukraine’s various frontline positions. Without those two corridors, it would be nearly impossible for Kyiv to sustain wartime operations for more than a few weeks.

Putin, therefore, may calculate the best use of those 218,000 additional troops will be to launch a three-pronged axis to cut both of those supply routes: the priority effort in the west out of Belarus with the objective of Lviv, a supporting effort to the northeast in the Sumy direction, and supporting axis from the east to reinforce the current offensive in the Donbas.

A Russian attack out of southeast Belorussia with the objective of Lviv would represent the greatest strategic threat to the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF). Virtually all of the UAF’s weapons, ammunition, and repair parts enter the country from Poland through several land routes towards Kyiv. If Russia were to cut these routes off by attacking along the Polish/Ukraine border down to Lviv, Russia could cut off the majority of the shipments of war material from the West, without which Kyiv would not long be able to sustain its forces at the frontlines in the eastern part of Ukraine. …

If Russia employs a three-axes advance with its newly mobilized combat forces, added to the roughly 200,000 troops already engaged – and critically, avoids trying to invest cities – they will have a chance to focus their combat power where Ukraine is weakest, and in ways that are mutually reinforcing to other axes. This course of action would represent great risk for Zelensky’s troops, but it isn’t without significant risk for the Russians either. … (“Putin Could Launch a Big Winter Offensive in Ukraine to Cut Off Weapons“, Daniel Davis, 1945)

There is, of course, no way of knowing whether the war will actually play out in-line with Davis’s scenario. It does seem likely, however, that Russian strategists have already figured out that the war cannot be won without cutting off vital supply-lines to Poland. That is the main artery that sustains the conflict and allows Zelensky to avoid negotiations. For Putin, attempting such a move would be a risky gambit that could precipitate his political downfall, but if he fails to seize the opportunity to force Kiev to the bargaining table, the war could drag on forever. There are no easy choices but—in this case—it appears the benefits clearly outweigh the risks.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR / SOURCE
Mike Whitney is an indeendent geopolitical analyst residing in Washington state.


Print this article


Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP...
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW



 

[/su_spoiler]

Don't forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.


Up to You.

^3000US citizens have no real political representation.

We don't live in a democracy. And our freedom is disappearing fast.

I don't want to be ruled by hypocrites, whores, and war criminals.

What about you? Time to push back against the corporate oligarchy.

And its multitude of minions and lackeys.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

NOTE: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读



European Parliament Smears Russia While Bankrolling Nazi Terrorism

Please share this article as widely as you can.


DEFEAT CAPITALISM AND ITS DEADLY SPAWN, IMPERIALISM
ecological murder • endless wars • ingrained racism & social injustice • worker exploitation • incurable via reforms

EDITORIAL BY STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION


DATELINE: NOV. 25, 2022

European politicians are once again fueling war with their calumnies against Russia and their deliberate stoking of Nazi embers.


European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen applauds after an address by Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, via video link, during an extraordinary session on Ukraine at the European Parliament in Brussels, Tuesday, March 1, 2022.  There is no more abject blindness than when the blind refuse to see. (AP Photo/Virginia Mayo)


One would think, perhaps, that with a perilous war raging on the European continent, the European Union’s parliament might want to show some leadership in promoting diplomatic solutions to end that conflict. No, not a bit of it.

The European Parliament has shown itself again this week to be nothing more than a giant reactionary talking shop whose proclaimed democratic values have an inverse relationship to its copious chamber of 705 parliamentarians.

Only three years ago, the same parliament voted on a resolution that shamefully distorted the origins of the Second World War by trying to equate the Soviet Union with Nazi Germany.

The parliament comprising lawmakers from 27 member nations passed a resolution this week condemning Russia as “a state sponsor of terrorism and a state that uses the means of terrorism”. The motion is legally non-binding, and so, therefore, has no power of enforcement. It is a highly “symbolic gesture” of censure against Russia. In other words, it is naked political propaganda for a political purpose – to smear the Russian Federation and to inculcate the public perception of Russia as a barbarian rogue that needs to be eliminated.

Not even the United States has gone this far. The Joe Biden administration has balked at suggestions to similarly designate Russia a terror state. Washington has balked because it is a ludicrous incendiary step, as well as blatantly false.

The European resolution text was a screed of rabid Russophobia packed with anti-Russia allegations referring to the nearly 10-month-old war in Ukraine. Many of the claims are baseless or have been shown to be outright fabrications contrived to malign Russia. They were also hilarious in their stupidity.


The degree of European hypocrisy often matches Washington's, and in some cases clearly exceeds it.

For example, at one point the resolution absurdly blames Russia for blowing up its own Nord Stream gas pipelines under the Baltic Sea back in September. This contradicts plenty of evidence that the explosions were in fact carried out by the U.S. and Britain in a covert military operation to permanently sever European gas trade with Russia. Yet the European parliamentarians accused Russia of leaking its own gas into the Baltic Sea from the sabotaged pipes (costing the Russian state billions of dollars worth) and thereby inflicting “an environmental attack on the EU”. Ergo, the Russians are not only barbarians, they must be very stupid barbarians!

In another head-spinning example, the European Parliament resolution accused Russia of terrorizing the Ukrainian population by occupying the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) and “making it a military target”. That’s a weird sort of admission of the reality that for months now the Ukrainian military has been shelling Europe’s biggest nuclear station with NATO artillery threatening to create a radiation disaster. Yet instead of pointing fingers at Kiev and NATO, the European lawmakers lay the blame on Russia for making the ZPNN a military target. Oh, those dastardly barbarian Russians!

Lamentably, this only shows that the European Parliament has managed to brazenly turn reality on its head. The NATO and EU-backed Nazi regime in Kiev is the entity that is threatening to ignite another world war in Europe, one that would lead to a global conflagration.

The insanity of the European parliamentary resolution is beyond irony. It came only days after video evidence emerged that Kiev’s Nazi military was executing Russian POWs. It also came only a week after the Ukrainian regime was caught red-handed firing a missile at Poland killing two civilians with the obvious intention of causing a provocation in order to incite an all-out NATO war against Russia.

The resolution accused Russia of committing “aggression on Ukraine” for the past nine years. This is another example of reality-inversion. It was the U.S. and EU-backed coup d’état in Kiev in 2014 that spawned a Nazi regime to embark on terrorism against the Russian-speaking people of the former Ukrainian southeast Donbass region (now a part of the Russian Federation). The weaponizing by NATO of a Russian-hating Kiev regime that openly adulates Third Reich collaborators led to the present war in Ukraine.

That war has escalated because the United States and NATO have pumped Ukraine with billions of dollars of weapons. The latest total military aid from the US stands at nearly $20 billion {Nearly 100 billion in latest accounting.-Ed]  Washington and its European Union allies have bankrolled the Kiev regime to the tune of an estimated $126 billion since February this year. Much of that taxpayer-funded largesse has been siphoned off by a corrupt cabal in Kiev headed up by the comedian-turned-president Vladimir Zelensky.

The war started because of NATO and Europe’s refusal to engage with Moscow in diplomatic negotiations over its long-held strategic security requirements. And the war has escalated because NATO and Europe have sought every way to militarize the conflict while spurning diplomacy.

Russia has up to now tried to minimize military operations in Ukraine to neutralize the Nazi regime and its genocidal aggression. But it has become grievously clear that the Kiev regime and its NATO handlers have little capacity for finding a political settlement based on Russia’s strategic security concerns.

The endemic terrorism that the United States, NATO and European Union have bankrolled and weaponized in Ukraine shows that Russia has now no choice but to defeat the Kiev regime through military victory. The enemy mobilized the Ukrainian state in a war against Russia. The enemy did not hold punches in firing indiscriminately at Russian cities, destroying civilian infrastructure and waging “Total War” through economic sanctions and sabotage. The targeting by Russia of Ukraine’s power grid with increasing missile barrages is a situation of military exigency brought about by NATO’s implacable weaponizing of Ukraine. Russia is not the terror state here. It is the United States and European Union who have made war inevitable.

The European Parliament accused Russia of carrying out massacres when it is the NATO and EU-backed Nazi regime that has perpetrated vile atrocities against its own people at Bucha, Mariupol, Kramatorsk and other places of infamy in a macabre charade to blame Russia.

With supreme arrogance, the European Parliament touts itself as a bastion of democracy, human rights and international law. In reality, this bureaucratic colossus has become a propaganda machine for Nazi terrorism in Europe. This degeneration of the parliament has been underway over several years, brought about largely by the expansion of the EU with anti-Russian states. Like NATO, the bloc has become a reservoir of toxic Russophobia due to similar dynamics of expansion.

Europe has seen two world wars over the past century that resulted in as many as 100 million deaths. Russia has felt the suffering and loss from wars more than any other nation. European politicians are once again fueling war with their calumnies against Russia and their deliberate stoking of Nazi embers.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR / SOURCE
The Strategic Culture Foundation is a Russian think tank based in Moscow.


Print this article


Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW



 

[/su_spoiler]

Don’t forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.


Up to You.

^3000US citizens have no real political representation.

We don't live in a democracy. And our freedom is disappearing fast.

I don't want to be ruled by hypocrites, whores, and war criminals.

What about you? Time to push back against the corporate oligarchy.

And its multitude of minions and lackeys.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

NOTE: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读



Kiev continues to deny its battlefront atrocities and blatant provocations, with ample support by the West’s media and politicians.

Please share this article as widely as you can.


DEFEAT CAPITALISM AND ITS DEADLY SPAWN, IMPERIALISM
ecological murder • endless wars • ingrained racism & social injustice • worker exploitation • incurable via reforms

Col. Douglas Macgregor (Ret.)


Print this article


Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW



 

[/su_spoiler]

Don’t forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.


Up to You.

^3000US citizens have no real political representation.

We don't live in a democracy. And our freedom is disappearing fast.

I don't want to be ruled by hypocrites, whores, and war criminals.

What about you? Time to push back against the corporate oligarchy.

And its multitude of minions and lackeys.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

NOTE: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读