The United Russia political party held the initial session of what party chairman Dmitry Medvedev said would be an ongoing event happening every two years.
Since you mentioned Navalny at the end of your article, in my latest one I have analyzed the hypocrisy of Western MSM and governments/elites mourning Alexei Navalny's death in Russian penal colony, while ignoring Gonzalo Lira's death in a Ukrainian prison a few months ago and the illegal detainment of Julian Assange in a British jail: https://geopolitiq.substack.com/p/hypocrites-mourn-navalny
Thanks, very interesting. What does Lavrov constantly say about the #1 most important point of the UN Charter? The equality of all nations, large and small.
"the core reason for the violence is “the Western intention to hold on to its dominance in world affairs at all cost. People in Washington are convinced that doing so would be easiest amid a global chaos,”
Patrushev has it exactly right. What is irritating to me is that even the most pro-Russian, anti-American analysts. i.e., "the usual suspects" we are all familiar with, can't forthrightly say that. They dance around it, asking stupid questions like "why doesn't Biden do this", or "why doesn't Biden do that". Of course Biden isn't going to do this or that to solve any of the outstanding crises. The crises are what he and the rest of these morons want!
Every time I hear the word "negotiations" coming out of the "usual suspects" mouths, I want to barf. There will be no negotiations over Ukraine, or Gaza, or Yemen, or Iran, or Lebanon, or Syria, or Iraq or Taiwan or anything or anywhere else. The West doesn't not negotiate. Period. End of story. Any so-called "negotiations" are either a CYA fig leaf intended to go nowhere (like the Iran JCPOA "negotiations" Biden conducted for over a year) or a con job or bullying.
The West will only "negotiate" when it suffers a serious military defeat in which it loses significant military assets, e.g., several aircraft carriers or a couple hundred aircraft or 50,000 US troops in ninety days. And that's assuming the US doesn't go nuclear in that event, which is quite possible.
I suspect the West will not even "negotiate" if it suffers an economic crisis identical to the 1920's Depression. After all, the rich who run things won't be suffering that much. So unless there is a revolution that drives them out of power, things still won't change. And driving them out of power will require those in power to be killed - "voting" does not work in this system by definition. Third parties take decades to build. I have zero confidence in that approach.
No, it's going to take a major war to alter things. It may be inevitable that a nuclear war will be necessary.
You'll see in the next item I just finished that Lavrov says Russia is finished playing games with the West; that the West must come to the table since Russia won't do anything to force them. Carlson's very correct: Russia's quite willing to negotiate but the West isn't whatsoever and actually prefers the chaos and misery it causes. Russia will finish Ukraine up the way that's best for Russia. Period. Novorossiya will then become Russia's defense shield where it will emplace weapons to counteract all NATO weapons emplaced in close proximity to Russia. And some of those weapons will be of a type the West doesn't possess, nor will in the next several decades, if the West survives its internal parasites.
Ideally, the Global Fracture was to be avoided if possible, but that's clearly not going to happen. So, Plan B is two formulate two Blocs and wait for the dysfunctional one to disintegrate. IMO, the last Big War will be in Palestine, and that's already brewing. The Outlaw US Empire hasn't the ability to attack China or Russia, or Iran directly--even with NATO alongside.
He concludes that Russia will not negotiate OVER UKRAINE AT ALL but only negotiate AT ALL if the West is prepared to negotiate those December, 2021, treaty proposals.
I think we agree on that. We also agree that the West won't do that.
Schryver also assumes Russia will take much more than the four oblasts it currently controls. He still thinks western Ukraine is "unlikely". which I view as utterly ridiculous as I've said many times. Every single analyst has a blind-spot on that issue which is unshakeable.
I'm not convinced the Middle East war will be the end, unless of course the military defeat the US suffers is serious enough to prevent prosecuting a war with China. The US will attack Iran eventually during the Mid East war, but fail miserably, of course. Nonetheless, until the US suffers enough of a loss of military assets that it OBVIOUSLY can NOT attack China, it will continue to try to threaten China until China is forced to destroy the US military in the Pacific.
The main problem I have with your last sentence is: whether the US has the ability to attack someone successfully doesn't mean it won't try. Nations whose leaders don't understand the term "military balance" do it all the time. Look at Ukraine. Look at Israel now threatening Hezbollah; you've presumably seen b's post today on that. Israel just had a report released by a think tank that said Hezbollah could rain 2-3,000 missiles a day on Israel. Doesn't appear to have thwarted the IDF's willingness to start a war.
These people don't learn UNTIL they've suffered a major defeat. Did they learn from Afghanistan? No, because they didn't lose major military assets. And the neocons don't EVER learn until someone puts a bullet in their head.
This is human nature. Humans don't learn until it hurts - either physically or very much emotionally (which usually means someone they care about died.)
Every day that passes, Russia and China get stronger while the Outlaw US Empire weakens. Currently, Russia wants to have nothing to do with the EU but is close to some nations and will talk with them. Both Putin and Lavrov have said the Europeans must free themselves, and that they believe they are smart enough to do so. The point is the Deep State may decide that it's won enough by colonizing Europe at this juncture, withdrawal from Ukraine and go to work somewhere else, like Moldova.
Very likely. But what can they do in Moldova? It's tiny and will be facing a Russian Military District in western Ukraine - and no doubt a reinforced Transnistria. I think even the neocons wouldn't bother with that once Ukraine is a confirmed failure and go on to concentrate on Iran and China. But if not, Russia will handle Moldova, I'm sure. If NATO tries to stick more Aegis Ashore in eastern Europe, well, that's what the new Military District is for. Russia can put more S-500 in western Ukraine than the West can put Aegis in Europe.
Yeah, but the prods are getting weaker and weaker if they rely on Moldova. At least Ukraine had an army. Moldova has 6,500 professionals and 2,500 conscripts. Their budget is $112 million. Wagner could wipe them out. Hell, those 25,000 Grosny Chechens that Scott Ritter had to give a speech to could wipe them out. A brigade of Donbass militia could wipe them out. And they're not a member of NATO. According to Wikipedia, "In February 2023, 24% would vote in favor of NATO membership while 62% would vote against, according to an IMAS poll." So if Sandu wants to try...
So I don't think Russia is worried about Moldova or the Baltic states. And Poland and Romania will already be covered by the new Military District. As I said, Russia will make sure no one in Europe can threaten Russia any more without NATO going to nuclear missiles. That's the whole point of the SMO. And that's assuming NATO even continues to exist. Germany and Britain are the only two still talking tough and as Martyanov said today, who cares?
Glade to see the Russian security council statement by Nikolay Patrushev recognition of the Ansar Allah Al-Houthi movement claims under un charter and condemnation of US led strikes on Yemen.
Since you mentioned Navalny at the end of your article, in my latest one I have analyzed the hypocrisy of Western MSM and governments/elites mourning Alexei Navalny's death in Russian penal colony, while ignoring Gonzalo Lira's death in a Ukrainian prison a few months ago and the illegal detainment of Julian Assange in a British jail: https://geopolitiq.substack.com/p/hypocrites-mourn-navalny
https://gilles-verrier.blogspot.com/2024/02/notre-cause-au-forum-des-partisans-de.html Its in french but I guess you can use your translator.
Thanks, very interesting. What does Lavrov constantly say about the #1 most important point of the UN Charter? The equality of all nations, large and small.
Who are the 17 nations or territories ? Is it possible to contact the secretary of the group ?
There are far more than 17 depending on how they're defined. Try here first as it also has other links to similar situations, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependent_territory
There's a UN agency described here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Committee_on_Decolonization and here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_list_of_non-self-governing_territories
"the core reason for the violence is “the Western intention to hold on to its dominance in world affairs at all cost. People in Washington are convinced that doing so would be easiest amid a global chaos,”
Patrushev has it exactly right. What is irritating to me is that even the most pro-Russian, anti-American analysts. i.e., "the usual suspects" we are all familiar with, can't forthrightly say that. They dance around it, asking stupid questions like "why doesn't Biden do this", or "why doesn't Biden do that". Of course Biden isn't going to do this or that to solve any of the outstanding crises. The crises are what he and the rest of these morons want!
Every time I hear the word "negotiations" coming out of the "usual suspects" mouths, I want to barf. There will be no negotiations over Ukraine, or Gaza, or Yemen, or Iran, or Lebanon, or Syria, or Iraq or Taiwan or anything or anywhere else. The West doesn't not negotiate. Period. End of story. Any so-called "negotiations" are either a CYA fig leaf intended to go nowhere (like the Iran JCPOA "negotiations" Biden conducted for over a year) or a con job or bullying.
The West will only "negotiate" when it suffers a serious military defeat in which it loses significant military assets, e.g., several aircraft carriers or a couple hundred aircraft or 50,000 US troops in ninety days. And that's assuming the US doesn't go nuclear in that event, which is quite possible.
I suspect the West will not even "negotiate" if it suffers an economic crisis identical to the 1920's Depression. After all, the rich who run things won't be suffering that much. So unless there is a revolution that drives them out of power, things still won't change. And driving them out of power will require those in power to be killed - "voting" does not work in this system by definition. Third parties take decades to build. I have zero confidence in that approach.
No, it's going to take a major war to alter things. It may be inevitable that a nuclear war will be necessary.
You'll see in the next item I just finished that Lavrov says Russia is finished playing games with the West; that the West must come to the table since Russia won't do anything to force them. Carlson's very correct: Russia's quite willing to negotiate but the West isn't whatsoever and actually prefers the chaos and misery it causes. Russia will finish Ukraine up the way that's best for Russia. Period. Novorossiya will then become Russia's defense shield where it will emplace weapons to counteract all NATO weapons emplaced in close proximity to Russia. And some of those weapons will be of a type the West doesn't possess, nor will in the next several decades, if the West survives its internal parasites.
Ideally, the Global Fracture was to be avoided if possible, but that's clearly not going to happen. So, Plan B is two formulate two Blocs and wait for the dysfunctional one to disintegrate. IMO, the last Big War will be in Palestine, and that's already brewing. The Outlaw US Empire hasn't the ability to attack China or Russia, or Iran directly--even with NATO alongside.
"Carlson's very correct: Russia's quite willing to negotiate but the West isn't whatsoever"
Actually, William Schryver's latest covers that negotiation issue very clearly:
The Vladimir Putin Interview - Part Two
Part Two — Is Russia Angling for an Exit?
https://imetatronink.substack.com/p/the-vladimir-putin-interview-part-209
He concludes that Russia will not negotiate OVER UKRAINE AT ALL but only negotiate AT ALL if the West is prepared to negotiate those December, 2021, treaty proposals.
I think we agree on that. We also agree that the West won't do that.
Schryver also assumes Russia will take much more than the four oblasts it currently controls. He still thinks western Ukraine is "unlikely". which I view as utterly ridiculous as I've said many times. Every single analyst has a blind-spot on that issue which is unshakeable.
I'm not convinced the Middle East war will be the end, unless of course the military defeat the US suffers is serious enough to prevent prosecuting a war with China. The US will attack Iran eventually during the Mid East war, but fail miserably, of course. Nonetheless, until the US suffers enough of a loss of military assets that it OBVIOUSLY can NOT attack China, it will continue to try to threaten China until China is forced to destroy the US military in the Pacific.
The main problem I have with your last sentence is: whether the US has the ability to attack someone successfully doesn't mean it won't try. Nations whose leaders don't understand the term "military balance" do it all the time. Look at Ukraine. Look at Israel now threatening Hezbollah; you've presumably seen b's post today on that. Israel just had a report released by a think tank that said Hezbollah could rain 2-3,000 missiles a day on Israel. Doesn't appear to have thwarted the IDF's willingness to start a war.
These people don't learn UNTIL they've suffered a major defeat. Did they learn from Afghanistan? No, because they didn't lose major military assets. And the neocons don't EVER learn until someone puts a bullet in their head.
This is human nature. Humans don't learn until it hurts - either physically or very much emotionally (which usually means someone they care about died.)
Every day that passes, Russia and China get stronger while the Outlaw US Empire weakens. Currently, Russia wants to have nothing to do with the EU but is close to some nations and will talk with them. Both Putin and Lavrov have said the Europeans must free themselves, and that they believe they are smart enough to do so. The point is the Deep State may decide that it's won enough by colonizing Europe at this juncture, withdrawal from Ukraine and go to work somewhere else, like Moldova.
Very likely. But what can they do in Moldova? It's tiny and will be facing a Russian Military District in western Ukraine - and no doubt a reinforced Transnistria. I think even the neocons wouldn't bother with that once Ukraine is a confirmed failure and go on to concentrate on Iran and China. But if not, Russia will handle Moldova, I'm sure. If NATO tries to stick more Aegis Ashore in eastern Europe, well, that's what the new Military District is for. Russia can put more S-500 in western Ukraine than the West can put Aegis in Europe.
They want to continue to prod Russia. There's very little cost to the Empire as they get the locals to do the work as with Ukraine.
Yeah, but the prods are getting weaker and weaker if they rely on Moldova. At least Ukraine had an army. Moldova has 6,500 professionals and 2,500 conscripts. Their budget is $112 million. Wagner could wipe them out. Hell, those 25,000 Grosny Chechens that Scott Ritter had to give a speech to could wipe them out. A brigade of Donbass militia could wipe them out. And they're not a member of NATO. According to Wikipedia, "In February 2023, 24% would vote in favor of NATO membership while 62% would vote against, according to an IMAS poll." So if Sandu wants to try...
So I don't think Russia is worried about Moldova or the Baltic states. And Poland and Romania will already be covered by the new Military District. As I said, Russia will make sure no one in Europe can threaten Russia any more without NATO going to nuclear missiles. That's the whole point of the SMO. And that's assuming NATO even continues to exist. Germany and Britain are the only two still talking tough and as Martyanov said today, who cares?
Glade to see the Russian security council statement by Nikolay Patrushev recognition of the Ansar Allah Al-Houthi movement claims under un charter and condemnation of US led strikes on Yemen.