Paul Damascene correctly points out - as "I am on record" (as Andrei Martyanov likes to say) since April, 2022 for saying - that those Aegis Ashore installations in Poland and Romania are a main issue for Russia. I believe they are the primary issue next to the Russian treaty proposals of December, 2021. It is precisely because the West can not and will not agree to those treaty proposals that the SMO was forced on Russia.
Russia repeatedly said during 2021 that if the West did not resolve the issue of having strategic weapons within 5-10 minutes from Moscow, Russia "would reproduce those conditions for the West." Well, if you can't force the removal of such strategic weapons - and you can't blow them up unilaterally without starting WWIII - what do you do? The only solution is to place your air defense and strategic weapons as close to those enemy strategy weapons as possible.
That place happens to be western Ukraine - and western Belarus - and further north in western Russia. The goal of the SMO - and also the movement of nuclear weapons into Belarus and the further integration of the Belarus' military with the Russian military - and the creation of new Russian Military Districts in western Russia opposite Finland - is to create a new "Iron Curtain 2.0" to shut out any possible ground military threat from the West permanently.
WWI? WWII? And now NATO and Ukraine and Poland? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice - or three times - shame on me. Russia will not be shamed again.
I haven't read most of your MoA comments over years due to your constant use of the phrase "Outlaw US Empire". Not that it isn't essentially correct but it feels like the kids playground where peoples names are turned into a rude or altered word and everyone giggles at it.
We are essentially on the same page and your comments are generally quite good. There again I am probably the only one that sees playground behaviour as denigrating the serious comments that you do make. Feels to me like Bush and his absurd Axis of Evil.
Yes, it's hard to be remined of your reality when it clashes with your perception of reality. I have the opposite issue: I find it difficult to use the acronym USA for many reasons, primarily because the nation's been in gross violation of its proclaimed principles since 1945, almost 10 years before I was born. In 1979, I swore an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution from ALL Enemies, Foreign AND Domestic, which is one part of the Oath of a US Citizen that most US citizens never have to swear to uphold--indeed, they're never even taught that!! I know very well because I was trained to teach Political Science/Civics and none of that was even hinted at. My assumption when readers encounter the term Outlaw US Empire is for them to wonder why. What is an Outlaw? It's a serial lawbreaker. And it breaks its own self-proclaimed Law of the Land and the values attached to it and has for decades. I could call it a gangster and also be correct, and perhaps most appropriate. World's #1 Terrorist--most certainly.
It's unfortunate the term keeps you from reading my commentary, and I see another agreed with your comment but chose to remain silent. I chose to open the door to the closet holding all the USA's and Imperialism's skeletons so I could know the truth of my existence. Fortunately, I'm able to live with that knowledge, although it's not at all comfortable. I tried my best not to contribute to the mayhem once my enlistment was over, but the oath remains. I want a law-abiding government--don't you? How do we attain that goal? Is the 1787 Constitution that a tiny minority approved of that ousted the Articles of Confederation a suitable document along with its institutions or is something new and rather different required?
So, thanks for your reply as the above needed to be stated at some point.
Aug 17, 2023·edited Aug 17, 2023Liked by Karl Sanchez
Outlaw US Empire of Lies also works :-)
From a distance I see the only solution being tearing up the current US Constitution, then the entire system that grew from that and starting over from scratch where a new Constitution is first approved by the People themselves in a series of Plebiscites / Referendums. .. after much deliberation. They need at least a decade to sort that out AFTER the US people collectively finally come to the point of realizing it needs to be done (another decade at least).
IT seems to me the Dems/Reps should be disbanded and shut down, their existing powers eradicated in whatever arrangements are made (some kind of temporary Tribunal Military Govt ) to create a new workable Lawful Constitution - I expect this cannot be done without powerful external International forces supporting and directing it.
Demilitarization and destruction of all WMD equally seems obvious - but how could all this come to pass with out first a unilateral surrender being forced by overwhelming military means as happened to Germany and Japan?
What also makes some sense is the voluntary or enforced partitioning of the USA into several smaller agreeable nation States. Where similar to the subcontinent the people are allowed the freedom to choose to which nation they will be a part of - and travel to there without restriction and register as a 'Citizen'. A wild theory I know. :-)
I do not see any in power in the US willingly surrendering their powers. I find the whole situation frightening as to what is coming.
thanks karl.. well said.. my only quip is a general one based on your idealism.. i think this is going to take a lot longer to see in reality.. otherwise, i share all of your position here on this..
I'm also on record as saying I think this will end in the partition of Ukraine and the cessation of it as a state and regime. Russia will dictate terms over Ukraine but will need to enter into some sort of dialogue with its partners in the partition. But as they have demonstrated to be "agreement incapable" that will of course cause issues, and unless Russia negotiates from a position of some strength - I would say dominance - then they risk pulling defeat from the jaws of victory. By that I mean some sort of hostile rump Ukrainian regime joins NATO and re-arms, and continues some sort of low intensity war. I think to achieve its aims [denazification, disarmament and no NATO] the Ukrainian state and its regime must in effect cease to exist.
RSH (below) is on record that the whole of Ukraine will ultimately be [conquered] by Russia. As I understand the reasoning [Richard please correct me if I have misunderstood you] it relates to the range and speed of nuclear armed weapons and the abilty of NATO to first strike if deployed too close to the Russian centres of political gravity.
Personally - and I am only speculating here - I would have thought it better if certain western regions were re-absorbed into Poland, Hungary etc. For reasons expressed elsewhere. The Odessa region will be a problem but Russia might be forced to give it up (ie it is occupied by NATO troops who would require to be removed forcibly at the risk of WW3) as part of an overall peace settlement.
It is hard to know how this ends as the West either pretend that it is for Ukraine to do a deal or then demands Russia surrender (eg Jeddah). Who does Russia actually negotiate with? You have to think Russia might just say "f*ck it", let's finish this thing once and for all. I may have argued myself into agreeing with RSH!!!
lol at the end... the problem is russia has no one to negotiate with... that is as clear as day.. thus, they are left to decide how they want to see this madness end.. it is not an easy puzzle to solve given how the one party which karl rightly describes as the megalomaniacs / pleonexiacs - have not a shred of interest in ending anything other then russia's statehood and independence here..
To marcjf too, I read Hudson's latest interview after posting this discourse, which he titled "Creating an Independent World," where he speaks his mind more forcefully than ever before. The key area to read is the new international financial system and how it relates to stopping Western Imperialism. We haven't collaborated on the solution we provide, but they're strikingly similar. https://michael-hudson.com/2023/08/creating-an-independent-world/
The MSM will need to unwind its many lies to become credible, then it would need to objectively attack Neoliberalism for its corruption and totalitarian attitude, neither of which I expect to occur soon.
I wasn't so much positing a mea cupla on behalf of the MSM, merely that they are prepping the ground for the embarassing off ramp that will occur at some point aka Kabul. :-)
'As argued, there’s no way to remove Ukraine and all the actions related to it past and present from the current Big Picture.'
How to get there?
Russia has to achieve a position where it can dictate terms without being preempted by current NATO efforts, repudiated by Z and toadies.
Lavrov is by far the best man to figure out how to deal with the various international busybodies who would like some say.
Russia can just follow Casear's 'Veni, vidi, vici' and say 'just watch us.' My guess is that there will not be any military response by a war weary NATO with at least the US screaming its head off. The US might get the UN to order something useless but that is a high reach and pretty iffy.
Lamp posts may have to play a role, not just for Z, but also for Blinken, Sullivan and Icky Vicky. The latter's weight might break the lamp post. Ursula von der Leyden said that Nuremberg was not right. The Germans will have to deal with her and NS2 specialist Olaf Scholz.
Paul Damascene correctly points out - as "I am on record" (as Andrei Martyanov likes to say) since April, 2022 for saying - that those Aegis Ashore installations in Poland and Romania are a main issue for Russia. I believe they are the primary issue next to the Russian treaty proposals of December, 2021. It is precisely because the West can not and will not agree to those treaty proposals that the SMO was forced on Russia.
Russia repeatedly said during 2021 that if the West did not resolve the issue of having strategic weapons within 5-10 minutes from Moscow, Russia "would reproduce those conditions for the West." Well, if you can't force the removal of such strategic weapons - and you can't blow them up unilaterally without starting WWIII - what do you do? The only solution is to place your air defense and strategic weapons as close to those enemy strategy weapons as possible.
That place happens to be western Ukraine - and western Belarus - and further north in western Russia. The goal of the SMO - and also the movement of nuclear weapons into Belarus and the further integration of the Belarus' military with the Russian military - and the creation of new Russian Military Districts in western Russia opposite Finland - is to create a new "Iron Curtain 2.0" to shut out any possible ground military threat from the West permanently.
WWI? WWII? And now NATO and Ukraine and Poland? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice - or three times - shame on me. Russia will not be shamed again.
paul damascene is always bang on and worth reading..
I haven't read most of your MoA comments over years due to your constant use of the phrase "Outlaw US Empire". Not that it isn't essentially correct but it feels like the kids playground where peoples names are turned into a rude or altered word and everyone giggles at it.
We are essentially on the same page and your comments are generally quite good. There again I am probably the only one that sees playground behaviour as denigrating the serious comments that you do make. Feels to me like Bush and his absurd Axis of Evil.
Yes, it's hard to be remined of your reality when it clashes with your perception of reality. I have the opposite issue: I find it difficult to use the acronym USA for many reasons, primarily because the nation's been in gross violation of its proclaimed principles since 1945, almost 10 years before I was born. In 1979, I swore an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution from ALL Enemies, Foreign AND Domestic, which is one part of the Oath of a US Citizen that most US citizens never have to swear to uphold--indeed, they're never even taught that!! I know very well because I was trained to teach Political Science/Civics and none of that was even hinted at. My assumption when readers encounter the term Outlaw US Empire is for them to wonder why. What is an Outlaw? It's a serial lawbreaker. And it breaks its own self-proclaimed Law of the Land and the values attached to it and has for decades. I could call it a gangster and also be correct, and perhaps most appropriate. World's #1 Terrorist--most certainly.
It's unfortunate the term keeps you from reading my commentary, and I see another agreed with your comment but chose to remain silent. I chose to open the door to the closet holding all the USA's and Imperialism's skeletons so I could know the truth of my existence. Fortunately, I'm able to live with that knowledge, although it's not at all comfortable. I tried my best not to contribute to the mayhem once my enlistment was over, but the oath remains. I want a law-abiding government--don't you? How do we attain that goal? Is the 1787 Constitution that a tiny minority approved of that ousted the Articles of Confederation a suitable document along with its institutions or is something new and rather different required?
So, thanks for your reply as the above needed to be stated at some point.
Outlaw US Empire of Lies also works :-)
From a distance I see the only solution being tearing up the current US Constitution, then the entire system that grew from that and starting over from scratch where a new Constitution is first approved by the People themselves in a series of Plebiscites / Referendums. .. after much deliberation. They need at least a decade to sort that out AFTER the US people collectively finally come to the point of realizing it needs to be done (another decade at least).
IT seems to me the Dems/Reps should be disbanded and shut down, their existing powers eradicated in whatever arrangements are made (some kind of temporary Tribunal Military Govt ) to create a new workable Lawful Constitution - I expect this cannot be done without powerful external International forces supporting and directing it.
Demilitarization and destruction of all WMD equally seems obvious - but how could all this come to pass with out first a unilateral surrender being forced by overwhelming military means as happened to Germany and Japan?
What also makes some sense is the voluntary or enforced partitioning of the USA into several smaller agreeable nation States. Where similar to the subcontinent the people are allowed the freedom to choose to which nation they will be a part of - and travel to there without restriction and register as a 'Citizen'. A wild theory I know. :-)
I do not see any in power in the US willingly surrendering their powers. I find the whole situation frightening as to what is coming.
thanks karl.. well said.. my only quip is a general one based on your idealism.. i think this is going to take a lot longer to see in reality.. otherwise, i share all of your position here on this..
I'm also on record as saying I think this will end in the partition of Ukraine and the cessation of it as a state and regime. Russia will dictate terms over Ukraine but will need to enter into some sort of dialogue with its partners in the partition. But as they have demonstrated to be "agreement incapable" that will of course cause issues, and unless Russia negotiates from a position of some strength - I would say dominance - then they risk pulling defeat from the jaws of victory. By that I mean some sort of hostile rump Ukrainian regime joins NATO and re-arms, and continues some sort of low intensity war. I think to achieve its aims [denazification, disarmament and no NATO] the Ukrainian state and its regime must in effect cease to exist.
RSH (below) is on record that the whole of Ukraine will ultimately be [conquered] by Russia. As I understand the reasoning [Richard please correct me if I have misunderstood you] it relates to the range and speed of nuclear armed weapons and the abilty of NATO to first strike if deployed too close to the Russian centres of political gravity.
Personally - and I am only speculating here - I would have thought it better if certain western regions were re-absorbed into Poland, Hungary etc. For reasons expressed elsewhere. The Odessa region will be a problem but Russia might be forced to give it up (ie it is occupied by NATO troops who would require to be removed forcibly at the risk of WW3) as part of an overall peace settlement.
It is hard to know how this ends as the West either pretend that it is for Ukraine to do a deal or then demands Russia surrender (eg Jeddah). Who does Russia actually negotiate with? You have to think Russia might just say "f*ck it", let's finish this thing once and for all. I may have argued myself into agreeing with RSH!!!
lol at the end... the problem is russia has no one to negotiate with... that is as clear as day.. thus, they are left to decide how they want to see this madness end.. it is not an easy puzzle to solve given how the one party which karl rightly describes as the megalomaniacs / pleonexiacs - have not a shred of interest in ending anything other then russia's statehood and independence here..
To marcjf too, I read Hudson's latest interview after posting this discourse, which he titled "Creating an Independent World," where he speaks his mind more forcefully than ever before. The key area to read is the new international financial system and how it relates to stopping Western Imperialism. We haven't collaborated on the solution we provide, but they're strikingly similar. https://michael-hudson.com/2023/08/creating-an-independent-world/
Am I imagining it, but the western MSM beginning to admit as much...?
The MSM will need to unwind its many lies to become credible, then it would need to objectively attack Neoliberalism for its corruption and totalitarian attitude, neither of which I expect to occur soon.
I wasn't so much positing a mea cupla on behalf of the MSM, merely that they are prepping the ground for the embarassing off ramp that will occur at some point aka Kabul. :-)
i am the wrong person to ask marcjf!
'As argued, there’s no way to remove Ukraine and all the actions related to it past and present from the current Big Picture.'
How to get there?
Russia has to achieve a position where it can dictate terms without being preempted by current NATO efforts, repudiated by Z and toadies.
Lavrov is by far the best man to figure out how to deal with the various international busybodies who would like some say.
Russia can just follow Casear's 'Veni, vidi, vici' and say 'just watch us.' My guess is that there will not be any military response by a war weary NATO with at least the US screaming its head off. The US might get the UN to order something useless but that is a high reach and pretty iffy.
Lamp posts may have to play a role, not just for Z, but also for Blinken, Sullivan and Icky Vicky. The latter's weight might break the lamp post. Ursula von der Leyden said that Nuremberg was not right. The Germans will have to deal with her and NS2 specialist Olaf Scholz.