An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Supporting neo Nazis in Ukraine and jumping on the bandwagon of MAGA certainly brings the crackpots out of the sewer. Who think to themselves that they finally have a voice who represents them.
And consider it normal now to express in any way they can what their belief system is and what they stand for.
Biden done the same for the other lot who thought it was quite normal to walk into a subway and start shooting and then simply hand himself in in order to get views taken seriously.
The US has never been more divided since the civil war. Politically did it ever really end ?
I'd like to do a tour of the bible belt one day. Spend a bit of time there to see if it is a mixture of deliverance and twin peaks.
Dress up like the Klan and stop people in the street and Ask if they know anywhere were my cousin can get an abortion. If they know a good spot where I could open an atheist book shop.
Probably a month away from Russia changing the game before that NATO meeting in Madrid regarding Finland.
China changing their outlook also.
complete war and full immobilisation certainly looks likely. Go full out on both Ukraine and Finland whilst China has your back as they know they are next.
The Finnish government has made an official decision to join NATO - a statement.
Britain called for the creation of a "global NATO", which will allow monitoring the "security" in the Indo-Pacific region.
"While protecting Euro-Atlantic security, we also need to pay attention to security in the Indo—Pacific region," Liz Truss said.
Turkey supports NATO's "open door" policy, but opposes countries supporting terrorists, the Turkish Foreign Minister said.
Turkey, at a meeting of NATO ministers, "conveyed to the partners the concern" about the ties of Finland and Sweden with the Kurdistan Workers' Party, Cavusoglu said.
The party is recognized as a terrorist organization in Turkey.
In addition, Finland and Sweden continue to restrict exports of defense industry products to Ankara, the Turkish minister said.
Finland and Sweden have declared their readiness to work with Turkey to resolve issues of concern to Ankara in connection with their membership in NATO.
https://t.me/s/sputnik
Confirms everything discussed in the video.
At this stage it looks and feels like they are sleeprunning into WW3.
Also regarding Scott Ritter, the convicted online sexual predator of underage girls....
Yeah, so I think that it's good that Scotty is giving these online interviews. More interviews, full of shit thought they are, the less time he'll have cruising online chatrooms/forums for the grooming/manipulation of young, unsuspecting girls.
German creatine, beta-alanine, hydrolyzed collagen, beetroot juice and, my favourite, freshly-brewed coffee (caffeine).
The above supps are listed in the IOC Consensus Statement on Sports Nutrition. Why? Solid evidence behind them, and because they are legal to use (because in food!). I can personally vouch for the creatine :)
What? I thought i'd be a good Samaritan and share this info :)
Oh! Regarding collagen, all the randomly controlled, double-blinded trials were conducted using around 3 to 5 grams of collagen. So make sure you get that much; any more would be just extra protein -- no harm, but not really necessary.
All Putin jokes aside, and I am sure Tom will concur with me, this war... this war was nuts. It has brought nothing but death and misery: millions displaced, 100s of thousands maimed or killed... and it ain't over yet (I think the howitzers have arrived to greet the young, ethnic "Russian" conscripts).
So according to Ritter in this interview, this war is turning into a strategic defeat for Russia - because of Finland.
That is not what he says. His view is that if Russia doesn't seem the tide of weapons from the West, it will eventually be defeated, which is what "bleeding Russia to death means." The West largely outnumbers Russia in both military production capability and population size to draw on for forces. So Russia has to make it too expensive for the West to continue the operation.
What Ritter doesn't say is that if Russia waits too long to do this conventionally, then it will be forced to use nuclear weapons.
Garland brought up the point that this is also existential for China, so China cannot afford to let Russia fail knowing it will be the next target and the West will be able to attack China on two fronts McGovern and Ritter agreed.
The takeaway is that the situation has morphed into US/NATO expansion without yet committing troops, waiting for Russia to attack before it does so in order to blame the escalation on Russia.
The likelihood of WWIII is increasing quickly and the potential for it to go full-on nuclear is very high since the faction controlling US/UK foreign/military policy is convinced that the US/UK can "win" a nuclear war with Russia/China. Yes, it will be costly, they admit, but that is the price of world domination.
All Putin jokes aside, and I am sure Tom will concur with me, this war... this war was nuts. It has brought nothing but death and misery: millions displaced, 100s of thousands maimed or killed... and it ain't over yet (I think the howitzers have arrived to greet the young, ethnic "Russian" conscripts).
Yes, this war it nuts but you ain't seen nothin' yet. There is a reason that Russia went this route. The Russians had concluded that NATO was not coming after them so they seized the initiative instead of waiting for the first strike to decapitate them. Russia was aware that this would likely result in war with NATO. The US had already taken the decision in their view.
In my comment above at 12:17PM, "The Russians had concluded that NATO was not coming after them" should be "The Russians had concluded that NATO was coming after them."
That is not what he says. His view is that if Russia doesn't seem the tide of weapons from the West, it will eventually be defeated, which is what "bleeding Russia to death means." The West largely outnumbers Russia in both military production capability and population size to draw on for forces. So Russia has to make it too expensive for the West to continue the operation.
This is about Finland, and to a lesser extent, Sweden. If Russia cannot tolerate Finland in NATO, then they are on a path to a possible strategic defeat. On the other hand, if they stick to their original objective within Ukraine, they will have won on that battlefield, without having to mobilize a million or more troops.
Paul Craig Roberts has made a similar argument: That Russia's unwillingness to quickly defeat the Ukrainian army has given Washington time to rally Europe into bolstering the NATO alliance. The Russian bear should have hit hard, to establish facts on the ground, and force their adversaries to negotiate.
Finland's inexplicable, possibly suicidal decision, has changed the longer term picture. Russia won't be able to stem the flow of weapons, nor can they match an eventual European military buildup. Expanding the war to Finland would be a slippery slope.
Andrei Martyanov (former USSR naval officer) that the Russian military is not (yet) conducting real war. They are still engaged in a special military operation, which is extremely selective to ensure that as few civilian casualties and as little infrastructure destruction as possible since these are ethnic Russian areas. This is going according to the Stavka plan and the VSU is being reduced methodically in Donbass.
After this phase is accomplished there will either be a negotiated solution or real war will begin. Then the velvet gloves come off and the brass knuckles go on.
Some ask why the Stavka did not commit the full might of the Russian military to the invasion. The answer is simple. You only employ the resources needed for the task. It's called efficiency. The Stavka is apparently satisfied with progress with the present level of commitment, which changes with conditions.
BTW, "Putin" is not making the strategic, operational or tactical decisions, as the media seems to think. The Russian military is carrying out the policy of demilitarization and denazification as decided by the Russian Security Council and ordered the the president.
They will have to move to total war before it becomes a NATO member.
Russia has cut off the electricity to Finland to nudge them to think again but it didn't work they said today they will be joining.
Never in a million years will they allow that to happen.
Now the Russians are saying Ukraine will never be a member of the EU never mind NATO. It is ramping up big time.
Russia WILL move to total war knowing China's military has its back. China has its back because they know they are next and top of the list of the Pentagon.
Russia will not necessarily react to Finland's joining NATO immediately. The reality is that the more NATO and the EU expand, the weaker they become rather than stronger. A principle factor in the destruction of previous empires has been over-expansion. It appears to me that Russia senses this weakness and plans to use it to take down NATO. This weakness is already showing up economically. The EU just caved to buying Russian energy using ruble settlement. for example, and they cannot agree on an oil embargo. And there is hardly agreement in Europe on kinetic war over Ukraine. Will Europe be willing to go to war to defend Finland? Time is on the side of RussiaWhile Scott Ritter thinks that time is against Russia, it looks like the Russian think that time is on their side. They have the unity and commitment to sustain this. Does NATO and the EU, or even the US/UK politically? Remember that when all is said and done, this boils down to national interest. Russia has an existential interest in this. Europe and the US do not. It is matter of choice and vanity.
Way past vanity this is about will the US and the West still control things afterwards.
Will Russia do whatever it takes to keep first strike nuclear response times at a manageable level by triggering article 5 of not triggering article 5 if they have that choice ?
That's the crux of the issue when it comes to Finland joining NATO.
It's possible that Russia will not react to Finland's joining NATO. Becoming a NATO base is another matter. I doubt Russia would stand by and watch this without taking it out preemptively. But all this is complicated.
The Stavka is in a position that the rest of us are not. They are tasked with preparing scenarios for the various contingencies involved. There is intelligence that is only available to agencies. There are back channel communications with adversaries as well as allies. There is prepositioning weapons systems and troops. Etc.
The US and allies also have to consider that prepositioning missiles capable of a preemptive decapitating strike will be met the second that launch of any missile is detected with a full salvo that will destroy Europe and the US. This is what MAD is about. The US and its allies have no defense against long-range hypersonic missiles.
But this situation existed during the Cold War and a nuclear exchange was avoided even though there were some close calls, in particular accidents like false positives that were averted. The problem now is that the travel time is greatly reduced, requiring immediate full response that triggers MAD.
The Russians have nerves of steel. Do the Europeans and Americans, for whom this is a matter of choice and vanity?
There's a lot of water between "triggering article 5" and a country being politically able to deploy forces into a war.
At some point somebody has to commit their sons, fathers and brothers to die for another country. At that point the "no thanks" will turn up - because this generation of western young people won't do the dying. They are too self-centred.
Russia is losing in Ukraine. Even Scott Ritter is becoming resigned to this. ("They're being bled dry.") Russia cannot fight a 2 front war. (Ukraine, Finland.) It's over for Russia or nuclear.
36 comments:
https://t.me/sputnik/4001
The Buffalo shooter
Probably was also a big fan of the war room podcast and truth social and held many extreme religious views.
Supporting neo Nazis in Ukraine and jumping on the bandwagon of MAGA certainly brings the crackpots out of the sewer. Who think to themselves that they finally have a voice who represents them.
And consider it normal now to express in any way they can what their belief system is and what they stand for.
Biden done the same for the other lot who thought it was quite normal to walk into a subway and start shooting and then simply hand himself in in order to get views taken seriously.
The US has never been more divided since the civil war. Politically did it ever really end ?
I'd like to do a tour of the bible belt one day. Spend a bit of time there to see if it is a mixture of deliverance and twin peaks.
Dress up like the Klan and stop people in the street and Ask if they know anywhere were my cousin can get an abortion. If they know a good spot where I could open an atheist book shop.
Just to see what the craic is.
Great replacement theory...
Buffalo supermarket shooter's chilling 180-page manifesto said 'great replacement theory' of whites being outnumbered drove him to kill - and New Zealand mosque shooter Brenton Tarrant was his inspiration
That was a fantastic interview Tom
Should be shown worldwide and what the mainstream press should have looked and sounded like.
Ahmed,
Yup the racists thinks MAGA is their voice .
The Klan loved Trump and were emboldened by him.
Probably a month away from Russia changing the game before that NATO meeting in Madrid regarding Finland.
China changing their outlook also.
complete war and full immobilisation certainly looks likely. Go full out on both Ukraine and Finland whilst China has your back as they know they are next.
The Finnish government has made an official decision to join NATO - a statement.
Britain called for the creation of a "global NATO", which will allow monitoring the "security" in the Indo-Pacific region.
"While protecting Euro-Atlantic security, we also need to pay attention to security in the Indo—Pacific region," Liz Truss said.
Turkey supports NATO's "open door" policy, but opposes countries supporting terrorists, the Turkish Foreign Minister said.
Turkey, at a meeting of NATO ministers, "conveyed to the partners the concern" about the ties of Finland and Sweden with the Kurdistan Workers' Party, Cavusoglu said.
The party is recognized as a terrorist organization in Turkey.
In addition, Finland and Sweden continue to restrict exports of defense industry products to Ankara, the Turkish minister said.
Finland and Sweden have declared their readiness to work with Turkey to resolve issues of concern to Ankara in connection with their membership in NATO.
https://t.me/s/sputnik
Confirms everything discussed in the video.
At this stage it looks and feels like they are sleeprunning into WW3.
Finland has been serious about maintaining their military and defending their country - and now their leadership does this.
Britain called for the creation of a "global NATO", which will allow monitoring the "security" in the Indo-Pacific region.
NATO = US/UK Empire to dominate the world and exact tribute
Is the US/UK Empire still rising or is is declining?
Also regarding Scott Ritter, the convicted online sexual predator of underage girls....
Yeah, so I think that it's good that Scotty is giving these online interviews. More interviews, full of shit thought they are, the less time he'll have cruising online chatrooms/forums for the grooming/manipulation of young, unsuspecting girls.
More interviews, scotty! Lots more!
So according to Ritter in this interview, this war is turning into a strategic defeat for Russia - because of Finland.
German creatine, beta-alanine, hydrolyzed collagen, beetroot juice and, my favourite, freshly-brewed coffee (caffeine).
The above supps are listed in the IOC Consensus Statement on Sports Nutrition. Why? Solid evidence behind them, and because they are legal to use (because in food!). I can personally vouch for the creatine :)
What? I thought i'd be a good Samaritan and share this info :)
Oh! Regarding collagen, all the randomly controlled, double-blinded trials were conducted using around 3 to 5 grams of collagen. So make sure you get that much; any more would be just extra protein -- no harm, but not really necessary.
All Putin jokes aside, and I am sure Tom will concur with me, this war... this war was nuts. It has brought nothing but death and misery: millions displaced, 100s of thousands maimed or killed... and it ain't over yet (I think the howitzers have arrived to greet the young, ethnic "Russian" conscripts).
So according to Ritter in this interview, this war is turning into a strategic defeat for Russia - because of Finland.
That is not what he says. His view is that if Russia doesn't seem the tide of weapons from the West, it will eventually be defeated, which is what "bleeding Russia to death means." The West largely outnumbers Russia in both military production capability and population size to draw on for forces. So Russia has to make it too expensive for the West to continue the operation.
What Ritter doesn't say is that if Russia waits too long to do this conventionally, then it will be forced to use nuclear weapons.
Garland brought up the point that this is also existential for China, so China cannot afford to let Russia fail knowing it will be the next target and the West will be able to attack China on two fronts McGovern and Ritter agreed.
The takeaway is that the situation has morphed into US/NATO expansion without yet committing troops, waiting for Russia to attack before it does so in order to blame the escalation on Russia.
The likelihood of WWIII is increasing quickly and the potential for it to go full-on nuclear is very high since the faction controlling US/UK foreign/military policy is convinced that the US/UK can "win" a nuclear war with Russia/China. Yes, it will be costly, they admit, but that is the price of world domination.
All Putin jokes aside, and I am sure Tom will concur with me, this war... this war was nuts. It has brought nothing but death and misery: millions displaced, 100s of thousands maimed or killed... and it ain't over yet (I think the howitzers have arrived to greet the young, ethnic "Russian" conscripts).
Yes, this war it nuts but you ain't seen nothin' yet. There is a reason that Russia went this route. The Russians had concluded that NATO was not coming after them so they seized the initiative instead of waiting for the first strike to decapitate them. Russia was aware that this would likely result in war with NATO. The US had already taken the decision in their view.
There's an open thread at Moon of Alabama today with comments about Ritter's change of viewpoint.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/05/ukraine-open-thread-2022-66.html
The crunch will come when the nudge technique require deploying actual non-Ukrainians into battle - and they start coming home in bags.
It's all very well waving flags, and casting votes in Eurovision. It's a different matter sending your sons, brothers and fathers into a war zone.
This all has a very World War I smell to it.
In my comment above at 12:17PM, "The Russians had concluded that NATO was not coming after them" should be "The Russians had concluded that NATO was coming after them."
That is not what he says. His view is that if Russia doesn't seem the tide of weapons from the West, it will eventually be defeated, which is what "bleeding Russia to death means." The West largely outnumbers Russia in both military production capability and population size to draw on for forces. So Russia has to make it too expensive for the West to continue the operation.
This is about Finland, and to a lesser extent, Sweden.
If Russia cannot tolerate Finland in NATO, then they are on a path to a possible strategic defeat. On the other hand, if they stick to their original objective within Ukraine, they will have won on that battlefield, without having to mobilize a million or more troops.
Paul Craig Roberts has made a similar argument: That Russia's unwillingness to quickly defeat the Ukrainian army has given Washington time to rally Europe into bolstering the NATO alliance. The Russian bear should have hit hard, to establish facts on the ground, and force their adversaries to negotiate.
Finland's inexplicable, possibly suicidal decision, has changed the longer term picture. Russia won't be able to stem the flow of weapons, nor can they match an eventual European military buildup. Expanding the war to Finland would be a slippery slope.
Yup,
And the big elephant in the room is Russia can fight on multiple fronts if it moves to full mobilisation and total war because China has its back.
It can fight in the Baltics, Finland and Ukraine if need be and can commit to it knowing China has its back.
These NATO meetings in Madrid could change things in a very big and dangerous way.
Andrei Martyanov (former USSR naval officer) that the Russian military is not (yet) conducting real war. They are still engaged in a special military operation, which is extremely selective to ensure that as few civilian casualties and as little infrastructure destruction as possible since these are ethnic Russian areas. This is going according to the Stavka plan and the VSU is being reduced methodically in Donbass.
After this phase is accomplished there will either be a negotiated solution or real war will begin. Then the velvet gloves come off and the brass knuckles go on.
Some ask why the Stavka did not commit the full might of the Russian military to the invasion. The answer is simple. You only employ the resources needed for the task. It's called efficiency. The Stavka is apparently satisfied with progress with the present level of commitment, which changes with conditions.
BTW, "Putin" is not making the strategic, operational or tactical decisions, as the media seems to think. The Russian military is carrying out the policy of demilitarization and denazification as decided by the Russian Security Council and ordered the the president.
Yup,
But Finland is a game changer.
They will have to move to total war before it becomes a NATO member.
Russia has cut off the electricity to Finland to nudge them to think again but it didn't work they said today they will be joining.
Never in a million years will they allow that to happen.
Now the Russians are saying Ukraine will never be a member of the EU never mind NATO. It is ramping up big time.
Russia WILL move to total war knowing China's military has its back. China has its back because they know they are next and top of the list of the Pentagon.
If Russia moves to total war and starts fighting on 2 fronts Finland and Ukraine.
And it escalated from there China's military will see some action before the end of the year.
The whole thing will have changed and Russia and China both know they are fighting for there survival.
The only hope we have at the moment is Finland changes it's position. Does a U turn on joining.
They will have to announce it before the meetings in Madrid.
Like Ritter and McGovern says if Finland says it is going to join like it did today.
a) Russia will invade
Or
b) Fire a nuke into a depopulated area like the Middle of a forest in Finland as a warning.
It is all about nuclear response times and first strike and Finland is less than 50 miles from ST Petersburg.
It is what the war in Ukraine is all about
First strike response times.
They commit everything they have and go total war to get the response times to a manageable level.
Even more so with China at their back.
Russia will not necessarily react to Finland's joining NATO immediately. The reality is that the more NATO and the EU expand, the weaker they become rather than stronger. A principle factor in the destruction of previous empires has been over-expansion. It appears to me that Russia senses this weakness and plans to use it to take down NATO. This weakness is already showing up economically. The EU just caved to buying Russian energy using ruble settlement. for example, and they cannot agree on an oil embargo. And there is hardly agreement in Europe on kinetic war over Ukraine. Will Europe be willing to go to war to defend Finland? Time is on the side of RussiaWhile Scott Ritter thinks that time is against Russia, it looks like the Russian think that time is on their side. They have the unity and commitment to sustain this. Does NATO and the EU, or even the US/UK politically? Remember that when all is said and done, this boils down to national interest. Russia has an existential interest in this. Europe and the US do not. It is matter of choice and vanity.
Either way never in a million years will Russia allow a 500 mile first strike nuclear response time.
They will do what it takes regardless.
Then the world will hold its breathe to wait and see if the US shows massive weakness as the world is watching and deciding which side to choose.
Triggering article 5 is crucial here Tom.
Way past vanity this is about will the US and the West still control things afterwards.
Will Russia do whatever it takes to keep first strike nuclear response times at a manageable level by triggering article 5 of not triggering article 5 if they have that choice ?
That's the crux of the issue when it comes to Finland joining NATO.
I guess we'll have to wait and see.
"Russia will not necessarily react to Finland's joining NATO immediately."
Once missiles are placed in Finland. That are nuclear warhead ready.
Russia then reacts and triggers article 5
Then what ?
It's possible that Russia will not react to Finland's joining NATO. Becoming a NATO base is another matter. I doubt Russia would stand by and watch this without taking it out preemptively. But all this is complicated.
The Stavka is in a position that the rest of us are not. They are tasked with preparing scenarios for the various contingencies involved. There is intelligence that is only available to agencies. There are back channel communications with adversaries as well as allies. There is prepositioning weapons systems and troops. Etc.
The US and allies also have to consider that prepositioning missiles capable of a preemptive decapitating strike will be met the second that launch of any missile is detected with a full salvo that will destroy Europe and the US. This is what MAD is about. The US and its allies have no defense against long-range hypersonic missiles.
But this situation existed during the Cold War and a nuclear exchange was avoided even though there were some close calls, in particular accidents like false positives that were averted. The problem now is that the travel time is greatly reduced, requiring immediate full response that triggers MAD.
The Russians have nerves of steel. Do the Europeans and Americans, for whom this is a matter of choice and vanity?
The irony is that Finland is as prepared as they will ever be; and better prepared than NATO.
If Russia doesn't react to Finland's move, they can wrap up the operation in Ukraine, partition it, and for all practical purposes, end the bleeding.
What's to stop Russia from relocating more of their nuclear deterrent to the far East?
There's a lot of water between "triggering article 5" and a country being politically able to deploy forces into a war.
At some point somebody has to commit their sons, fathers and brothers to die for another country. At that point the "no thanks" will turn up - because this generation of western young people won't do the dying. They are too self-centred.
Russia is losing in Ukraine. Even Scott Ritter is becoming resigned to this. ("They're being bled dry.") Russia cannot fight a 2 front war. (Ukraine, Finland.) It's over for Russia or nuclear.
Should have just quickly taken the eastern regions and stopped…
Russia under Putin will be a pariah nation … everyone with anything on the ball is going to leave…
Post a Comment