Colonel Doug Macgregor consistently does a great job of objectively breaking things down in Ukraine, discussing the military situation in a real and realistic way like you just won't see in mainstream media. It's such a stark contrast when you compare Doug's analysis to that of guys like Generals Petraeus and Keane. This Keane especially, he reminds me of one of those guys you can imagine as platoon leader or company leader but not in charge of entire field armies or even a division.
It's Doug Macgregor who should be the 4 or 5 star general, really. But he didn't bow down enough to “the establishment.”
But back to Keane—he just gets so much of his battlefield basics wrong whether it's to do with supply and replenishment issues, dismounted troops and light armoured vehicle or more distanced engagement, and his “facts” are twisted in the main, based on flawed, distorted intelligence from NATO, the Ukraine secret service (SBU), and the CIA.
I don't have a crystal ball to tell you exactly how well the Russian generals can be expected to succeed in their upcoming new and massive winter offensive in Ukraine, but with hundreds of thousands of fresh, well-trained, well-equipped troops (reservists) stationed in the west near Belarus together with the regular Russian army, we may expect upwards of a million Russian soldiers in the theater.
I would expect at least three or four points of attack, from virtually every direction, especially to connect the big muscle of the Russian military - the Russian armies of the south - with those in the other directions and to swallow up everything between north and south, everything from Chernihiv down to Odessa and west of, including Kiev.
As Macgregor said, Putin has thus far used only about 20 percent of his active military, to minimize Ukrainian civilian casualties as I mentioned from the beginning many months ago. I remember Keane was shocked that Putin chose not to take down the power grid, internet, telecommunications in Ukraine when this whole thing started which it is well-known was easily within the capability of the Russian military to do. Instead, Putin opted for a very measured, very targeted, modest attack, not to conquer Ukraine territory but to destroy military targets and, as he stated in his objective, to "de-nazify and de-militarize" it. Attrition warfare, if you like.
But this new campaign will be an effort to remove Zelensky's regime through a war of conquest. Putin likely sees Zelensky's removal as the only way to stop the endless massive weapons war support from the West which is prolonging the war. Also, by taking the predominantly ethnic Russian parts of eastern Ukraine, Putin wants to keep US-funded NATO off his doorstep. He always considered war game exercises by NATO and Ukraine troops near to the Russian border in the last few years as hostile action and a national security threat, as well as US-NATO missile defense and offense apparatus for decades aimed against Russia in Romania and Poland. His objections to this are certainly understandable.
Likewise, its understandable that the Chinese object to US naval ships in the South China Sea. It's nothing more than a provocation. Imagine if the Russians decided to retaliate and play tit-for-tat and started parking battleships or nuclear subs off the coast of Nova Scotia aiming their warheads at Ottawa or by Virginia aiming at D.C., or near Cuba? Do we really want another repeat of the Cuban Missile Crisis? And the only reason the Soviets did that back then was because the US had first put their missiles in Turkey pointed at Russia.
I have heard of reliable intelligence that the "deep state" is prepared to back off if Putin puts the subs back in Cuba, but the Western Globalists are seeing how far they can keep going on with their power-and-profit-hungry evil mischief until that point, convinced that Putin won't do anything. In effect, they are threatening world peace and annihilation on the high-risk bet that Putin won't act as recklessly insane as they do.
Back to Ukraine. This new stage in the Russia-Ukraine conflict will no longer be a war of attrition, but all-out war. God have mercy on everyone involved, including the Ukrainian conscripts and poor Ukrainian civilians who remain in the eastern half of Ukraine.
Oh, and on the subject of a military coalition against the Russians, Macgregor makes a point of not mentioning Serbia, which has always been close allies with Russia.
With the possible exception of maybe Poland, the other eastern European countries have no stomach for an expanded war with Russia, and neither does western Europe. Time and again Putin has expressed his willingness for a ceasefire or peace deal. But starting way back in the beginning of the conflict with Boris Johnson's intervention, the West forced Zelensky to decline a deal with Russia which he had already tentatively agreed to with Putin, and they just want to keep feeding the war machine with tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money which could be much better spent for peace and prosperity at home rather than on war and mass murder abroad.
Where are the anti-war street protests in the USA, where are the anti-war progressives? I can't find them!
from
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment