Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the
round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're
not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify
them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change
things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the
crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that
they can change the world, are the ones who do.

Steve Jobs
US computer engineer & industrialist (1955 - 2011)

Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts

Saturday, September 10, 2022

Russia's failings in Ukraine



 The Russian invasion of Ukraine has three primary goals: geo-strategic; strategic; and tactical. The geo-strategic goal is decouple Russia from the Western economy and integrate heavily with China and other Eurasia leaning nations. The invasion of Ukraine resulted in massive sanctions as promised by Western powers, and as a result Russian President Putin was able to get his population on board with decoupling. Putin's moves to bolster the Ruble by requiring for purchases of oil and gas is a good example of this. On the geo-strategic front it is clear that Russia has won the war.

The picture is a lot less clear on the strategic/tactical front. On the strategic front, Russia's primary goals are clearly to make Crimea sustainable as an unsinkable air craft carrier that dominates the Black Sea. To achieve that goal Russia must, at a minimum, secure Kherson and Zaporizhzia  oblasts (provinces). Unfortunately for Russia, the war in Ukraine has shown that Crimea is very vulnerable if Odessa oblast is not secure. The strikes on Russia's Black Sea Fleet, and air bases located on Crimea make it crystal clear that securing Crimea means securing Odessa oblast. To this end Russia has not put as much as a dent on Odessa, and it must be said that strategically they are failing here. 

The other areas of strategic necessity are the Donetsk and Lugansk Republics, which are collectively known as the Donbass (region). The Donbass gives Russia strategic depth on its southern flank which is critical to protecting its underbelly. Donetsk Republic contains massive gas and oil fields (mostly untapped as yet) which a Eurasian Russia would want in its back pocket rather than the West's. For all the above reasons, the oblasts that are strategically necessary for Russia are: Crimea; Kherson; Zaporizhzia; Donetsk; and Lugansk. Another city that is very important for Russia to capture is Kharkov/Kharkiv.  Kharkov is Ukraine's largest city and it is located right on the Russian border. As such, Kharkov offers a main supply and logistic hub to any forces (Western included) to invade Russian territory. With the notable exception of Kharkov and Odessa oblasts, Russia has secured, or is securing the remainder of the oblasts. It has therefore been roughly 70% successful strategically. 

The tactical picture, however, has been a nightmare for Russia. Starting with the Russian air force. Recall US heavy bombers carpet bombing the Taliban which paved the way for the Northern Alliance to advance and defeat the Taliban (short term). So, where are the Russian heavy bombers and the carpet bombing of Ukrainian formations? Russia has 125 strategic bombers, but is not carpet bombing Ukrainian forces. That is the number one tactical failure. Why is the Ukrainian air force able to still fly planes and helicopters over Ukrainian air space? Russia has 1533 fighter jets, but is unable to establish air superiority over Ukraine. That is the second tactical failure. Why has Ukraine been able to strike Russian air fields, bases, ammo depots, ships, and important bridges with their missile systems? Russian air defence has at least 410 launchers of the S-400 variety. That doesn't include the S-300, Pantsir, or other systems. It seems here that Russia is reluctant to use the S-400 system in an effort to keep that system cloaked from NATO. However, the failure of Russian air defence systems has been a very serious third tactical failure for Russia.

The failure of the Russian Navy to make much if any impact on the war is notable. The Black Sea Fleet has not been decisive in any way during the conflict, despite the fact Ukraine no longer has a navy. Not to mention the Moskva, the flag ship of the Black Sea fleet, that was destroyed by the failure of the aforementioned Russian air defences in Crimea. A fourth tactical failure for Russia. The list goes on. 

In some ways it is amazing that Russia has been able to make the progress it has. That progress is largely attributable to the arm of the Russian Army that has not failed - the artillery and missile forces. Russian fire power has dominated the battle space. Other units that have distinguished themselves are: airborne forces; Chechen forces; and Spetsnaz forces to name a few.

In a sense, Russia has been the author of its own tactical failures in Ukraine. It's the old "half-pregnant" strategy that dooms every military in history that has tried it. Unfortunately, it looks like political objectives are knee capping military operations. Russia entered this war because, as US President Biden said, "it has no choice". Ukraine was preparing to invade and put down the self-declared independent republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. Either Russia acted or it watched Ukraine take strategic territory back. It's the "how" it reacted militarily that has caused all the issues for the Russian military since. Rather than using an air war, for at least a month as the US did in Iraq, the Russian military attacked with almost no air war first. That can be considered akin to charging trenches without artillery first...

The initial goal was to topple the Ukrainian government in a lightening strike on Kiev. That is what the columns form Belarus and Belgorod areas were meant to do. The massive forces tied up in this operation, political gamble if you like, could and should have been deployed in the south of Ukraine to undermine the rear of the Ukrainian defences in the Donetsk and Lugansk republics. This is only common sense militarily. The soft under belly of Ukraine if you will. All bridges on the Dnieper River should have been destroyed by air and missile forces, in the first hours of the war, to cut Ukraine in half and deny reinforcement and resupply to Ukrainian units trapped in the east. These are military goals and are not based on wishy washy political gambles. 

Whether Putin took advice from others or not, the responsibility for the tactical failures of his military rest on his shoulders. Even to this day all the bridges across the Dnieper River remain intact. NATO is able to funnel heavy weapons and ammo to Ukrainian troops in the east almost unfettered. Without specific intelligence it is hard to determine whether or not the Russian Army argued for a more focused, less political armed intervention in Ukraine. It does, however, have the feel of a political gamble gone bad. It does have the feel of a cat and mouse game, similar to the approach of intelligence forces that Putin once belonged to, than steel fist of a military campaign. In a war of annihilation, which this is becoming, political considerations get thrown to the way side - especially when your geo-strategic goals have already been met. To do less is to show your sworn enemy that you are weak, as evidenced by the massive escalation in Western military support for Ukraine. Weakness, or the perception of it, may lead to all the wolves closing in for the kill.


Tuesday, March 1, 2022

The Ukraine War - It's not what you think

 The world is a stage and we are but mere actors. Never has this saying been more true than today.  We are witnessing the making of "heroes" and "villains" in Ukraine and Russia right now. The Ukrainian President has been pumped by western media as some kind of modern day Churchill as he, with no military experience, "personally directs the defence of Kiev" from within the city. A hero, and potentially a martyr all in one. We have the Ukrainian military being hailed for putting up a "heroic" defence against the Russians. And, of course, we have Russian President Putin painted variously as the bad guy, evil guy, insane guy, ... you get the idea. Good guys vs bad guys, black vs white, demonize vs canonize - such is the evil pit that the world has evolved into.

We see this very painting of people here in Canada as well. Far from the flames of the Ukrainian war. Truckers are heroes. Truckers are terrorists. One Liberal cabinet member just referred to truckers in the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa as, wait for it, "terrorists".  We have just come through two years of what can only be described as the worst violation of civil rights in Canadian history - mass vaccination requirements, lockdowns and mandates - all designed to get Canadians used to the suspension of their constitutional rights as some sort of natural right the federal government, and provincial governments can exercise at will. The Canadian government even invoked the Emergency Measures Act, renamed by Mulroney but then known as the War Measures Act, to suppress an act of defiance and civil disobedience via protests on Parliament Hill. Rights you thought were sacred two years ago evaporated in a woke moment. It has been the same throughout most of the world.

So how does Ukraine fit into this? Well, three words: World Economic Forum. The WEF is a multi-national private organization born in Germany, now with its headquarters in Davos, Switzerland. It's primary purpose, like other German fathers of the same vision (Marx and Engels most recently), is to turn the world into a one government utopia where humans have no rights to property, religion, beliefs other than the WEF's, etc. In the words of the nominal head of the organization, the "Fourth Industrial Revolution". If that sounds a lot like another German phrase, the Third Reich, you can be forgiven. Both have their origins in Germany, both seek world dominance, both sought to conquer/control Europe (ie EU), both sought to conquer Russia/Soviet Union after gaining control of Europe, both believe in genetic manipulation of the human species, you get the idea. They don't call themselves Nazis anymore. The new term they love to use is "Globalists". 

The Globalists aim to conquer states from within, that is to say they mentor and put in place leaders and politicians that they control. (don't believe me? watch the video here. Interestingly, Schwab even refers to Putin as one of his guys. This takes us to the "we are all actors" part. What is really happening in the Russo/Ukraine war, and more importantly, what is the purpose of it.

The primary point woman from Europe is Ursula Von Der Leyen, a German (again) physician and politician (first woman to serve as Minister of Defence in Germany). Some of her mentors shown below:




In case you aren't familiar, the top picture is her with Henry Kissinger, and the lower picture is her with Schwab. Her job in all of this is to direct European states, and people, to prepare them for war against Russia. As you may have noticed from the emergency session to grant Ukraine EU membership, the European Parliament was decked out like some kind of Ukrainian birthday party. The new Chancellor of  Germany is newly elected Olaf Scholz - pictured below (with Schwab):


For the WEF, and its backers, the most important aspect of their plans is what can loosely be called the "schedule". The schedule is used to determine the length of time politicians stay in office, the bringing up of "young politicians" as Schwab refers to them in the video link above, the stacking of governments to implement its policies, and finally the beginning of the "Fourth Industrial Revolution". That is commonly referred to as Agenda 2030, which means eight years remain. In those eight years they have to destroy our current beliefs in bodily autonomy, freedom of thought and speech, ownership of private property, privacy, and nation states. They list as some of the primary goals of Agenda 2030 as people will own nothing; all commerce will be conducted by drones; a "handful of countries" will dominate all others; the amalgamation of people's physical/digital/economic identities, and others.  Here is the link to the WEF's own video on the matter here.

The war in Ukraine should thus be thought of as the initiating event that forces the world onto the WEF's schedule for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Putin's role, if you will, is to destroy the patsy state of Ukraine in order to occupy it and create a new iron curtain. Likely to follow in very short order are Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. You can view it as the WEF fixing the mistakes of Hitler's invasion of the USSR by having the Russians use up their men killing Ukrainian men - which is after all what bled the German Army white in WW II. Then, because Germany under Merkel (another of the politicians Schwab listed) agreed to tie Germany's energy needs so tightly to Russia, the sanctioning of Russia will "force" Putin to turn the tap off to Europe and create a massive economic shock to the world economy. It will also sour people toward the dependence on fossil fuels for energy. As a result, Russia will be at war with NATO, but not a nuclear war. Instead it is likely to be a war of conventional destruction previously unknown to mankind. Perhaps that is why the WEF includes travel to Mars as one of its goals - Dark Fleet anyone? 

China will join Russia in a war against NATO and its allies. The world will be carved into two blocks Eurasia and Atlantia. China will bury the hatchet with India, and India will join Eurasia. This will be a war of, in a sense, extermination. The Globalists (WEF) aim to reduce the human population of earth to around 500 million people - that's 7 billion deaths required. The Globalists refer to this as "creative destruction".  In a sense, their strategy mimics the Russian/Soviet war of 1941-45 - which they referred to as a "war of annihilation". 

The end result of the collapse of the financial system, the war of annihilation, and the collapse of the human value system will create a need to "build back better". This is where the WEF's agenda gets implemented. Make no mistake, nothing less than this can achieve their stated aims. For example, private property rights are guaranteed in the US constitution and have formed the basis for western life since the beginning. That means the US constitution must be destroyed in order to implement the "you will own nothing" aim. How do you destroy the US constitution without invading the US and conquering it? You destroy it from within. That means firstly you denigrate what it means to be American and have rights. Have we seen that happening in the US?  How about some examples of many: burning US flags; removing patriotic statutes (like Abraham Lincoln); labelling half the populations as deplorables; suspending rights during Covid; invalidating the US electoral system; politicizing the police and courts; moving to disarm civilian populations; etc. All of this is already happening in the US. 

The war in Ukraine is simply a manifestation of a controlled establishment that fully intends to extinguish the rights, and in many cases the lives, of  people all around the world. It is only a first step, and the remaining steps will be much worse than what we are currently seeing. This is by design and with purpose. This may sound like a "conspiracy theory" to you, but don't forget who made the term "conspiracy theory" a term for mocking - the establishment via the media. People lie but the evidence does not. Look about you. Look at your country and see what has happened to your values, rights, and nations over the last three decades. Ask yourself why it was the the most right wing, patriotic people like Reagan, Thatcher, and Mulroney who instigated and implemented free trade agreements between nations, which resulted in the unnecessary transfer of wealth from wealthier countries to less fortunate. The very definition of such a transfer of wealth from the fortunate to the unfortunate is socialism in its purest form. Yes, the world is but a stage and we are mere actors. We don't have to be slaves to it though.


Sunday, January 8, 2017

Our Time of Chaos

It's a new year, but it might as well be an extension of the year just passed. A year that saw the beginnings of a cataclysmic split between the global elites and the citizens of this earth. A movement of defiance. A global movement of defiance that is. In other words, a revolution. Sounds extreme I realize, but sit back and absorb what has taken place and where it must all lead.

Think of the world today as a "reaction". For every action their is a reaction as the old saying goes. What is the world of today reacting to? Well that's evident enough - the world of yesterday. Perhaps a better word is "movement" rather than "world". The movement of yesterday was a movement promising one world government, or as Bush senior out it "a new world order". Bush junior clarified it when he boldly stated: " you're either with us or against us". A force that could not be interrupted or delayed. A manifest destiny. A new world order according to, and ruled by, the United States and to a much lesser extent other worldly allies.

In many respects the movement really took its first bold baby steps with the Canada - US Free Trade Agreement signed by US president Ronald Reagan and his Canadian counterpart Brian Mulroney. The goal was to reduce and/or eliminate restrictions on capitalism. The fact that such actions would cause significant dislocation in some areas within each country were for the most part ignored. The truth is that at that time the countries economies were very closely tied so that upheaval was never that much of a threat, but then Mexico jumped in. Then China jumped in. And so it goes. The point is that the fat cat societies of the world, and their populations, had become very accustomed to a certain way of life and certain comforts. Comforts that the rest of the world, the vast majority, could never dream of attaining. World free trade agreements offered them that hope.

What Reagan, Bush, Clinton, the other Bush, and Obama offered was the biggest transfer of wealth in human history. A transfer of wealth from the old world to the underdeveloped world. In fact, these great icons of capitalism acted as the greatest socialists of all time. Socialism is after all a transfer of wealth from those that have it to those that don't. The result was massive imports of cheap goods from these underdeveloped countries that swamped and drowned the industrial bases of the first world. All of which was perfectly foreseeable, and all of which served a purpose - a one world economy or new world order. I say "economy" because integrated economies require integrated policies and standards, which necessarily causes integration, which makes political segregation unnecessary and even unhelpful. The economics will dictate the politics in other words.

Of course all this is premised on the idea that people are really not that different. That nationalities are artificial. That languages are unimportant. That cultures are racist incumbrancers to unity. Essentially, human beings are as interchangeable as parts on your car, and it really doesn't matter where they are made. They will do as they are programmed to do. This is where the fallacy of the one world economy, one world government, new world order fails the test of history and human nature, and that failure is the "reaction" we are beginning to experience today.

The truth, despite what you hear daily on your television, is that economics was meant to serve mankind - not the other way around. The human being is the central figure in our existence - not the dollar. Economic was only ever meant to do one thing, and that was to regulate consumption of resources. Obviously no world could survive for any period of time if every person just took as much as they wanted from it. There is only so much food, so much water, so much shelter, etc. Putting a price on those resources curbed their consumption - rationed them if you will. It's been that way since the beginning of time in one form or another. So economic models, in today's case capitalism, were a means to an end. Today the world is in a state where the economic model has become the end and human beings have become the means. Granted it has been that way for some time - which has caused such things as communist revolutions, etc. However, people always had their religion, customs, cultures and nationalities to take comfort in. To insulate themselves with. The new world order began to strip those last vestiges of dignity and security from people - and they rebelled. That is today.

Where there is rebellion there is chaos before there is resolution. In fact chaos is the first result of any revolutionary movement. Or to put it less "radically", chaos is the natural result of the "reaction" to the elite's push to global governance and control. 2016 saw the first few examples: Brexit; the rise of Russia and China; and of course the now infamous Trump win in the US. In the case of Brexit and Trump the "elite or establishment" campaigned viciously to stop both movements. All the polls predicted the movements would fail. The mainstream media predicted they would fail. They were all wrong. The people voted to "get their countries back". They voted for a return to the days before Reagan started signing free trade agreements. They wanted control of their economic, political, and sovereign institutions back. They rebelled against what the new world order had told them was just and right. They placed the world onto the path of the unknown. The vortex of chaos.

There can only be one result of this "reaction" or "revolt" if you will. The result can only be war. Not a war of hearts and minds, because it appears that war has been lost by the one world types, but a war of retribution. In other words, the establishment will attempt to cause significant retribution on the people of the world to show us the "error of our ways". I expect that war to take the form of serious economic consequences including stock market and currency collapses. I also expect part of the establishments retribution to include real war - unfortunately. Trump has insinuated a desire to take on Iran  and China which could be helped along by the establishment. Give a man enough rope and he'll hang himself. If Trump is viewed by Americans as the leader of the anti-establishment movement then it seems logical they would do everything they can to give him all the rope necessary. That will include support in the US Houses for aggressive actions internationally which will have devastating results, and more importantly to them prove to people that this revolt is unwise.

Because none of us has a crystal ball we can't predict exactly how it will all play out. We look around us at the world today, and instinctively we know things are very wrong. We sense that the world is heading to a very dark place. Yet, we're not sure exactly where that place is or how dark it is. That is the chaos. The time just before the storm when the winds are just beginning to pick up and the skies are clouding over, but its destructive result isn't yet known or experienced. Our time of chaos.


Saturday, February 7, 2015

End of Days for World Order

Our world today didn't happen in the last few months, or even years. It's the natural consequence of a financial system that in many ways can be understood as a "ponzi scheme". A ponzi scheme starts with a basic assumption that wealth can be built from nothing. The first into the scheme benefit the most, and as the scheme grows the returns diminish until finally there is not enough money going in to pay out those that are owed - and it collapses. That in a nut shell is the nature and state of our world wide financial system, and thus our civilization.

Every national currency represents a "right to consume". There are limited amounts of resources the earth can produce, so the limit to consuming them is represented by currencies. Since World War II national and international economics have been driven by debt - a promise to pay currency at some point in the future for resources consumed today. In effect the promise to pay, as opposed to actually paying,  has allowed nations to live far beyond what they can produce compared to what they consume. In other words, debt has fueled and allowed the ponzi scheme to continue. In other words, debt has become currency, and currency has become a tool to measure debt.

The greatest enabler of debt, and the supreme master of the ponzi scheme is without doubt the US stock market. As it goes, so goes the national banks in each country - and area banks like the European Central Bank. The killer if you will is that the stock market has become addicted to cheap debt from central banks. With that cheap debt the wheelers and dealers of the market place can leverage, buy, sell, and make currency. Without that cheap debt profits shrink and investors can't meet interest payments. Without that cheap debt the system collapses as company's earnings don't meet margins required to pay their debt obligations. In other words, there isn't enough revenue coming in to cover the interest costs of their debt, and they collapse.

This is where we are at today - on a world scale. The ponzi scheme is living out its last days. Central banks have lowered their prime borrowing rates to below 1%, and in many cases a half or quarter of that. Some call that "quantitative easing". "Easing" meaning the lessening of pressure to repay currency for debt. In other words, staving off the inevitable pay the piper day. The logic is that the cheaper the prime rate set by central banks, the cheaper the interest rates set by banks, which allows consumers and corporations to continue consuming at an unabated pace - and therefore allowing the world economy to do the same.

However, what happens when individuals, corporations, and countries become so leveraged with debt that they can no longer borrow to finance their consumption - no matter the interest rate? That is the proverbial "tipping point". The point of no return. Very recently the Bank of Canada, and even the European Central Bank cut back their prime lending rates - in Canada's case to .75%. What happens when it goes to zero and yet can no longer spur or maintain economic growth? It has to go to zero. There is no other way. At this stage of the game debt is so high that it would take individuals, corporations and countries decades of non-borrowing to reverse the need for cheap debt. If that were to happen for even a year the world economy, led by the stock market, would collapse into depression. Hence the end of the ponzi scheme.

We are very close to that day now. Any significant event will trigger panic in the stock market and international debt markets. A major war or a default could quite likely be the trigger point. Greece for example could be that trigger point. So could Ukraine. Both are European countries so to speak, and both are members in some way of the European Economic Community. Without a massive debt infusion within a month Ukraine will financially collapse. Its currency has already collapsed. Greece has already been bailed out, and forced into that position of non-borrowing that I mentioned above would be necessary to avoid a collapse. They're in it now, and they're looking for a way out. Will they accept a kinder, gentler bailout from Russia or China? It's quite possible. Will they leave the Euro, or be forced to leave the Euro? That's even more possible.

The thing with Greece is it represents the future for us all. At some point we are all going to reach the position Greece is in. If Greece defaults on its debt the message becomes debt is not a guarantee to control consumption. And, if it can't really control consumption, or responsibility for over consuming, then in reality it is meaningless as a control mechanism. That is where we reach the trigger point. If the guarantee to pay one's debt for currency used, and goods consumed, becomes meaningless then so does the world economic order. In reality, that is what Greece represents. The geo-strategic question remains - will Russia and/or China bail out the current world economic order by bailing out Greece, or will they let Greece implode to foster their own currencies as the bench mark?

Both China and Russia have minuscule national debts compared to almost every country in the world. They are positioned to pickup the pieces of the ponzi scheme from what can only be imagined as a desperate world. How will they change the nature of economic order? What discipline will they impose on consumption and debt to ensure a similar collapse does not happen again? All this is yet to play out, but it will. That you can take to the bank.

   

Saturday, August 9, 2014

The Ukrainian Genocide.



This woman's eyes have haunted me since 4:00 p.m. Ukraine time, June 2, 2014. Her name was Inna Kukuruza. She was a wife, a mother, and a citizen of Luhansk city. On that day, June 2, 2014, she made a fatal mistake walking past the City's Administration building after work. She, and many others, had her life ended in a hail of unguided rockets fired by a lone Ukraine air force jet. However, unlike the rest of those dead around her, she did not die immediately. She lay there for seconds, all filmed by the ever present phone cameras, and asked to speak with her daughter. Then she died. What the picture above doesn't show is her mangled legs, or her missing foot. She bled to death. My heart broke for her at that moment.

It was just the beginning of a campaign by the Ukraine military, and its paramilitary forces known as "National Guards", of killing civilians throughout the Ukraine provinces (known as Oblasts) of Donetsk and Luhansk. A slaughter that Europe has not seen since the civil war in the former Yugoslavia. Yet, through all the fog of war, a clear pattern has emerged. The Ukraine army approaches a "rebel" (NAF) area, normally a community. They establish fire bases around it, with varying types of artillery, and then they start shelling. It was the same in Slavyansk, Kramatorsk, Gorlovka, Donetsk, Luhansk, and every other community in the two break away provinces.

First the infrastructure is targeted. Specifically, the electrical power stations. Once these facilities are knocked out, and no power flows: sewage systems shut down; water systems shut down;  hospitals can't operate well; commerce can't function; and on and on it goes. The clear and obvious strategy is to place the citizens of the community in misery. To turn them against the NAF in a psychological warfare conducted with artillery. Of course, the artillery and its ferocity, terrifies the people all on its own.

Second, health and transportation are targeted. Bus stations and train stations are hit. Hospitals of all types are hit. Even schools are hit. The pattern repeats itself in every community the Ukraine army assaults. There is no mistake. At this point the citizens are not just terrified, but also trapped. They can't leave the chaos. They are corralled in a hell no civilian should have to suffer.

Then, the civilians themselves are targeted. Specifically, their homes, apartments, shops, and city centres. The victims have ranged from the very elderly, and in some cases mental patients, to the youngest children and everyone in between. The shells and rockets don't have a conscience - the people that fire them are meant to.

Slavyansk became the model for all Ukraine army operations since. Surround the community. Do not allow escape. And fire. Small caliber mortar fire was the start. There were many reports of it on social media, but the "main stream media" refused to report it, or its damage. As if encouraged by that, the Ukraine army brought in larger mortars, then field artillery. They got away with all that too, despite pictures of the destruction and the civilian victims flooding social media. There was no outrage, or reporting in the main media. The NAF refused to budge, so the Ukraine army brought in even bigger guns - self-propelled 152mm guns. Monsters of artillery, these weapons created massive, indiscriminate damage and casualties. Not completely satisfied with this level of destruction, the Ukraine army started using air burst white phosphorous shells at communities on the outskirts of Slavyansk, and then Slavyansk itself. The Russian government drew the line there and raised concerns about it at the UN. It was dismissed, and the  Ukraine army carried on.

Then came the battles around Donetsk city, Gorloka and Luhansk city. A whole new form of artillery was deployed - Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS). At the low end of these systems is the GRAD, and on the high end the "Tornado", "Hurricane, and "Smerch". They can fire up to 40 high explosive rockets at a time. They were designed by the Soviets to break up tank formation and create chaos. They are lethal and can level entire complete grid squares when deployed enmasse. They are also unguided. The use of MLRS took the ferocity of the conflict to an all new level, and with it a rapidly increasing civilian death and wounded toll. Pictures of grandmothers , fathers, children, and even priests - with their bodies torn to pieces - began flooding the social media. So grotesque were the results that You Tube began taking films of the victims off their site.

As if this wasn't a great enough outrage, the Ukraine army upped the ante one more time. On July 29, 2014 the Ukraine army fired four, of a reported five available, SS-21 ballistic missiles at the NAF held community of  Snezhnoe. The missiles are massive, and carry a warhead of up to 1000 lbs. They can be used to deliver nuclear weapons. In this case they carried high explosive warheads. These were designed as, and remain, weapons of mass destruction. Even the US government admitted the missiles were fired - yet they did not cause any damage. The reason? Russian S-300, S-400 anti-missile/air units on the Russian border shot them down before they impacted Snezhnoe. If the Russians had not intervened, the loss of life would have been in the thousands. It is here that apparently the US and West were prepared to draw the line on the Ukraine army. There was no condemnation by the West, but there was also no condemnation of Russia for shooting them down.

The death toll so far in the Ukraine war against the Donbass Region (Luhansk and Donetsk) was estimated to be around 10,000. The wounded many more times that. Over 250,000 refugees have fled - mostly to temporary camps lining the Russian side of the border. Those that remain are suffering constant shelling. Constant terror. But, that's the point of it - right? The Ukraine government always refers to the NAF as "terrorists", yet the only side terrorizing its citizenship seems to be the Ukraine government itself. The Geneva Convention is supposed to protect civilians and civilian institutions at a time of war, however the lawyers in the crowd claim this isn't a war. It's war-light. It's an internal insurrection. Although the Ukraine government itself has accused Russia of invading it at the UN Security Council. It would seem, therefore, that the Ukraine government considers itself in a state of war. In that case, the rules of war as outlined in the Geneva Convention should apply to them.

If, for whatever reason, the lawyers succeed and the Ukraine government is not restrained by the Geneva Convention, then there is always the International Court of the Hague. It clearly details that attacks made against civilian populations, or terrorizing civilian populations, or forcefully moving populations is a crime against humanity. There can be no doubt in any right thinking person's mind that what Ukraine has committed against the Donbass is a crime against humanity. Inna Kukuruza was a member of humanity. She did not deserve to die in that blood soaked street in Luhansk city. There was no need. She did no wrong. Her only crime was to be a citizen of a break away region of Ukraine. As far as I'm concerned, Ukraine will never be able to whipe that spot of her blood off their hands. Her final appeal to speak to her daughter, her eyes betraying her terror, the helplessness, will never leave me.

















Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Patriot Games: Ukraine,Venezuela and the like.

The Olympics are over, and so is the peace. During the games, two separate, but curiously related insurgencies erupted: one in the Ukraine and one in Venezuela. Separated from each other by geography, but linked to each other by the "national interests" of the United Sates. Venezuela being the pot that stirs the anti-american kettle in South America, and the Ukraine being the soft under belly of Russia's traditional buffer zone to the West.

They each erupted over civil issues: Ukraine-a loan agreement with Russia and the abandoning of the European Union approach; and Venezuela - a student protest over security on a campus. From there they both transformed into mass demonstrations, complete with violence and death. Each insurgency sought primarily one thing - the over throw of their government. A troubling trend.

If you believe that democracy is the rule of the majority, as expressed by election of representatives, then you have to be concerned about these events. Both Venezuela and the Ukraine are democracies that elect their own governments. We may not like the choices made, and the losers of the elections may not like to lose, but that is the natural result of democracy. There are those that win elections and those that lose. The key is to respect the result of the election. To do otherwise is to undermine the very foundation of democracy, and unfortunately we've been seeing a lot of that recently.

A short while ago, the Egyptian military overthrew the elected President of Egypt. The reason? He wasn't governing on behalf of all Egyptians. Those that voted against him in the election protested and demanded he be overthrown, and after much bloodshed he was. Ditto for the Ukraine. Possibly the same coming for Venezuela. If any one reads this that believes these "revolts" are spontaneous cries for freedom, well, you're fooling yourself. These are quite obviously "revolts" that resulted from the destabilization of these governments, because they didn't serve the "national interest". The problem with this approach is that it takes us back, yet again, to the rule of the jungle.

We barely walked away from the American/European intervention in Syria without a world war. If you recall, while the Americans and French were threatening to turn the Syrian government into a parking lot by way of military strikes, the Chinese and Russians were sending war ships and troops to the area in response. Like the Ukraine, Syria involved key strategic allies of Russia - vital to its national interests. Now, we are headed back to a similar scenario. However, this time the stakes are far greater, and far more dangerous.

Up until now the Russians and the West were satisfied with trying to bribe the Ukraine government over to one side or the other. The Russians offering $15 billion in aid, and the West offering EU trade membership. When the Ukrainian government chose the Russian option over the Western option all hell broke loose. Demonstrations and then violence flooded the centre of Kiev. Then, when the government agreed to go with the Western option and abandon the Russian option, the crowds demanded a change of President. Finally, the Ukrainian President changed his mind again, and went with the Russian option. That resulted in an escalation of the violence, many deaths, and his overthrow.

Now, as I write this, Russian troops, ships and aircraft are being deployed all around Ukraine. At a minimum, it looks as though Russia is prepared to annex Eastern Ukraine, which is heavily influenced by Russia, and home to many Russian speaking people. It's also home to the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. That is a minimum. At a maximum, Russia could decide that its "national interests" require a buffer state the size of all of the Ukraine. Russia has always used countries around it as buffer states to foreign aggression. It is at the core of Russian strategic planning, and always has been. It is the reason why the US and Britain have already issued warnings to Russia not to militarily intervene. It's another game of chicken between the US and Russia - just like Syria.

What should trouble us in all this, besides the obvious dangers of war, is what I call "democracy of convenience". That is, yes we'll be democratic, but if we decide that our interests aren't being served, we will overthrow that democratically elected government. Having a "democracy of convenience" is like having "principles of convenience", neither of them mean anything. The problem with having "democracies of convenience", that don't mean anything, is that the entire order of our world is threatened. After all, our trade and integrity as countries in a global community requires rules, protocols, and order. Without it, the world becomes a free for all. We are at that point now. A free for all. We can't expect to disregard the very things that separate us from the animal kingdom, and remain apart from the jungle.

Perhaps, that is the way it's meant to go. Perhaps our society, and our freedoms such as they are, have become inconvenient. Perhaps this is all one step toward the collapse of our international order which might result in a world government of sorts. Perhaps that is the point. Maybe the only thing left to decide between the big powers of the US, China, Russia, and the West is who will dominate that world government. Just maybe that is what we are witnessing in our time. In any case one thing is for certain, the values of democracy are being rendered meaningless each and every day - to our certain detriment.