I was one of the few punters in NZ to predict Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine and noted that it was the attempted coup in Kazakhstan last January that was the final straw for Putin.
I argued that his personal Christian faith alongside his own perspective of himself in the pantheon of Great Russian leaders drove a conflict he believes is the only means for Russia to be great again.
We have all hoped that Putin has miscalculated based on the poor performance of his army, but I fear he bullied his ill prepared Army into a conflict he intends to drag on for as long as possible to maximise global chaos because in the rules based order, American hegemony rules supreme, where as in a world of Chaos, Russia is stronger.
Hopes that this appalling war will end any time soon are misplaced.
The Ukrainians rightfully refuse to accept any peace deal that doesn’t see Russia out of all Ukrainian land alongside a war crime trial and reparations.
Russia will refuse to accept any peace deal that doesn’t keep all their annexed Ukrainian land.
The American Military Industrial complex will refuse any peace deal because they are selling billions in weaponry and the American Economy is headed towards recession which always means war.
The Ukranians are exhausted despite the vast intelligence and new generation weapons provided to them while Russia will continue to mutilate their own army for a blood drenched impasse.
While NATO has encroached, while the West helped destabilise the Donbas and Ukraine, while there were Fascist elements inside the Ukrainian military, while all of that – there is no justification to actually invade the Ukraine.
Putin is a war criminal, and so is the American Military Industrial Complex.
Sure. All given, b-u-t that doesn’t in any way shape or form justify Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine and it doesn’t justify the vast civilian violence and murder.
I despise Western foreign policy as much as the next educated person, but that doesn’t give grounds to invade the way Russia has into the Ukraine.
While we never want out military to raise their hand in attack, we have an obligation to raise our hand to defend others.
Russia and the Ukraine are base ingredient producers whose scarcity of base ingredients will drive global production higher at the same time China collapses due to Covid.
Either there is a Palace coup to kill Putin or he will remain in power and keep sacrificing Russian lives to create a stalemate of violence and global disruption.
So.
What happens now?
Putin can not fail in this war or risk an internal revolt (remembering the next Authoritarian Leader may be worse than the current one).
The Ukrainians will never back down unless Putin uses a weapon of mass destruction.
Russia can’t use nukes because China and India have ruled them out.
So what weapon can Putin use to force the Ukraine to surrender?
Hypersonic missiles…
Putin puts warship armed with hypersonic missiles on combat duty
Russian President Vladimir Putin has deployed a frigate armed with hypersonic cruise missiles to the Atlantic and Indian Oceans in a show of military force as the war in Ukraine grinds on.
Putin took part in a ceremony via video conference on Wednesday to mark the launch of the Admiral Gorshkov.
…this is where Putin can legitimately ratchet up real military pressure.
He can’t use nukes because his allies will refuse him that, but he can use hypersonic missiles that can bypass Western Air Defences.
Once in the Mediterranean Sea Putin can add this to the Hypersonic missiles he has moved into the Kaliningrad region. The Russians have used hypersonic missiles three times so far in the war so have shown a readiness to use them already.
I fear once in place, Putin will unleash a hypersonic missile barrage that will force the Ukrainians to the negotiation table.
A smouldering wound that can never heal will be what ‘victory’ looks like here.
Expect the American Military Industrial Complex to prolong conflict for as long as possible, there’s an Economic recession coming.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
Russia cannot lose.
How long does the U.S want this to continue?
I don’t find the narrative that Putin has some Peter The Great, expansionist motive convincing..at all.
Every nation wants border security.
Russia cannot lose? Really! Watch this space sunshine!
In the bigger picture Russia has already lost. Its threat cut the gas supply to Europe has failed because the Europeans have found supplies from elsewhere and they currently have nearly full stores. They are also building more LNG terminals on the west coast and will henceforth buy from other vendors, leaving Russia without a large chunk of its revenue. The fact that both France and Germany have committed to provide armoured vehicles to Ukraine tells us that they’re dumping relations with Russia.
Russia has lost about a million men of conscription age including most of those with IT skills. They will probably never return because there are better prospects elsewhere. There is an increasing manpower and skills shortage in Europe, especially in Germany so they will fit in nicely.
The *real* issue for the world is the almost inevitable collapse of Russia into a cold version of Mad Max. Sort of like the Congo but whiter and with nuclear missiles. I don’t fancy that prospect and am glad I live on the other side of the world!
What does Andrew’s newly found testiness really tell us
It was either this, or a massive nuclear crisis.
A U.S. controlled N.A.T.O nuclear missile launched from Ukraine would wipe out Moscow in less than 10 minutes. If it’s hypersonic? Five minutes.
So say you decide to do nothing, and let the U.S. set up shop next door. Then what?
You’d have to put nuclear missiles in Cuba again, and next to Alaska. Much faster ones than in ’62.
We were hours away from nuclear armageddon back then. Fancy that again?
Recall 2014, the beginning of this war.
Why did the U.S. openly stage a coup d’etat, and then send the C.I.A. in to organise the coup regime’s war against the Donbass resistance?
You will remember the discussion at the time was about giving Russia ‘another Afghanistan’. The RAND. Corp. would eventually refer to this as ‘unbalancing Russia’.
Martyn has it backwards. It isn’t Putin who “intends to drag it on for as long as possible”, it is the U.S., who are trying to bleed Russia dry with another long war.
Brzezinski considered Afghanistan to be his greatest achievement, as he believed, by starting that long proxy war, he was responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union.
More congressmen declared this week that the war should not end until ‘Putin is gone’.
What they are really referring to is the Captive Nations Policy: the policy to smash Russia into weak statelets, that Brzezinski started publicly promoting in 1997, and Dick Cheney was privately advocating in 1991.
Martyn’s ‘global chaos’ theory is upside down. Brzezinski was the architect of the chaos: after all, his strategy was originally called ‘The Arc of Chaos’.
Yes, it’s one rule (or more accurately, no rules at all) for the USA and it’s USA’s rules for everybody else.
“It isn’t Putin who “intends to drag it on for as long as possible”, it is the U.S., who are trying to bleed Russia dry with another long war.”
You’re correct, although not all of the USA. The arms industry owned swamp creatures on both sides of the aisle definitely want it to continue because their sponsors are making a fortune making ammunition.
Some of the wrangling in Congress over the last week was about this – honest conservatives wanting to wrest power from the swamp, bring a little fiscal rectitude into the proceedings and so put a limit on arms expenditure. Their view runs along the lines of “Why should we defend Ukraine’s border when we’re not defending our own?” I can see their point.
Problem for Russia and Putin is that even if he manages to overrun Ukraine by conventional force it will be a scorched earth landscape and any people left there will carry inter generational hatred towards all things Russian. Not going to be a smooth integration into the Russian federation. Nor does Russia have the population to spare to displace the Ukrainian population with a Russian one. He will barely be able to militarily hold onto eastern Siberia nor will he have the military capacity to keep the Russian federation membersl in check. Neither is he guaranteed that the eastern Ukrainian regions, he claims are now Russian, will want to stay in the Russian federation and not claim independence (like Chechnya and Georgia)
If hypersonic missiles are the only answer left he will gain nothing but scorched earth and a sullen people. His biggest risk is what his air defenses are like around Moscow and St Petersburg. Can they withstand a swarming barrage of conventianal cruise missiles launched from the 25 odd submarines in the Baltic and Mediteranean sea? Not to mention the B52’s stationed around the world. Can he be certain that the western reply will not be a nuclear attack? How confident is he that the Russian nuclear weapons are operational?
Your theory on Kalingrad is compounded by the fact that Russia cannot militarily defend the place from a direct Polish attack (unless they annex Lithuania (a NATO member). Sure there may be missiles there but he will only fire those once, before Poland invades. Poland will do this with or without NATO.
To me those hypersonic missiles are like the German V2. To little to late. To win the war surely he would have unleashed them all to secure the ground before American and NATO armaments flowed eastwards?
Putin and the Russian federation are like the Roman empire. They cannot win AND maintain the status quo. That train has left the station. As has the status of Russia as a “Superpower”.
Problem for the western Military Industrial Complex is that they may never get paid the full value of the weapons they produce. Ukrainian economy cannot pay for the county’s restoration of services plus pay for the armaments. Took Britain till 2006 to pay what they owed to the MIT for WW2.
About the only thing Gerit gets right is that a swarming missile attack can overwhelm the best defenses. And the US has as he says lots of old Polaris etc.
On the other hand Russia has an asymmetric advantage in hypersonics that cannot be stopped by any current defence and can deliver nuclear.
Noboby can win a nuclear missile exchange.
Simply a numbers game. Does Russia have a large quantity of missiles? Both offensive and more importantly defensive.
The fact that only 3 Mig31 capable of launching hypersonic missiles were sent to be stationed in Kalingrad does indicate a shortage of missiles. Defensively does Russia have enough S300 and S400 (and the rumoured S500) defensive missiles to protect against a swarm attack? Can they launchers be reloaded quick enough? Can the American and NATO wild weasel’s suppress the Russian defense systems?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Weasel
Only one way to find out. Go Mr Putin, launch those missiles. At least it will finish the war one way or another.
Perfect numbers game.
Do we still know how quickly such missiles can be produced?
The Pentagon has lamented that the U.S. is no longer able to surge the production of armaments in the event of a war. It was lost after World War II.
On paper Russia has an entire industrial system which is specifically designed to have such spare capacity in all areas. The civilian factories were meant to be able to quickly switch to production of specific military items.
What we don’t know is the current state of those factories. Yeltsin managed to destroy many of them, but Putin has since been able to rebuild much of the system.
I think we can however get that the Russians are probably retaining all of their hypersonic missiles for nuclear use if needed. If so, it is one hell of a reason for Nato to avoid a nuclear war.
Work the rest out for yourselves. No doubt, the partisans here on either side will work it out to be in their favour..
I suppose the only way to find out how many missiles Russia has is to attack them. I’m not sure that the more realistic military people in the Pentagon would have confidence in that approach.
Fact is that so far Russia has suffered no lack of missiles, has a surfeit of ammunition and has effective defensive technology. They utilise swarm tactics with drones, the West can do the same.
If it comes to nuclear neither side can take that risk as both sides can deliver ballistic missiles to which there is not yet an effective ability to intercept. First strikes are a fantasy because there will always be those systems you miss. Tactical battlefield nukes are a fantasy as well, you can do the same damage with newer conventional explosive devices.
From a delivery of weaponry to Europe in a full blown war scenario the US would need control of the seas, they cannot currently stop hypersonics. That single weapon has made the projection of US power through carrier task forces obsolete. The Russians have them, the West doesn’t. Its an asymmetric advantage. And that is probably why the US doesn’t want a declared state of war where smouldering carrier task forces would send a very bad message to vassal states and markets. That would probably end up nuclear so I cant see Russia doing it except in extremis.
All up it seems that even if one side has an advantage its not worth a lot as escalation will result and neither side can win that. The best result is that cooler heads negotiate a settlement.
Come on Martyn, how many hypersonic missiles does Putin have? How functional are they? I think you’ve bought into Putin’s propaganda. Russia is fast running out of missiles and ammunition. Their artillery are firing less than 25% of the barrages they were firing at the beginning of the war.
Have you seen this Gadfly? You understand Russian don’t you?
https://t.me/Slavyangrad/28450
Nato could seriously ramp up offensive weaponry and end the invasion as fast as possible, and that would scare the bajeebers out of the PRC too
https://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-wont-live-2024-llya-ponomarev-1772906
Who knew we had so many military technology experts and cutting edge strategists roaming around. The detail some of The Daily Blog posters come up with is truly impressive.
It reminds of a Meme from mid COVID times. A guy is being loaded into an Ambulance and asks “are you taking me to the Hospital?” the Ambulance officer replies…“No Sir, you need top Medical Experts! We’re taking you to the comments section.”
Yay Tiger, hole in one!
What seems clear to me is that Russia will not back down. So the idea of a retreat from any of the recently “liberated” or “annexed” territory depending on your perspective, is not going to happen without defeating Russia’s military in all of it’s dimensions.
To humiliate them will require annihilation of the population.
Who remember’s Putin’s “proposal” or perhaps “ultimatum” made in mid December 2021 and published so anyone interested in the world could read it (them) ,made to the US and separately to NATO.
It was a clear statement that if the West was not going to co-operate with mutual security agreements of an even handed ,balanced ,trustworthy framework he was going to do what was necessary to secure Russia without that co-operation.
He would have known that the US would ridicule his submission as the tone of the wording was strong enough (necessarily) to be beyond the hubris of any US government to seriously engage with. So there is no doubt at all that he knew what he was likely taking on when he moved into Ukraine a couple of months later.
Just consider what their view of the Western powers would be by now if Russia has not downed MH17′ Has not poisoned the Scripals, or Navalny , or had any hand in trying to influence any US elections. You could not escape the comprehensive campaign of destructive propaganda . You would have to recognise by now that there was no path open for any kind of normal relations. The West has been patient but the consistent determination to marginalise and ultimately destroy the Russian nation , just like any other nation that has been determined to manage their own economy, resources, finances and relations with their neighbours , like Syria, Iraq, Libya ,Venezuela etc.
Ukraine will IMHO lose Crimea, and the 4 recently occupied regions, and accept a position of neutrality , not Join Nato , and eventually get a government that is prepared to get along with Russia. Russia will rebuild what is damaged in Ukraine by this operation , and Nato and the US will either accept that reality or there will be a full scale nuclear war.
It is to a degree now or never for Russia because at the moment they are decisively ahead of any other power with their nuclear delivery systems. they can largely stop the West’s missiles with the systems they have, but their own delivery systems can’t be stopped by anyone. But the US will be working frantically to remedy this imbalance and it cant’t be expected to persist forever.
D J S
There would be no such “reality” to accept unless Russia wins Ukraine to its side by force.
The use of hypersonics is not likely to be decisive because of limited numbers. They will merely mean that Ukraine will continue to take damage to its infrastructure despite improving air defence systems. And if Russia wins it faces the burden of replacement.
Gerit, Andrew and crew all ask how many hypersonic missiles Russia has? Simple answer is the only people who know are Russian. This obviously bothers the West, because they know that whatever specific single target chosen has about a 99% probability of being hit. How about a carrier task force as the target, or perhaps NATO HQ?
To quote a Holywood great, “Are you feeling lucky punk?”
Comments are closed.