- Kherson: the Defeat that Wasn't Archived Message
Posted by Keith-264
on November 16, 2022, 5:18 pm
|
https://julianmacfarlane.substack.com/p/kherson-the-defeat-that-wasnt Julian Macfarlane Nov 12 I was so wrong “Collaborators” in Kherson. aka “People you don’t like”. Real “collaborators” left with the Russians The mainstream media are happy again. Huge blow for Russia as it abandons key Ukrainian city of Kherson - BBC News Biggest Defeat For Russia In A Generation As Starving Troops Flee Across A Key Ukrainian River Forbes ‘Russia kaput!’: Ukraine brigade eyes victory as enemy retreats from Kherson The Guardian Russia Orders Retreat From Kherson, a Serious Reversal in the Ukraine War. The New York Times. If you have read my last two articles, Russia, Rollin’, Rollin’ and Russia Is On A Roll you are probably wondering how I could have been soooooooo wrong! Russia is losing.! “Starving” troops “fleeing”. The biggest defeat in a whole generation. Dumbass! (How many years is a “generation” anyway? However long it takes to make a baby and see it to adulthood, which is 16 sometimes 18 elsewhere, used to be 21, is really never? But I digress. I have ASD; that’s what people like me do.) All the main suppliers of informational feed for that large factory farm of cluckin’, ####in’ chickens and pigs-in -shit we call the “Public” are in agreement with ….well...themselves – and what the MSM gods have been saying for months and months. Russia is losing, losing, losing. Those vodka swilling leftovers from Genghis’ horde don’t know how to fight a war. Putin just has NO talent! He neither sings nor dances. Nor can he play a piano with his penis. On the other hand, as Larry Johnson point out wars are not talent shows, despite the Public being conditioned to see them that way. The key to victory in GOT TALENT is impressing or seducing the viewer at home. Performance on the stage is relevant but often not the determining factor. But that is not the case in war. Looking good or playing to win public approval is not the objective. The goal is simple–destroy the ability of the enemy to fight. So why is the withdrawal from Kherson being touted as a disaster for Russia and glorious victory for Ukraine? Because it looks bad. Got that? It makes it look like Russia is losing or running away from a fight. People offering this type of criticism are like the cretins you knew in middle school who would gather in a circle and shout at two of their compatriots to “FIGHT.” Yet, not one of the hecklers had the stones to step into the ring and throw some punches. The Western corporate media do not do journalism-- they do infotainment. Oh, Larry we love you . The MSM show? All show, no tell. Truth and dare? Dare maybe . No truth. Zelensky’s got talent ? The surprise that was not surprising This is not a surprise victory for NATO or the Ukraine. Sorry to say, this evacuation ….um... “retreat” aka “reversal” aka “defeat” ...has been debated publicly ad nauseum for weeks on the Russian side, as the Russians began evacuating civilians from the West Bank to the East Bank in a massive spoiler alert. If you have read my articles, you know that I believe peer-level wars are not won by acquiring territory-- but by destroying your enemy’s ability to fight. The model for this is actually Grant’s strategy for his destruction of Confederate forces, reversing the Confederacy’s previous gains. Brian Berletic makes the point that wars to gain territory are wars of conquest. Russia’s “war” was never an “invasion” aimed at taking land; rather it was intended to neutralize military threat in the form of that malignant political cancer represented by Western Ukraine’s Banderites and NATO weaponization. Hence, as Berletic points out their first goal had to be “demilitarization”. The Russians destroyed Western Ukraine’s ability to fight a war of conquest in the first couple of weeks by establishing air superiority and destroying most of the UAF’s air force, navy and a large amount of its air defense systems including S300 and BUK systems to the extent that, as Brian Berletic points out, the UAF has been groveling in the dirt of its now dark and cold cities for NATO systems – which NATO can’t supply in enough quantity to make a difference— especially now that Russia is using swarms of Geran 2 and Lancet drones. Lancet targeting The Russians have air superiority, which means general but not unlimited control of airspace. Total control is air supremacy. Therefore, the Ukrainians can still bring down Russian aircraft if they are used unwisely. UAF propaganda of course claims unimaginably high levels of Russian losses, so hight that the British press claims that Russia is running out of aircraft. But combat losses appear to be just a bit higher than regular attrition through accidents thanks to the use of standoff weapons and artillery. To date, the UAF has lost about 500 aircraft and helicopters. The Russians, at most, one-tenth of that. A fraternal battle—and a world war At the beginning, the Russians clearly regarded the war as a civil conflict between Western Ukraine and Russian Ukraine—a fraternal conflict. After the first few weeks and various events unfolded, it was clear, however, that while this was still the case, the Ukraine was just one battlefield in a larger world war against Russia, Iran, and China, with a decades old hybrid economic war reaching critical mass. That’s the nature of proxy wars. No more Big Macs for you Vlad’. No chips for you Xi’. And we won’t take your credit cards. Just your diesel oil and uranium and titanium—oh, and (thanks to our guys in Shanghai) your iPhones. We will give our boy, Volo’ a couple of billion dollars for that island in the Caribbean where he can snort coke and have fun parties. Taiwan? Hey! We do TakeOut. In this case, we are taking out your entire IT industry and moving it to Texas. But Russia and China have evolved separately, but they are now allies, their goals and strategies complementary by necessity. They have raised the ante – insulating themselves from the global recession already underway. BRICS, multipolarity these are tomorrow. The West is yesterday. Of course, the Evil Empire has power. It set up Western Ukraine, at the beginning as probably the largest, best equipped army in Europe. Russia responded by going slow in the Ukraine with careful use of manpower and resources, as they built a new geopolitical identity, new alliances and a new world order. In a fight with your kid brother, you don’t want to kill him, just take away the butter knife he is brandishing in his moment of madness but what if he has a gang of big friends? Public support in Russia Playing the long game in the Ukraine allowed time for the Russian public to come to a fuller awareness of the existential threat they faced and a rapidly changing world. Let us remember that the dissolution of the USSR which plunged them into chaos and anarchy. was not so long ago. Now, with fuller support and socio-cultural cohesion, Putin can move towards checkmate in the New Great Game. Kherson? Never a bishop or a rook. A pawn only. Despite what the morons at the NYT think, the Russian people are not going to dump Putin for sacrificing a pawn—not as he takes his opponents’ Queen. Rather, they will band together to support him, disavowing the “Atlanticist” fringe who can move to Europe and freeze.. Public support for Putin dropped all of 0.6% (not statistically significant) down to 79.5%. Biden by contrast has 39% public support. The Moral War As I have written elsewhere, John Boyd pointed out that a war is only 30% military—the rest is psychological and moral, with the two interdependent. Propaganda tries to create psychological and moral support for a war — and can be successful — but only temporarily — if it is based on lies that leak out— as is continually the case in Western propaganda. The facts are clear: Western Ukraine does not care about human life; Russia does. The Truth will out. In these terms, the withdrawal across the Dnieper is a tactical and strategic move—but also a moral statement. Withdrawal to pre-prepared defensive positions indicates the Russians prioritize a.) the lives of civilians b.) the lives of soldiers. As I said, morality and psychology are intertwined. Alex Mercouris has noted the discussion in Moscow, ongoing for at least some weeks about withdrawal from the West Bank. Mercouris thought the Russians would stand and fight fearing a public backlash if they didn’t. Pepe Escobar says, …politically, it’s an unmitigated disaster, a devastating embarrassment. Both are wrong. No matter what pro-Russian writers on Telegram say. The Russians —and certainly Putin — don’t care what CNN or Newsweek think . For people in faraway Moscow and Vladivostok, this minor setback in a town in the Ukraine they didn’t’ know existed until recently only reinforces their perception of this as an existential conflict which could go awry without men and materiel. A sense of real threat is of course personal. but also involves moral psychology. Consolidation Kherson can be re-taken. It is just territory. Early, I wrote that while denazification and demilitarization are stated goals; there is an addition goal - consolidation, which is consequence of the first two. “Consolidation” means the creation of a new political reality in the Ukraine — which we see now in the inclusion of Donbass, Lugansk and Eastern Ukraine in the Russian Federation. It also means change. To achieve public support for revisions of a default status quo you have to “win” in the realm of moral vision. Fortunately, what distinguishes Putin from mere politicians like Biden and elevates him to the level of statesman is his principles and his humanity. Clearly, holding Kherson might allow the Ukrainians a few tactical advantages, but they are still vulnerable here.And those advantages are not significant, despite what the wonderful Pepe Escobar says about HIMARS threatening Crimea. If it was difficult for the Russians to defend for reasons of supply, it is even more so for the Ukrainians, with even more supply line problems. If the Russians had to worry about catastrophic flooding, the Ukrainians have to keep an eye on the sky for big birds that shit explosives. Moving military assets to the East Bank makes protects infrastructure also. It is unlikely that the Ukrainians will blow any dams, since that would flood Kherson City and drown their own forces. Russia had a re-supply problem in Kherson. Its bridges over the Dnieper did not allow full supply of the entire population of Kherson City and their military. Now, it is the Ukrainian occupation forces that will face resupply problems with ramped up bombings of supply routes to their forces in the city as well as degradation of the energy infrastructure. As Mariupol became a prison for the Azovs, so do will Kherson. Brian Berletic notes Russian advances along its entire defensive line in the Donbas, even without reinforcements in place. Taking Kherson, weakens the UAF elsewhere, as was the case with Kharkov, too. How very 1865. As Scott Ritter says, Kherson is a Pyrrhic victory for Western Ukraine. But all of the UAF’s “victories” to date have been Pyrrhic. The Frontline The “defeat” in Kherson, as you can see, offers long range strategic advantage in operations in the whole of Ukraine rather than momentary local success. America may have talent. It thinks that songs win wars. Too bad Zelensky can’t sing. Addendum “A mass mailing is being sent across the region urging residents to hand over "collaborators" to the SBU. The Ukrainian security services are cracking down on anyone suspected of having contacts with the Russian Armed Forces or the Russian administration, most of them will be victims of false denunciations.” Slavyangrad |
| Message Thread:
|