Blank attacks against all Russians and anything Russian will strenghten Russian determination and NATO will be seen as the 1941 Wehrmacht

For those of us who bother to learn about Russian history, the idea of launching an attack against all Russians and all things Russian will take the Russian Federation back to the 22th of June 1941, the start of Unternehmen Barbarossa when the strives towards the implementation of Adolf Hitler Plan to exterminate Russians and replace them with German farmers in Lebensraum begun.

Demolishing monuments used to remember those who fought against National Socialist Germany will return Europe back to World War Two. Those who forget the past are forced to relive the past. 

So what is the brilliant idea that the Baltic Republics and others got? Confiscate anything Russian. Why? To prevent any Russians from entering Europe. As soon as the news hit the headlines across the Russian Federation those who oppose national mobilization in the Russian Federation will support national mobilization and when this happens Europe as a whole will once again face the prospect of an all-out war.

NATO will be seen as the 1941 Wehrmacht.

https://www.meetup.com/london-online-chat-big-question-philosophy-group/events/296109310/

You are welcome to discuss about this and other issues following the link.

 

1945/2023: different times, same justification

 After the bloody battles in the Pacific, President Truman took a momentous decision to prevent a huge number of American casualties during the assault on the Japanese mainland. Hiroshima and Nagasaki. President Truman took care of American interests. Today, Secretary Blinken says that the Russian Federation will use nuclear weapons to put an end to the conflict in Ukraine. Well, the Russian Federation will follow the American example do what is best for Russian interests.

After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan recovered and went on to become one of the great nations of the Developed World. The war in Afghanistan lasted twenty years. The longest war of the century until now. The conflict in Ukraine has lasted more than a year and the Russian Federation might decide that enough is enough and do what USA did in 1945.

This a real possibility and all those seeking to prolong the conflict by supporting one of the sides in the conflict must take this into consideration. If nuclear devices are detonated in Ukraine, bordering countries will the first to be affected. The power of modern nuclear devices is vastly superior and therefore the level of destruction will be much greater and, as the world revolves, air and water will be contaminated. Those who remember the effects of Chernobyl should think about what is coming their way.

At this point, all warmongering attitudes and provision of armament should come to a halt. The likes of Warsaw that suffered under the German assault of 1939 with conventional weapons should take into account the destruction caused by an invisible enemy called nuclear radiation. The consequences of destruction caused by conventional weapons can be dealt with in the short term. The consequences of radiation pollution will last for many years to come rendering entire areas totally uninhabitable. Although Japan ultimately recovered, the legacy was thousands of lives affected for many generations to come. Cancer, birth defects and the like.

If Secretary Blinken is really and trully concerned and if he believes that the use of nuclear weapons is a certain possibility, he should advice President Biden that a strategy change is needed. The more fuel is added to the fire the closer we get to a nuclear reality. 

Moscow and London: How signals are interpreted

 

How signals are interpreted

In 1991, the Soviet Union came to an end and this was very much the consequence of the efforts to remain ahead during the so called Cold War. The Soviet Union had to invest a vast amount of resources to remain significant in the arms race and it came the point when it could no longer afford to keep up because it did not have the financial muscle to do so.

The resignation of Mikhail Gorbachev as Soviet President is very much the end as soon after the Soviet Union disintegrated, leaving the USA as the one major superpower without any close competitors as China itself was far from being what China is today - economically, technologically and militarily. It could be said that the USA could attack Yugoslavia and dismember Yugoslavia without a UN mandate and without any real opposition and this is something that could not have happened if the Soviet Union had been around with the power to prevent such attack.

Having said that, 2022 is a different story. The Russian Federation is much more powerful than the Soviet Union for several reasons and one of them is the fact that the Russian Federation like China are much more homogenous countries with less ethnic and political contradictions. The Russian intelligence networks was magnifically helped by the fact that former Warsaw Pacto countries and regions were integrated into the European Union. If you were to look for an image to represent what has happened the Trojan Horse comes to mind.

The USA has used Britain as an extension of the USA in Europe and beyond. The USA has used Britain to justify USA agendas before the American people. If Tony Blair had not joined forces with George Bush Junior, it would have been difficult for the American President to sell his agenda to the American people. Britain has been used as a junior partner and as a propaganda tool and Britain has had to pay a very high price for it. It happened in Iraq and it happened in Afghanistan and it is happening in Europe. Inflation and financial difficulties that Britain is facing don't come out of nowhere. They are the direct result of sanctions and other measures taken against the Russian Federation that have had a boomerang effect not just in Europe, but worldwide. What happens when oil prices measured in US Dollars go up? Britain will pay higher prices not just because of market prices going up, but also because the loss of value of Pound means that Britain will need a lot more Dollars to pay for energy supplies and this has a direct impact on the British economy. If the Treasury cannot keep up with increasing expenditure and if the private sector in Britain has to translate cost into prices charged to consumers, industrial unrest is already on the horizon.

Just a few days ago, the British government was offering salary increases of 3% when inflation was already at 9% and more. Active workers will suffer and pensioners will suffer when the government is not able to adjust salaries and pensions taking into account the rate of inflation. The private sector already hit very badly by Covid, hit now both by inflation and consumption reduction will face an even harsher economic environment.

Liz Truss as Foreign Secretary said that she was in favour of cutting down the manpower of the British Armed Forces at a time when tensions are rising and there is the prospect of open conflict with both the Russian Federation and China. While would the UK be talking about cutting down its military capabilities? While is she asking other countries to increase their defense budget? My educated guess is that Britain does not have what it takes to beef up its Armed Forces and is therefore asking others to invest more to level the field in terms of what NATO can do or not do. President Donald Trump raised the concern that USA was the one feeling the pain created by military expenditure while other NATO members were not doing enough. Chancellor Olaf Scholz talked about hundred billions of EUROs to beef up German military capabilities, but how does this fit in with the fact that Germany is facing serious issues when it comes not just to the availability of energy sources, but also to the cost of existing energy sources. When both big economic players like Bayer and Thyssen-Krupp and the trade unions talk about the risk of economic collapse, what will Olaf Scholz be willing to sacrifice to beef up the German military capabilities? When you look East, Poland was offering to send their outdated Mig fighter jets to Ukraine if the USA could give Poland F35s in exchange, something that was rejected outrightly by the USA. What about other countries of the NATO block and what about those who are not members of NATO? Do they have the financial muscle to beef up their military capabilities or will they always depend on what USA or Britain can give them? Germany made many promises, but has delivered none of them.

Behind the speeches, this is the reality and today the British Primer Minister Boris Johnson fell not because of the scandals involving sexual misconduct of Conservative MPs. He fell because of economic realities. What were Conservative MPs talking about? VAT and Corporation Tax. Britain has been overspending for several reasons, including the fight against COVID when caution regarding budget was put aside to deal with a national emergency. On top of that, there is another national emergency created by British geopolitical decisions that have backfired. 

Look at the economy. For decades, Britain had remained relatively stable with very low interest rates and a significantly higher rate of employment and low prices in the shops. As the CEO of Poundland explained, he used to pay about 2,000 Pound for a container and now the price has jumped and it costs 20,000 Pound to bring imported products to the United Kingdom. Add to that fixed overheads and utilities and economic margins are dramatically reduced. This is not sustainable and on top of it the devaluation of the Pound compared to the US Dollar will make imports ever more expensive. Put aside Poundland and the situation many importers and exporters face and focus on food supplies. If Britain imports 60 per cent of what Britain consumes, then the costs of food will rise exponentially combining importation, transportation and distribution and costs involved in retail operations. Retail costs have been reducing by reducing manpower at the shops. You see today that the number of employees employed by retailers has been reduced with the introduction of automation. Automation reduces the numbers of jobs across the board whether we are talking about banking and financial institution, retailers and even transport. Much of the dispute affecting transport and leading to strikes is due to the declared intention of cutting jobs to cut costs. Having said that, if jobs been eliminated in one segment of activity are not created in other areas, the welfare bill will have to rise to pay for unemployment benefits and other social benefits in a country in which the number of non active population is rising while the number of those active at work is falling. This happens naturally because of an ageing population, but it is accelerated when people who are still fit to remain active lose their jobs.

What happened to the Soviet Union will happen to Britain. There is a time when your economy is not strong enough and everything is translated into accumulated and rising debt and when this happens there are social and political consequences.

 

Britain: Gun Ho mentality is making a bad situation worse

The crise in Eastern Europe is set to carry on and on and on, increasing the chances of an even worse conflict to occur. Those in charge of dealing with the situation are visibly acting out of their depth and without any real understanding of the consequences of what they are doing.

Mass media are blissfully ignorant in terms of what is involved and keep the propaganda machine alive with a series of headlines that apart from being absolutely pathetic and often misguiding tend to create hatred and animosity.

In the meantime, the range of issues that continue to erode the foundations of the European Union keeps growing. It is just a matter of time when issues related to refugees generate political upheaval in the host countries. Just days ago, Lech Walesa stated that Poland and Hungary should leave the European Union since both countries are losing out because of their membership of the European Union. There are obvious disparities and differences in terms of aims within the European Union. France and Germany have their own approach to the crisis in Eastern Europe with regards to the stances of other EU countries. Unity is in very short supply and the cracks are becoming ever more visible.

While USA and others use Ukraine in a proxy war against the Russian Federation, they know full well that given the cost of a direct confrontation they would not want such direct confrontation. In the meantime, they all agree that China is a much greater threat and China is closely following events in Europe while it prepares itself to recover Chinese territories in Asia. China is no longer the retiscent China of the past. China is more than willing to engage in military conflict and incursions close to Japan and to Australia are much more than posturing. After the shambolic end of military operations in Afghanistan, there is little appetite for what would be a massive military conflict that will involve both Europe and Asia.

In Britain, what is the state of British military capabilities? Britain struggled in Iraq and struggled in Afghanistan being limited now to skirmishes across the Middle East. Britain does not have the manpower it would need for an all-out war that would very likely include the British mainland. It would take 15 minutes for a nuclear missile launched from Kaliningrad to reach London. There has been some research about the impact of a nuclear strike in London, but we must assume that should there be an all-out war all the main British cities will be targetted as a well as military installations, communications, energy production and distribution and we could not discount that there will be acts of sabotage within the United Kingdom.

Mass Media Blackout: Purpose? Not to allow the general public to know what is really happening.

 

At this point in time, all information coming out of Ukraine is fragmentary to say the least. On the one hand there is the propaganda war telling you that the conflict has stalled and giving images to fit in with the narrative and on the other is the data about advances inside Ukraine that is losing access to the Black Sea and therefore any intervention via the Black Sea is now a non possibility.

The map shows very clearly that all the talk about resistance is merely talk. Liquid courage not based on reality. Why would Ukrainian forces be blowing up bridges unless they were losing? You don't blow up your own bridges when you are winning. Seventy or so years ago, the French blew up bridges that would allow a rapid German invasion, but failed to destroy the ones that were used by German forces to advance very quickly towards Paris. At the time, remembering what happened to Warsaw, the French authorities declared Paris an open city so that Paris was not bombed.

 Away from the Black Sea there is Poland as the only way in if anybody wanted to get in, but getting in comes at the price of losing neutrality status and entering a new and much more dangerous phase in the conflict. Although some would like to enter, for Poland it is a very simple choice: if access is granted then Poland becomes the next immediate target and that will engulf Baltic Republics that are hanging on the sides without any means to repel an attack that will certainly come if a chain reaction based on NATO structure is unavoidable. The fate of all other countries all the way towards Britain would be sealed.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Defense Secretary Ben Wallace and Dominic Raab MP have explicitly said that they don't want a no-fly zone, let alone an intervention that could make Britain a target and unleash World War Three. If the numbers published by the so called West are to be believe, a massive wave of refugees has already entered Poland and from then onwards it will be coming to Western Europe, including France, Germany and ultimately Britain.

Right now, France is accusing Britain of not doing enough to deal with refugees. This comes on top of the issues affecting what is happening on the Channel region. Can Germany handle any more refugees? What about Hungary? As it happened before with Iraq, neighbouring countries will take the brunt. Olaf Scholz promised to invest not less than 200 billion EURO to beef up German armed forces. Having hundreds of thousands of refugees reaching Germany, on top of the existing refugee issues is not good news for the fledging German coalition. What about France that faces the first round of Presidential Elections in April?

Refugees in Britain? Britain can hardly afford social housing to cover present needs. Hundreds of thousands coming in on top of what is happening right now? Will the British government be taking over expensive private property to house refugees?

 

 

Palestine never existed as a state, but as territories of other states

 

Regardless of the judgement of the International Court of Justice, there never was a State of Palestine. There were territories that belonged to other states that went to war against Israel and having lost wars against Israel they lost part of the lands that they controlled. Talking about war crimes is an idiocy. The said wars happened a long time ago and for decades lands taken from Arab states have been controlled by Israel.

The Organisation of the United Nations has no right to go around telling what can be done or cannot be done. It can only make statements that more often than not are no more than empty words because reality on the ground takes precedence. Any settlement can only be kept or changed by force and force is something that the Organisation of the United Nations doesn't have. Whether the rest of the world likes it or not, the Golan Heights - for example - are part of the State of Israel having belonged in the past to Syria. The sames goes for Gaza and West Bank. In a treaty signed by Israel and Egypt, the Sinai Peninsula was recovered by Egypt. 

Whether the rest of the world accepts Jerusalem as capital of Israel is irrelevant. Who controls Jerusalem? Israel. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that as long as Jerusalem is controlled by Israel and is an integral part of the State of Israel whatever the world says about it will not change an iota. All the talk about Jerusalem being an international city is bollocks.

World history is full of 'this belongs to me and this belongs to you'. Looking at the map of Europe itself, national borders have changed after a series of conflicts. The Europe of Metternich is a clear example. Looking at the map of the Americas much of a similar nature can be said. Much of the south of today's United States are occupied territories. They used to belong to Mexico and to other countries including Spain. The Louisiana was bought from France. 

The Six-Day War was a time of territorial acquisitions for Israel. Egypt, Syria and others waged war against Israel and lost. Their intention had been to wipe out of the recently formed State of Israel. So, they lost. Bad luck. Are they called 'occupied territories' because Syria and others didn't sign a peace treaty with Israel? Well, for all we know, for decades the attackers have not been at war with Israel and this led to a status quo. With peace settlements or without peace settlements, the reality on the ground is that for decades acquired territories have been under Israeli rule and wil presumably be under Israeli rule for the foreseable future.

There is an unhealthy war of words that is not conducive to peaceful coexistence. If the rest of the world were to be treated according to the same standards Israel is measured with, there wouldn't be peace anywhere. European countries would be at war with each other trying to recover 'occupied territories'. Is it about Danzig and Memel or Gdansk? What about huge chunks of Germany given to Poland and others? What about parts of Italy and Austria that are now part of neighboring countries? What about the status of Baltic Republics? Are we going to suddenly start ignoring reality?

I heard a Member of the House of Lords talk about what is happening today in the Soviet Union. Really? Apparently the noble Lord is not aware of the fact that the Soviet Union came to an end in 1991. It is all too good to talk about the UN Plan for the partition of Palestine, but it is useless talk. 

Much of what Western politicians talk via mass media is sheer nonsense when it comes to geopolitics. Just a few days ago, there was a military coup in Myanmar (Burma). Suddenly, we heard them talking about taking action against the military in Burma. They talk as if they owned Burma which, of course, they don't. Burma, apart from being a sovereign nation is a sovereign nation with close ties with China. China and some European countries have huge economic interests in Burma. The UN, the USA, or whoever else, can protest about the status of Muslim minorities in Burma until they become red in the face. Nothing is going to change.

In the meantime, those who pretend to have a say about what is happening elsewhere should pay closer attention to what is actually happening in their own countries.