- Russia is fighting this war very differently from what the US or the UK would try to do in a similar situation, hence most commentators are quick to say Russia is doing it all wrong. It’s certainly not ideal what they are doing, but that doesn’t mean it’s not working
- Ukraine’s losses are higher than reported. The Russians have amassed quite a bit of fire power by now and they are using it. The Russians are even capturing some of those much vaunted Javelin anti-tank weapons and are using them against the Ukrainians
- Russia is using its missiles to attack barracks and other military and non-military sites in the rear of the Ukrainian army positions. Hundreds of soldiers and foreign fighters are dying as a result of such strikes, before they can even react
- Being a foreign volunteer on the Ukrainian side seems to be a suicide mission. It’s to be expected that the Ukrainian send those guys to the worst spots with mediocre equipment
- the media is making a big fuss over Russia’s inability to gain air superiority in Ukraine. Here is how to better understand that: The Russian army has a different doctrine than NATO countries. It never set out to gain air superiority before sending in ground troops. That is western military doctrine, because the west is used to fighting countries with a weak air force to begin with and the west does not want to lose any soldiers. Russia has prepared to fight NATO which has a very strong air force. So Russian thinking goes like this: send in ground troops without having air superiority, and then make it very hard on the opposing air force by also sending in lots of anti-aircraft batteries. This may seem like a bad idea through western eyes and does lead to higher losses on the ground, but from a purely military point of view it can also get the job done. Instead of relying on aircraft the Russians rely on artillery and missiles. That’s what they have been doing. They have slowly taken up positions to use their extremely large amount of artillery. It’s taken them a while, but that artillery is going to seriously hurt the Ukrainians. Russia has enough of artillery to keep up a devasting fire for a long time. It is attacking non-military buildings, yes, but who is to say that the Ukrainian army is not or will not use at least some of those civilian buildings as military positions? This is a war. In a war people die. Talk of genocide is preposterous. Commentators are using this word gratuitously. The holocaust was genocide. What happened in Rwanda was genocide. What happened in the Balkans was genocide. This? This is a modern war in a densely populated region. This is a war that is being fought between two sides who do not gentlemanly or romantically opt to meet in a field with no houses or civilians around to slug it out and then have a nice little peace agreement when the smoke clears.
- Where is the word ‘genocide’ when Israel or the US destroy non-military targets and slaughter a bunch of civilians?
- The use of the Kinzhal (dagger) supersonic missile is not a game changer, but it can have a demoralizing effect since there is no way to defend against it. See picture below
- By the way: Ukraine has also send missiles of its own into Russian territory. Almost all is fair in war according to me, but it would be nice to hear this reported via the mainstream news as well.
- Russia has arguably the most advanced tank in the world. The T-14 Armata tank. It’s suspiciously absent in Ukraine. This may be because they don’t have enough of them. Because they are too advanced to be compatible with Russia’s vast number of older systems. And also because it doesn’t want to risk losing these very expensive tanks to a relatively cheap Javelin or drone attack. The propaganda value of a destroyed Armata tank would be too great a gift to the Ukrainians
- Mariupol will fall. This will enhance the Russian position in the south. Mykolaev and later Odessa will then become easier to target
- When Ukraine loses its army may spill over into neighbouring countries and try to lure the Russians into attacking them there, thereby escalating the war
- if the Ukrainians lose there will be a harsh crackdown on the Ukrainian population (NOT a genocide, mind you), because even when occupied their cities will remain unruly.
- a no fly zone = world war three, so don’t even go there
- Syria is de facto at war with Ukraine since it has encouraged its soldiers to go and fight in Ukraine. This could give a boost to the Russian army. I would value these Syrians much more than any help from Belorussian soldiers
- we will see more use of artillery in the coming weeks and Ukraine’s military situation will worsen. We will also see the humanitarian crisis worsen. What Russia is doing is the same thing the Americans did to Native Americans: kill women and children, burn villages, destroy food supplies. The comparison doesn’t hold up, because what the Americans did was actual genocide. The Russians have no intention of wiping 40 million people off the face of this earth. What they are doing is criminal, but it doesn’t amount to a genocide. Not yet anyway. Given Putin’s mindset and Zelensky’s stubbornness combined with unwavering western support this conflict will become a long war, unless all the experts have it wrong – again – and some unexpected peace agreement is reached. No serious peace agreement can be reached with Putin, but perhaps some temporary deal can be brokered to stop the killing for the time being. I think that neither side can stop at this moment. If Ukraine agrees to peace now it kinda signs its own death warrant. It would even disappoint its western allies if it caves to Russian pressure, because US leadership wants Russia to bleed out in Ukraine. I am convinced US leadership is secretly overjoyed that this invasion has happened and it is praying the Russians incur many more casualties before this thing is over. And Putin doesn’t want peace, because he first wants to completely destroy Ukraine as a military factor and connect Crimea to Russia. I mean, he would be quite dumb if he’d settle for less now.
A contrarian view of the war in Ukraine. Russia’s plan is working :: Day 25

“I am convinced US leadership is secretly overjoyed that this invasion has happened […]”
Yes, totally. For me, there are still many open questions about this war, but the one thing that I’m absolutely certain about is that it is a wet dream come true for the US military-industrial complex and their underlings in the White House.
Still not sure about Russia’s ultimate goal, though. There are some things that they might get out of this, but it doesn’t seem to me like it’s worth the price they are paying economically.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This whole thing has really exposed our journalists as boot lickers, nationalists and war mongers. I have seen journalists practically begging politicians to organize a no fly zone over Ukraine. One was using emotional blackmail to get Boris over in the UK to basically unleash world war III. Those people will do and say anything just so they can look like courageous, loyal crusaders in a ‘good’ cause regardless of any consequences. It’s like this time they have done away with even a smoke screen of objectivity. There is also this weird expectation that a war can somehow be victimless. The Ukrainian army is running around in cities. What are the Russians supposed to do? Agree to only shoot at them if Ukrainian soldiers are at least 1 km away from any non-military targets? So limit the war to a couple of bushes somewhere in the middle of nowhere? But when there is a war somewhere else you hear… crickets. Is it worth the price for Russia to do this? Not through our western eyes, no. Through Russian eyes where embracing the worst kind of suffering seems to be part of what is it to be a great Russian, yes. This whole thing is still a pin prick to them compared to the horrendous catastrophes they have experienced throughout their history. What worries me most is what they will do once they get Ukraine. They are like a child begging mummy to put a steaming hot potato in its mouth. They want it and when they will have it they will find out they were better off without it. If you want to control Ukraine you would have to deport over half of the population. But maybe they will… What do you think?
LikeLike
Yeah, the media coverage of this war is really remarkable. Back in the days of George W’s crusades in the Middle East, they at least pretended to be neutral. Now everything is blue/yellow. I even observed a kid painting a castle on the street with a Ukrainian flag the other day.
I think it’s always a bit suspicious when the Media are talking about a single person (Putin, Bin Laden, Assad…) instead of saying things like “the Russian government”. It shows that they need to have one (bad) person that everyone is supposed to hate.
As for the Russians, I seriously doubt that they have the resources to hold Ukraine for a long time, given that the economically stronger West is pumping so much money and equipment in there. But if they ultimately only want to hold the contested areas near the borders, that seems doable, albeit at a very high price.
I kinda miss the Cold War – with two superpowers being at de facto peace with each other while the arms manufacturers were still making tons of money, it seemed like win-win for everybody. (J/K of course, I know it wasn’t a picnic either).
LikeLiked by 1 person