Cold War II_(US-West vs Russia/China tensions)

Hahahaha... Ukraine is winning because they destroy three Russian artillery platforms for every one of their own that they lose... what a load of horse shit... they even admit that their assessment is based on the video footage posted on line of artillery being destroyed... wow... there is no cure for stupid.

It also goes on about western guided shells but does not mention Russia has better weapons in much larger quantities.

It seems they would be winning if they just had more artillery shells... what a crock of shit.

https://www.asiafinancial.com/threat-of-more-chip-curbs-spurs-warnings-on-china-innovation

Threat of More Chip Curbs Spurs Warnings on China Innovation

September 8, 2023

The chief of one of the world’s biggest chip equipment-makers, ASML, said isolating China completely will ‘force’ the country to ramp up innovation

The Netherlands started implementing fresh chip export restrictions targeting China, from last week, a move largely seen as a response to lobbying by the United States, which is working to hobble Beijing’s military and technological capabilities.

Wennink noted he wasn’t expecting much revenue impact on ASML, Europe’s most valuable semiconductor company, from the restrictions. However, he expressed a fear that the Dutch government may implement fresh export controls, at Washington’s “insistence”.

Wennink also noted that China’s ability to innovate, and do so quickly, was already evidenced by the country’s increasing prowess in the electric vehicle (EV) market.

“In Germany they just had a big car show and they were shocked. In China things are faster, faster and more focused. We are too complacent,” Wennink told Nieuwsuur.

https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2023/11/16/xi-meets-biden/

US efforts to strangle the Chinese economy are not working. Western ‘experts’ continue their never-ending message that China is close to a debt collapse; China’s property market is imploding; and above all, China’s previous phenomenal growth is now over and the economy since COVID is grinding to a halt and will end up like Japan, stagnating in a sea of debt.

And yes, overall debt in the capitalist sector has rocketed. Now the government will be forced to liquidate many of these developers and/or ‘restructure’ their operations with state money. But this does not mean China is about to have deflationary crash. China’s net debt to GDP ratio (debt burden) is only 12% of the average in the G7 economies. The state holds huge financial assets; so it can easily manage this property slump.

The point is that the Xi leadership no longer trust the Western-educated economists in the People’s Bank to regulate the private sector – the bank is a fortress of neo-classical pro-market economics. CP leaders still stop short of bringing these speculative financial and real estate speculators into public ownership (no doubt some leaders have personal links).

The Chinese economy is not diving into a recession. The IMF has just forecast that China’s real GDP will rise by 5.4% this year – and that’s an upgrade from its previous forecast. The housing market may be struggling, but productive industrial construction is booming. China has already built enough solar panel factories to meet all demand in the world. It has built enough auto factories to make every car sold in China, Europe and the US. By the end of next year, it will have built in just five years as many petrochemical factories that Europe and the rest of Asia have now. And take hi-speed rail and infrastructure projects. Back in the US, Biden makes much of his infrastructure program after decades of decline and neglect in US transportation facilities. But that’s nothing to the rapid expansion of hi-speed rail and other transport projects that now have linked up the vast expanse of China’s regions. Compare this to the state of infrastructure in the San Francisco area as Xi visits.

Ah, but you see, China’s economy is seriously ‘imbalanced’. There is ‘too much’ investment in such projects and not enough handouts to the people to spend on consumer goods like I-phones or services like tourism and restaurants. I have pointed out the nonsense of this view on several occasions. China’s growth has been based on a high rate of productive investment. High investment does not mean low consumption growth – on the contrary, investment leads to more production, more jobs and then more incomes and consumption. China’s supposedly low consumption ratio to GDP compared to the highly successful Western capitalist economies is accompanied by a much faster growth in household spending. Indeed, retail sales rose 7.6% yoy in October – not suggesting an entirely weak consumer. China’s workers may not have any say in what their government does, but nevertheless, their wages are still rising faster than anywhere else in Asia.

And those wage rises are not being eaten away by inflation as has happened in the last few years in the rest of the G20 economies. China’s inflation rate is near zero while inflation, despite recent falls, in the US and Europe is several times higher – indeed US workers have seen prices rise by 17% since COVID.

And if Biden is hoping that the upcoming presidential election in Taiwan will lead to a victory for the pro-independence candidate from the Democrat party, then he could be in for a surprise. It seems that the two anti-independence, pro-China parties, the Kuomintang and People’s Party, are planning to run a single candidate for the presidency and current polls show that such a candidate would win. So that could mean a pro-China president in Taiwan next year.

How America’s top spymaster sees the world and why it’s so disappointing, by Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory, for RT. 04.04.2024.

The CIA head’s vision for the future of America’s ongoing confrontation with Russia is depressingly shortsighted.

William J. Burns has published a long piece in Foreign Affairs under the title 'Spycraft and Statecraft. Transforming the CIA for an Age of Competition'. This is an essay likely to be read with great attention, maybe even parsed, not only by an American elite audience, but also abroad, in, say, Moscow, Beijing, and New Delhi, for several reasons. Burns is, of course, the head of the CIA as well as an acknowledged heavyweight of US geopolitics – in the state and deep-state versions.

Few publications rival Foreign Affairs’ cachet as a US establishment forum and mouthpiece. While Burns’ peg is a plea to appreciate the importance of human intelligence agents, his agenda is much broader: In effect, what he has released is a set of strategic policy recommendations, embedded in a global tour d’horizon. And, last but not least, Burns is, of course, not the sole author. Even if he should have penned every line himself, this is a programmatic declaration from a powerful faction of the American “siloviki,” the men (and women) wielding the still gargantuan hard power of the US empire.

By the way, whether he has noticed or not, Burns’ intervention cannot but bring to mind another intelligent spy chief loyally serving a declining empire. Yury Andropov, former head of the KGB (and then, for a brief period, the whole Soviet Union) would have agreed with his CIA counterpart on the importance of “human assets,” especially in an age of technological progress, and he would also have appreciated the expansive sweep of Burns’ vision. Indeed, with Burns putting himself so front-and-center, one cannot help but wonder if he is not also, tentatively, preparing the ground for reaching for the presidency one day. After all, in the US, George Bush senior famously went from head of the CIA to head of it all, too.

There is no doubt that this CIA director is a smart and experienced man principally capable of realism, unlike all too many others in the current American elite. Famously, he warned in 2008, when serving as ambassador to Moscow, that “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin).” That makes the glaring flaws in this big-picture survey all the more remarkable.

Burns is, obviously, correct when he observes that the US – and the world as a whole – is facing a historically rare moment of “profound” change in the global order. And – with one exception which we will return to – it would be unproductive, perhaps even a little churlish, to quibble over his ideologically biased terminology. His mislabeling of Russia as “revanchist,” for instance, has a petty ring to it. “Resurgent” would be a more civil as well as more truthful term, capturing the fact that the country is simply returning to its normal international minimum status (for at least the last three hundred years), namely that of a second-to-none great power.

Yet Burns’ agenda is more important than his terminology. While it may be complex, parts of it are as clear as can be: He is eager (perhaps desperate) to prevent Washington from ending its massive aid for Ukraine – a battle he is likely to lose. In the Middle East, he wants to focus Western aggression on Iran. He may get his will there, but that won’t be a winning strategy because, in part thanks to multipolar trend setters, such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS, Iran’s escape from the isolation that the US has long imposed on it is already inevitable.

Regarding China, Burns’ real target is a competing faction of American hawks, namely those who argue that, bluntly put, Washington should write off its losses in Ukraine and concentrate all its firepower on China. Burns wants to persuade his readers that the US can have both its big fight against China and its proxy war against Russia.

He is also engaged in a massive act of CIA boosterism, clearly aiming to increase the clout of the already inordinately powerful state-within-a-state he happens to run himself. And last but not least, the spy-in-chief has unearthed one of the oldest tricks in the subversion and destabilization playbook: Announcing loudly that his CIA is on a recruiting spree in Russia, he seeks to promote a little paranoia in Moscow. Good luck attempting to pull that one on the country that gave us the term “agentura.” Moreover, after the horrific terror attack on Crocus City Hall in Moscow, it is fair to assume that Burns regrets having boasted about the CIA expanding its “work” in Russia. Not a good look, not at all.

What matters more, though, than his verbal sallies and his intriguingly straightforward, even blunt aims, are three astonishingly crude errors: First, Burns insists on reading the emerging outcome of the war in Ukraine as a “failure on many levels,” for Russia, revealing its, as he believes, economic, political, and military weakness. Yet, as the acknowledged American economist James K. Galbraith has recently reiterated, the West’s economic war on Russia has backfired. The Russian economy is now stronger, more resilient, and independent of the West than never before.

As to the military, Burns for instance, gleefully counts the tanks that Russia has lost and fails to note the ones it is building at a rapid rate not matched anywhere inside NATO. In general, he fails to mention just how worried scores of Western experts have come to be, realizing that Moscow is overseeing a massive and effective expansion of military production. A curious oversight for an intelligence professional. He also seems to miss just how desperate Ukraine’s situation has become on the ground.

And politics – really? The man who serves Joe Biden, most likely soon to be replaced by Donald Trump, is spotting lack of popularity and fragility in Moscow, and his key piece of evidence is Prigozhin and his doomed mutiny? This part of Burns’ article is so detached from reality that one wonders if this is still the same person reporting on Russian red lines in 2008. The larger point he cannot grasp is that, historically, Russia has a pattern of starting wars on the wrong foot – to then learn, mobilize, focus, and win.

Burns’ second severe mistake is his argument that, ultimately, only China can pose a serious challenge to the US. This is staggeringly shortsighted for two reasons: First, Russia has just shown that it can defeat the West in a proxy war. Once that victory will be complete, a declining but still important part of the American empire, NATO/EU-Europe will have to deal with the after-effects (no, not Russian invasion, but political backlash, fracturing, and instability). If Burns thinks that blowback in Europe is no serious threat to US interests, one can only envy his nonchalance.

Secondly, his entire premise is perfectly misguided: It makes no sense to divide the Russian and the Chinese potentials analytically because they are now closely linked in reality. It is, among other things, exactly a US attempt to knock out Russia first to then deal with China that has just failed. Instead, their partnership has become more solid.

And error number three is, perhaps, even odder: As mentioned above, Burns’ language is a curious hybrid between an analytical and an intemperate idiom. A sophisticated reader can only wince in vicarious embarrassment at hearing a CIA director complain of others’ “brutish” behavior. What’s worse: the tub-thumping or the stones-and-glasshouse cringe? Mostly, though, this does not matter.

Yet there is one case where these fits of verbal coarseness betray something even worse than rhetorical bravado: Describing Hamas’ 7 October assault as “butchery,” Burns finds nothing but an “intense ground campaign” on Israel’s side. Let’s set aside that this expression is a despicable euphemism, when much of the world rightly sees a genocide taking place in Gaza, with US support. It also bespeaks an astounding failure of the strategic imagination: In the same essay, Burns notes correctly that the weight of the Global South is increasing, and that, in essence, the great powers will have to compete for allegiances that are no longer, as he puts is, “monogamous.” Good luck then putting America’s bizarre come-what-may loyalty to Israel first. A CIA director at least should still be able to distinguish between the national interests of his own country and the demands of Tel Aviv.

Burns’ multipronged strike in the realm of elite public debate leaves an unpleasant aftertaste. It is genuinely disappointing to see so much heavy-handed rhetoric and such basic errors of analysis from one of the less deluded members of the American establishment. It is also puzzling. Burns is not amateurish like Antony Blinken or a fanatic without self-awareness, such as Victoria Nuland. Yet here he is, putting his name to a text that often seems sloppy and transparent in its simple and short-sighted motivations. Has the US establishment decayed so badly that even its best and brightest now come across as sadly unimpressive?

https://www.rt.com/news/595132-us-cia-burns-russia/

Just an indication of the degradation in the west where someone either doesn't know what they are talking about, or can't say it at the risk of being banished from the gravy train.

As time goes by either the US will wake up from the American dream or they will remain sleeping as the world moves on without them.

Targeting Chinese chips, US to push Dutch on ASML service contracts

WASHINGTON, April 4 (Reuters) - President Joe Biden's administration plans to press the Netherlands next week to stop its top chipmaking equipment maker ASML from servicing some tools in China, two people familiar with the matter said, as the U.S. leans on allies in its bid to hobble Beijing's tech sector.

Alan Estevez, the U.S. export policy chief, is scheduled to meet in the Netherlands next Monday with officials from the Dutch government and ASML Holding NV (ASML.AS), opens new tab to discuss the servicing contracts, the people said.

Washington may also be seeking to add to a list of Chinese chipmaking factories restricted from receiving Dutch equipment as part of the discussions, one of the people said.

https://www.reuters.com/business/us-urge-dutch-more-curbs-asml-chipmaking-equipment-china-sources-say-2024-04-04/

I'm not a semiconductor expert, but it seems there are actually Three core elements in chip development and production

• Design
  
• Fabrication plant
  
• Tools
  

So both Russia and China have access to a great pool of engineers to work on chip designs, this part seems to be the easiest for both countries
China is ahead in the construction of Fabrication plants, but if the Tools that you need in these Fabs are Outsourced from countries that can be blackmailed by your adversaries, then it presents a clear problem.

Both countries need to strive to be Self sufficient in all three areas to limit NATO's ability to sabotage their work

lancelot wrote:
The US might try to put China into a tiny little box as much as they want to. But I doubt the Chinese will be contained. Their semiconductor industry has evolved too much already. They also have possibly the world's largest single market for semiconductors.

The pull of a huge market will make manufacturers attempting to supply it go to all kinds of lengths to do so. Grey markets rule OK!

'FT', now say it without crying: The West, 'on fire' because its imperialism is falling, its blackmail is increasing, by Javier Benítez for Sputnik.Latamnews. 06.08.2024.

The Financial Times warns that the conflict in Ukraine has repercussions that transcend that country. According to the outlet, while the situation on the battlefield is adverse, many of Russia's neighbors are weighing their options. Thus, it warns that the current crisis in Georgia, although its roots are local, is a symptom of this broader trend.

Europe is in serious trouble, and the Financial Times is well aware of this

In a kind of catharsis, the newspaper cannot help but show its indignation from an imperialist perspective. Thus, it explains that the Georgian government aspires to join a club of countries that could be called the Eurasian chapter of International Illiberalism.

He notes that "this club," as he calls it, "includes the Central Asian states, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Serbia and Hungary." "Having maintained a barrier between Russia and the West since 2022, its members are now leaning more towards Moscow. The leaders of these countries believe in a multipolar world, not a multilateral one. They do not believe in an international legal order or the post-1989 consensus on liberalism and human rights. They align themselves with Russia in the global culture war and speak the language of family values, writes the Financial Times practically in a sea of tears.

In this context, the US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller announced the imposition of visa restrictions against several dozen Georgian nationals. This first batch of such sanctions against Georgia is directed against members of the ruling Georgian Dream party, parliamentarians, law enforcement officials, and private citizens.

"This includes persons responsible and immediate relatives of those responsible for or complicit in undermining democracy in Georgia, for example, through the violation of the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, violent attacks on peaceful protesters, intimidation of civil society representatives and deliberate dissemination of disinformation at the direction of the Georgian government," Miller said at a press conference.

But what in hell is this virulent editorial in the Financial Times about, or the US sanctions against members and relatives of the Georgian Dream Party of Prime Minister Irakli Kobajidze?
There are two answers to this question.

The first answer is that this week the Transparency of Foreign Influence Law came into force in Georgia — after the Parliament lifted the veto imposed by President Salome Zurabishvili, who responds to the interests of the US and the EU — popularly known as the foreign agents law, which obliges non-governmental organizations and media that receive more than 20% of their income from other countries to register with a registry of entities that serve external interests. The law has been criticized by the US and the EU, because their infiltrated organizations in the country would be exposed. A law that, on the other hand, is based on the US FARA Law of 1938.

And the second answer is that also this week, Georgian Dream presented in Parliament a legislative package focused on the protection of family values and minors, which, among other purposes, seeks to ban LGBT propaganda and gay marriage.
"Imagine an electoral campaign, like the one that is coming up in Georgia, and suddenly all the media that are with Salome Zurabishvili, all the apparatus that supports her, from communications, civil society organizations - NGOs -, that all had the ’little' trademark of a foreign agent. That is the key to the issue," warns Dr. Enrique Refoyo, an international analyst.

"Just imagine that election campaign, that new presidency that has to come. Imagine that the Georgian Dream party presents a candidate and its media does not have that 'brand', but those of the pro-Western president [Salome Zurabishvili] do. So, the Georgian voter is already going to notice that. It's not that certain organizations are banned, they are simply found out, which is what hurts them [the West and its media] the most.

That is, to show that you support this person [Salome Zurabishvili] because she is 'your' candidate. She is not the Georgian candidate, she is the candidate of the West, she is 'their' intermediary, she is a foreign agent. Let the Georgians vote whatever they want. If they want to vote for a foreign agent, let them do so, but let them know effectively that he is a foreign agent," Refoyo emphasizes.

Yandex Translate from Spanish.

https://latamnews.lat/20240608/ft-ahora-dilo-sin-llorar-occidente-ardido-porque-su-imperialismo-se-cae-aumenta-su-chantaje-1155334524.html

In this context, the US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller announced the imposition of visa restrictions against several dozen Georgian nationals. This first batch of such sanctions against Georgia is directed against members of the ruling Georgian Dream party, parliamentarians, law enforcement officials, and private citizens.

Hahaha... that is going to make these people in power love the US and the EU and the west in general... there is no way this could possibly backfire and turn more Georgians against the west, even the ones that were friendly to the west because they fear sanctions being imposed on them too.

Because sanctions have always been the wests most effective tool to impose their will.

And of course you can bet that the people targeted were for reasons other than those stated... because western rivals want access to their assets or to steal stuff from them and these sanctions make it easier...

Mtavari announced Georgia's plans to restore diplomatic relations with Russia, 06.11.2024.

Mtavari: Georgian authorities are preparing to restore diplomatic relations with Russia.

At the same time, the channel’s interlocutors from the Georgian side, “close to the Kremlin,” say that the ruling Georgian Dream denies plans to open the Georgian Embassy in Moscow.

The governments of Georgia and Russia are actively working on the issue of restoring diplomatic relations; the selection of employees for the Georgian embassy in Moscow has already begun, the Mtavari Arkhi TV channel claims, citing sources.

The channel’s interlocutors from the Georgian side, “close to the Kremlin,” say that the ruling Georgian Dream party denies these plans. Representatives of the Georgian government call the dissemination of any information about the opening of an embassy in Moscow unfounded, the material says.

Tbilisi broke off diplomatic relations with Moscow in September 2008, after which Russia carried out an operation to “enforce peace” and also recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states.

The interests of Russia and Georgia have since been represented by the Swiss embassies in Moscow and Tbilisi.

https://www.rbc.ru/politics/11/06/2024/6668a7949a79477811646481

Russia believes in Big Meaning, by Andrey Polonsky for VZGLYAD. 06.14.2024.

The ideology of Russia’s opponents is built on one single basic principle – the total denial of the Greater Meaning for man. And the Great Meaning of Russia evokes special rejection, even to the point of gnashing of teeth.

Long ago, St. John Chrysostom said: “I persecute not by deed, but by word, not a heretic, but a heresy; I do not turn away a person, but I hate error and want to attract the erring one to myself.”

This is fundamentally contrary to the Western point of view, expressed with utmost fury in the famous “Hammer of the Witches”: “To destroy heresy, it is necessary to destroy heretics.”

And now, when we increasingly remember contradictions rather than commonality with the Western world, this contrast is worth keeping in mind almost in the first place.

In our tradition - despite the fact that concrete history knows a lot of the most diverse and exotic details - we are doomed to fight not with people, but with ideas. This is not only Christianly humane, but also eminently true in any view that combines past, present and future. People come and go, but ideas survive generations. At the same time, it is well known and proven in a thousand examples that pressure and persecution of specific ideologists and bearers of errors - no matter how tough and fair it may seem to contemporaries - only increases the popularity of the most bizarre ideology among descendants.

Of course, these days, during the existential confrontation with the Western world, we are forced to fight and limit the capabilities of Russia’s direct enemies. During any war, the most important condition for victory is the stability of the rear. A little over a century ago, Russia missed out on victories in two of its most important military clashes precisely because of the unrest behind the active army and the almost free work of enemy agitators in the rear.

But still, the real ideological confrontation begins where we primarily mean not the people who blurted out, recorded and reposted something disgusting, but the ideas and ideology that they represent and most often thoughtlessly relay.

The most curious thing is that the entire set of values ​​with which the enemy operates is quite simple to understand. In our conditions, it goes back to two sources.

The first is the tastes, preferences and mental stamps of Soviet and post-Soviet education, almost entirely collected in a certain metropolitan stratum and practically absent outside the megacities. In this unsympathetic cocktail, 19th-century Westernism turns into simple prejudice: “they have a normal life, but we have a bad one.” And opposition to any government, no matter what it does, also inherited from the century before last, turns into a denial of Russia’s experience in principle. Both in its monarchical and revolutionary versions.

In such a system, knowledge, and even more so love for real national history, for the “father’s tombs,” and even for the Russian space itself and the people inhabiting it, is not provided for and is not encouraged. The feeling of self – “I live without feeling the country beneath me” – has been replicated in hundreds of thousands of copies.

And the second source of all this obscenity is the ideology of modern Western consumer, post-Christian civilization. This system of thought, in its consistent nihilism, does not see anything interesting or attractive outside of biological existence. An individual person here almost dissolves in the chain consumer - money - product - money - consumer; for him there is no experience of history and previous generations, only reports of economic growth, PR technologies and marketing networks.

In principle, there are no hopes there, except for the hope of eating more, getting more, seeing more, before using all the bonuses from high-quality medical insurance and going to bed in a pre-purchased grave in a prestigious cemetery.

In principle, the entire ideology of the enemy - from “democratic values” in the American style to home-grown cardboard pacifism - is built on one single basic principle - the total denial of the Great Meaning, for the sake of which it is worth sacrificing oneself, wishing prosperity to the Fatherland, rebelling against the “natural” laws of money circulation. The big meaning of history is denied (“everything goes from nowhere to nowhere, continuous “contingency”), the big meaning of gender differences (why do we need children?), the big meaning of human vocation, origin and destiny (“check and abolish your privileges”).

And the Great Meaning of Russia evokes special rejection, even to the point of gnashing of teeth. During the perestroika years, the poetess Tatyana Shcherbina even published a special article in one of the Baltic magazines, where she foamed at the lips and argued that our country has no special meaning: no, it never has and cannot be.

The current subverters of Russian culture have also focused on similar topics. At the same time, they are not even working out a “training manual,” as they say nowadays, they are working out deep traumas of the subconscious. For any chain, consumer – money – product, the Big Meaning is destructive, since it brings longing for the lost Divine image in man.

Russia is inseparable from the Big Meaning; without it, our country, ourselves, our culture simply does not exist. We are fighting for a meaningful universe, for a view of things and a social world for which we can live and die. Otherwise, what is a person for? Indeed, a completely unnecessary load on the ground...

In the current existential conflict and the associated global ideological confrontation, we have strong arguments. We defend our history and our view of the future, which has fundamental meaning.

We can feel sorry for our ideological opponents and hope (although most likely these hopes are in vain) that their brains will become enlightened. But only until they supply weapons that kill our people. At this point, any ideological polemic stops.

https://vz.ru/opinions/2024/6/14/1270326.html

Europe is doomed to war, by Victoria Nikiforova for RiaNovosti. 07.01.2024.

In Western publications on the occasion of the July NATO summit (their official-cheerful tone inevitably reminds of Soviet editorials “towards the CPSU Congress”) the contours of the alliance’s new military strategy are clearly visible.
Despite all the howling about the integrity and cohesion of the bloc, the alliance today has essentially split into untermenschen and ubermensch. The inferior citizens of European countries will have to become cannon fodder on the eastern front, and the conflict is going to be managed by supermen from Washington, with the active yapping of supermen from London . It is very characteristic that the 75th anniversary of the alliance will be celebrated in Washington - it is from here that the management of all processes will come.

The latest manual in the Pentagon's military analysis publication rand.org tells how it will be. "There is no safe haven," the headline reads. "NATO must prepare for war at home."

Out of politeness, the text mentions the USA and Canada , but the main burden of the war must be borne by the people of Europe. They are reminded of the third article of the NATO charter - according to this paragraph, the members of the alliance must take all measures for their own defense. It is characteristic that the author decided not to mention the fifth article.

"Are they as stupid as this table?" President Putin responded to the suggestion that Russia was planning to attack NATO. However, the alliance's leadership benefits from this nonsense - it will make Europe look like an innocent victim and legitimize its attack on Russia.

And preparations are underway for the attack. What is happening today in the Old World is painfully reminiscent of what was happening on the continent in the 1930s. In the same way, the Anglo-Saxons “Weimarized” Europe, destroying its economy first with coronavirus lockdowns, then with anti-Russian sanctions.

Anti-Russian hysteria is being whipped up in exactly the same way - its intensity has already reached the level of the anti-Soviet propaganda of the 1930s. Under the sensitive guidance of the Anglo-Saxons, exactly the same geopolitical axis of evil is being created - from the very same countries that practiced fascism en masse ninety years ago. Joint military exercises near the island of Hokkaido have just been announced . Check out the list of participants: Germany , Spain , Japan ... Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Society is being pumped up and mobilized, military production is being accelerated. For the first time in many years, European countries are thinking about, for example, equipping all important infrastructure facilities and industrial enterprises with missile defence.

There is only one difference - in today's Europe there is no new Hitler, but, in essence, why do they need him? Modern technologies of inciting fear and hatred, as well as controlling the human masses, easily make it possible to do without the main villain. The process will be led by invisible Hitlers from overseas, and the fooled Hans and Zbysheks will go into battle, who by that time will have been deprived of their human appearance, turning into obedient biorobots.

The Europeans have been putting off the moment when they would have to get involved in the global slaughter until the last minute, but at the NATO anniversary summit they will be reminded that they will not be able to wriggle out of it. They had hoped that they would be able to destroy and plunder Russia with the help of Ukraine , but Ukraine broke down. Well, the Anglo-Saxons quickly, on their knees, cobbled together a new Ukraine from Europe - it's time for the Hans and Zbysheks to go into the meat grinder.

Have Europeans really lost all fear? No, there are still reasonable people there - and in fair numbers. They are trying to push right-wing parties into power that advocate peace in Ukraine, putting a spoke in the wheels of the inexorably spinning flywheel of a global war.

The results of a recent survey in European countries on the topic of the coming big war are typical. More than half of the British, for example, are confident that within the next five years their country will enter a world war. However, no one is eager to go to the front.

Among British youth aged 18 to 24, only 29% agreed to defend Britain from invasion . Parents who would be ready to send their sons to war turned out to be about 25%.

On average, 32% of the population in European countries agreed to fight - and here we must take into account that among these people there are many women and pensioners, who are not threatened by the front under any circumstances. Even in Germany, where the head of the Ministry of Defense Pistorius speaks out louder than Goebbels and demands the return of compulsory conscription, 59% of young people are categorically against this idea.

Because everyone understands perfectly well: Europe has already lost to Russia long before the official start. It is pure suicide to get into a protracted war with a half-dead defense industry that produces shells costing more than eight thousand euros each. It is madness, without a modern missile defense system, to yap at a nuclear superpower that has a full range of supersonic and hypersonic products. What kind of big war is there with such a population density as in Europe? There won’t even be a need for nuclear weapons there. It seems that European youth understands military situations better than pensioners.

The Russian leadership made a truly royal proposal to this Europe, which had not lost the remnants of its reason - to integrate into a unified system of Eurasian security and thereby save itself from collective suicide. Expel the American military from the continent following the example of African countries , roll back NATO to the borders of 1991 and conclude normal agreements with Russia that suit everyone. Only this will guarantee peace on the continent for generations to come.

Well, for a better understanding of the prospects, the Russian president was ordered to resume the production of medium- and shorter-range missiles. Enough to reach all European capitals, if anything.

https://ria.ru/20240701/evropa-1956478355.html

Russia is betting on hypersonics in its measures against Germany, by Evgeniy Pozdnyakov for VZGLYAD. 07.28.2024.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced Moscow's intention to respond to Washington and Berlin's actions to deploy American missiles in Germany. What could be included in Russia's measures against the militarization of Germany? Is there still a chance that Germany will abandon the idea that provokes Russia?

During the Main Naval Parade on Navy Day in St. Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared his readiness to respond to the deployment of US weapons in Germany.

According to the head of state, if Washington and Berlin's plans are implemented, important Russian facilities of state and military control will fall within the reach of Western warheads. Therefore, Moscow, responding to unfriendly steps, will consider itself free from the previously taken unilateral moratorium on the deployment of medium- and shorter-range strike weapons. The development of a number of INF systems is already in the final stage.

Putin stressed that the situation reminds him of events during the Cold War.

Recall that in early July, the US and Germany announced in a joint statement that the deployment of American long-range weapons in Germany would begin in 2026. Reuters wrote about this . With such actions, Washington "intends to demonstrate NATO's commitment to strengthening European defense."

At the same time, the “episodic deployment” will be preparation for a longer-term deployment of strike systems, which will include hypersonic capabilities and Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Against this background, four EU countries immediately agreed to develop their own INF missiles: France, Germany, Italy and Poland.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said on the Phoenix TV channel that a condition for canceling the decision to deploy American weapons could be Russia's cessation of military operations in Ukraine. Against this background, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recalled that the head of the German government is known for "ingenuous statements."

The expert community notes that the decision to deploy American weapons will probably not be reversed by either the current or subsequent German government. And Russia may respond to the increased level of threat to its security by strengthening its own hypersonic missiles.

"Most likely, we are talking about strengthening our defense contour with hypersonic systems. In this area, we still maintain leading international positions," said Vadim Kozyulin, head of the IAMP center of the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, discussing what the response to the West promised by President Putin will be.

"These technologies allow us to deliver retaliatory strikes at incredible speed. In addition, their accuracy indicators significantly exceed similar characteristics of traditional weapons.

The possibility of intercepting such warheads is extremely small. That is, Russia is capable of moving a truly formidable force to its borders, he notes.

"We should not forget about the capabilities of the fleet. Our ships have the ability to carry missiles of significant power. Their design allows them to cause serious damage to both sea and land targets. Therefore, the combination of hypersonic weapons and the Navy risks becoming a significant challenge for Western states," Kozyulin believes.

The German government has decided to accept American missiles without debate in parliament and without direct discussion with society, recalls German political scientist Alexander Rahr. "The current situation is truly surprising. The local leadership agrees to additional militarization with astonishing ease," he believes.

"At the same time, such a decision is also welcomed by the German media. Even during the Cold War, there were mass protests in Germany against the installation of US medium-range missiles. Society understood perfectly well that in the event of war, it would become a target for attack by the USSR. The concerns of the Soviet leaders were realized. Then, 40 years ago, Berlin took into account the interests of Moscow. Today, such an attitude towards Russia is absent. This country is perceived as an aggressor that must be stopped. At the same time, the Kremlin also treats Western countries with suspicion. In the current situation, Europe is becoming more vulnerable than ever," Rahr believes.

In his opinion, Germany, like the EU as a whole, wants to get hold of US weapons as soon as possible. "Germany understands that while Joe Biden is in power, it is much easier to do this than after Donald Trump's possible return to the White House. Only by 2029 do the Europeans want to establish independent production of missiles to contain Russia," the expert says.

"The rhetoric of detente, disarmament and diplomacy is completely disappearing before our eyes. Unfortunately, a peace movement capable of stopping the growing degree of escalation has not emerged. This is a truly big problem," Rahr notes.

Some German parties, such as the Alternative for Germany and some left-wing forces, have come out against the initiative with American missiles. However, the largest opposition bloc, the CDU/CSU, does not object to this proposal. Most likely, a representative of this force, traditionally more oriented towards NATO and the transatlantic partnership than Scholz's SPD, will lead Germany next year. This reduces even the theoretical probability of a new "détente" in relations between Moscow and Berlin.

https://vz.ru/politics/2024/7/28/1279609.html

What they need to do is point out that all the missiles they aim at Germany will be nuclear armed... just because these missiles will be hypersonic there is no need to be nice and spare human life.

The missiles the Americans will base there will be nuclear armed so the destruction of the country that allows such missiles to be based on its territory and pointed at Russia needs to understand it is going to get destroyed in response.

It also needs to be clear to the Americans that any missiles launched from Germany that attack Russia will be responded to by an ICBM and SLBM launch to destroy the US because those missiles are American.

Then start pointing out that a 6 ton cruise missile could be developed to fly 11,000km and be launched from anywhere inside Russia to hit any target in the US or EU at hypersonic flight speeds and it could be designed to carry multiple tiny nuclear devices on board that can be released in flight as it passes over targets.

Remember tiny nuclear devises are not Fusion... they are fission weapons and generate a much much larger amount of radioactive waste... these will be dropped on population centres in countries that are attacking Russia or are members of military organisations intending to defeat Russia.

Russia has brilliant scientists and can start work on all sorts of things that have been banned but are no longer banned because most of the international treaties have expired or been torn up by the US.

IRBM and IRCMs are smaller and lighter than bigger heavier longer ranged missiles which makes them easier and cheaper to mass produce.

If they are smart they can design some IRBMs that could have a standard booster attached to it to make it a useful satellite launcher at the end of its military life.

Moat IRBMs are ICBMs with the upper two stages and no large first stage to give it extra range... so any current ICBM or SLBM could be used as an IRBM by making it a two stage weapon instead of a three stage missile.

The west claimed it had the advantage because it has the money to outspend Russia, but Russia seems to have the production capacity to out produce the west...

New cruise missiles using scramjet motors will be rather simple to design and make... they are just heat resistant fuel tanks with control surfaces and guidance and a payload and of course the all important scramjet motor...

The US has figured out how to defeat everyone, by Victoria Nikiforova for RiaNovosti. 07.31.2024.

The US Congress' National Defence Strategy Commission has published its report on the state of the country's armed forces, and it is sad. "The first lines" directly state that the United States "cannot stand alone against either Russia or China and cannot win a war against them."

This is unpleasant news, of course, for Americanophiles, because they were raised on the myth of a world hegemon who will, if need be, fly in by helicopter, quickly occupy any country and put local "authoritarians" up against the wall. Now it turns out that no, it won't.

The commission members, who include representatives of intelligence, special services, diplomacy, and a retired general who became famous for his ability to tell the truth about the state of affairs at the front, write openly that the US is far behind Russia and China in military terms, and that this gap is growing every year: "The American military has neither the ability nor the capacity <...> to contain (the enemy) or win the battle."

It is painfully acknowledged that for the first time in decades, the City on the Hill found itself facing equal opponents. Because of this, the strategic concept has to be urgently changed. And what happened to the previous one?

Despite all the howling about "defending democracy," the real military concept of the United States since the collapse of the USSR has been the Wolfowitz Doctrine, we wrote about it at the time . This completely cannibalistic theory instructs Washington to destroy by military means any country that dares to develop at an accelerated pace.

This concept was followed like clockwork. Iraq is developing successfully ? We invade Iraq and hang the country's leader. The huge multinational Yugoslavia is thriving ? We bomb Yugoslavia. Libya has risen , becoming the most successful country in Africa ? Bam - and "we look back and see only ruins."

An important clarification: all these prosperous, successful countries were very weak militarily. The American army destroyed them without fear of response. At the same time, governments and elites insufficiently loyal to American hegemony were cleansed, and a cruel lesson was given to the remaining vassals: just make a move, and this is what will happen to you.

But while the Americans were dealing with obviously weak opponents in this way, China, Russia, Iran , and the DPRK were quietly and modestly building up their military and economic might. According to the old concept, they should have been "bombed back into the Stone Age" back in the 90s.

But it happened the way it happened. The Wolfowitz Doctrine, which was created during the era of the United States' unconditional flourishing and implied the absence of equal opponents, no longer works.

For a while, the "two wars" doctrine existed, which assumed that the United States could wage two conflicts simultaneously. However, Ukraine and the Middle East have shown that they can no longer do even that. The Ukrainian Armed Forces are in inglorious retreat, and pro-Iranian groups and local guerrillas are in full swing in the Middle East, driving American soldiers into military bases and attacking American warships.

The National Defence Strategy Commission is offering Americans a new concept of total war — "the use of force in multiple theaters of military operations." This means that a prolonged military confrontation with enemies such as Russia and China will unfold on the ground, in the air, in space, in cyberspace, and in the public sphere. The geography of these wars will also be vast, because Russia and China have allies in different regions of the world. And on all fronts, Americans must be ready to "repel the threat."

Measures that are ripe and overripe: the reindustrialization of America , urgent development of the defense industry and rapid implementation of innovations, support for private business in the military industry, building up and practicing interaction between different branches of the military, expanding recruitment into the army and even mobilizing citizens.

The plans are grand, but where will the money come from? The authors of the report note that "the American public does not even know what it will have to face in the event of a war - power outages, water shortages, food shortages, the absence of all the usual goods and services, as well as the price that must be paid to prepare for this war."

Indeed, in the States they love to make films and TV series about nuclear post-apocalypse, but it is characteristic that the survivors there exist in surprising comfort - and for some reason the electricity works, and there is plenty of food, and you can always get ice from the refrigerator, put it in a glass with expensive whiskey and stand thoughtfully by the unbroken window, admiring the sunset over the ruins of New York . The harsh reality, however, looks completely different.

The commission suggests that Americans return to the times of the Cold War, when the US military budget reached 16.9 percent of GDP (in 2025 it will be about three percent). At that time, taxes on profits in the States reached 70 percent, taxes on corporate income - up to 50. This means that today we need to raise taxes and increase spending on "defence" several times over.

In general, we have before us a full-scale strategy for mobilizing American society with belt-tightening and "guns instead of butter." This is open preparation for a full-scale world war, and the enemies of the United States are also openly named.

There are serious doubts that the US economy can withstand the reforms that the commission demands. The sky-high national debt, inflation, the rapidly growing number of poor people (it has almost doubled since 2021) - all these are real problems.

Today, Russia and China are winning the US economy - this is a very important theatre of war. There are no families left in Russia who do not have enough money for food. There are millions of such families in the United States. Are they ready to cut back even more in their expenses to finance their army? Or will military industrial production provide them with jobs and stimulate the economy as during World War II?

However, the experience of previous American interventions has demonstrated their terrible loss-making for the country. Either one or two trillion dollars were lost in the sands of Afghanistan . The fueling of the conflict in Taiwan brought losses of five trillion. Investments in Ukraine also turned out to be irretrievable. All this money is taken out of the pockets of ordinary American taxpayers and brings them nothing in return. Wars are no longer profitable. Like Roosevelt - it didn't work.

In any case, the new concept of US military strategy is a serious challenge, and it is simply impossible to treat it lightly. Russia and China have every opportunity to develop a worthy response to the Americans. And send this response to its destination.

https://ria.ru/20240731/ssha-1962950654.html

Eight Russians have been returned from detention in NATO countries, the FSB Public Relations Center announced, 08.01.2024.

FSB Public Relations Center: 8 Russians who were imprisoned in NATO countries have been returned to their homeland.

MOSCOW, August 1 - RIA Novosti. Eight Russians detained and imprisoned in a number of NATO countries have been returned to their homeland, the FSB Public Relations Center reported.

"On August 1, 2024, as a result of an exchange that took place at the airport in Ankara (Turkey), eight Russian citizens who had been detained and imprisoned in a number of NATO countries, as well as minor children, were returned to their homeland," the statement said.

https://ria.ru/20240801/fsb-1963528801.html

Biden says Russia has handed over four people to the US, 08.01.2024.

Biden: Russia handed over 4 people to US as part of exchange, including Whelan and Gershkovich.

WASHINGTON, August 1 – RIA Novosti. US President Joe Biden said that Russia handed over four people to US authorities on Thursday as part of a prisoner exchange, including Paul Whelan, Evan Gershkovich, Alsa Kurmasheva and Vladimir Kara-Murza (recognized as a foreign agent).

"Today, three American citizens and one green card holder who were unjustly imprisoned in Russia are finally returning home: Paul Whelan, Evan Gershkovich, Alsu Kurmasheva, and Vladimir Kara-Murza," Biden said in a statement released by the White House.

According to the head of state, in total, Russian authorities handed over 16 people to Western countries, including five Germans and seven Russians, whom Biden called "political prisoners." The exchange negotiations, the US president added, took place with the participation of Germany , Poland , Slovenia , Norway and Turkey.

In total, the American leader concluded, during the period of his administration, the United States returned to their homeland more than 70 "illegally detained" fellow citizens from various countries around the world.

https://ria.ru/20240801/obmen-1963547715.html

Red carpet and Putin at the foot of the plane: the redeemed Russians arrive in Moscow, 08.01.2024.

Russia and the West held a historic prisoner exchange at Ankara airport on Thursday.

Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Russian citizens exchanged with the West on Thursday in a historic prisoner exchange.

The redeemed landed at Moscow's Vnukovo airport, where they were welcomed with a red carpet and by an honor guard of the presidential regiment.

The president received the Russian citizens at the foot of the plane's steps, shook hands with them all and handed a bouquet of flowers to a prisoner who came down with her daughter.

Once at the airport building, the president congratulated the newcomers on their return to the homeland and "to those related to the Army" thanked them for their loyalty to the oath and promised to give them decorations.

The exchange was carried out under the coordination of the National Intelligence Organization of Turkey. Turkish media reports that 26 prisoners from seven countries were exchanged: the United States, Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Norway, Russia and Belarus.

As part of the exchange, Spanish-Russian journalist Pablo González has been exchanged "for an American journalist" and sent to Russia, "his country of birth," his lawyer, Gonzalo Boye, told RT.

Turkish media reports that 26 prisoners from seven countries (the United States, Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Norway, Russia and Belarus) were exchanged. According to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), the West exchanged eight Russian citizens.

According to reports, they were sent to Russia, among others:

• Artiom and Anna Dultsev, sentenced in Slovenia to one year and seven months in prison for alleged espionage;

• Vadim Krasikov, sentenced in Germany to life imprisonment for the murder of former Chechen commander Zelimkhan Khangoshvili, who fought against Russia during the second Chechen campaign;

• Vladislav Klyushin, who in 2023 received a nine-year prison sentence in the US, accused of participating in an insider trading scheme;

• Mikhail Mikushin sentenced in Norway for alleged espionage
Roman Seleznyov was sentenced in the US to 27 years in prison for cyber fraud, including stealing credit card data and organizing online scams;

• Vadim Konoschenok, accused of illegally buying electronic products for the Russian military-industrial complex, was facing up to 30 years in prison in the US.

Yandex Translate from Spanish.

https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/518046-putin-reune-rusos-canjeados-occidente.