June 9, 2023

Why NATO-Trained Armies Lose Wars And Why Ukraine's Criminal Leaders Should Beg For Mercy


NATO excels at psychological warfare operations and clandestine terrorism. They win wars on television. Their main battlefields are the global airwaves and the minds of men.

But Ukraine will soon learn, as Afghanistan eventually did, NATO is not any good at actually fighting.

If Ukraine fought alone, without any NATO assistance, it would have a greater chance of defeating Russia.

There is no greater shame for a nation than to be used as a proxy in a larger war. Such an indignity has fallen on noble Ukraine. Almost a decade ago its sovereignty and national mind were illegally captured by the evil pedophiles who rule Washington and London. 

Since then Ukraine been used like a blunt object to hurt Russia. It has been reduced to a mindless slave to wage a war it has no chance of winning. It has only lasted this long because of weak Russian leadership.

Russia has fought this war very patiently and sheepishly. It doesn't even call it a war. Putin keeps using the term "special military operation" for both political and legal reasons.

But regardless of what branding it uses to placate international legal bodies and the world media, it stands to gain massive pieces of Ukrainian territory at the end of this familial bloodletting. So the question has to be asked, what then? Where does the Russian march inside Ukraine stop? 

If Russia doesn't seize Kiev and restore law and order it will make a grave mistake. 



An excerpt from, "The Afghan Military Was Built Over 20 Years. How Did It Collapse So Quickly?" New York Times, August 13, 2021:

But even before that, the systemic weaknesses of the Afghan security forces — which on paper numbered somewhere around 300,000 people, but in recent days have totaled around just one-sixth of that, according to U.S. officials — were apparent. These shortfalls can be traced to numerous issues that sprung from the West’s insistence on building a fully modern military with all the logistical and supply complexities one requires, and which has proved unsustainable without the United States and its NATO allies.

An excerpt from, "How the Afghan Army Collapsed Under the Taliban’s Pressure" By Max Boot, CFR, August 16, 2021:

The fall of Afghanistan rightly raises serious questions about the mistakes the United States made during its twenty-year effort to train the Afghan military. The U.S. armed forces will need to process lessons learned, and there will need to be a great deal of critical self-examination. The U.S. training effort had many shortcomings, such as deficiencies in language and cultural knowledge and lack of expertise in training police rather than soldiers, which hurt local-level security. In addition, the U.S. effort concentrated too much on teaching tactical infantry skills while neglecting the kind of higher-level expertise in logistics, planning, training, and command and control that is needed to maintain a military force.

The U.S. training effort was also hindered by factors beyond its control, including the lack of education in one of the world’s poorest countries and the pervasiveness of corruption. As a police officer in Kandahar recently told the New York Times, “We are drowning in corruption.”

Video Title: Ukraine Can't Win War Against Russia: Hungary's Orban. Source: Bloomberg Television. Date Published: May 23, 2023.

June 8, 2023

The Corpse of Islam, The Skeleton of Nazism, And Brzezinski's Arc of Crisis

Supporting terrorism, using water as a weapon, can lead to short-term gains, but it's a slippery slope. In the end it only leads to chaos.

Chaos is the weapon of the weak, the rejected, and the desperate. 

NATO has imposed chaos and sought destruction from the steppes of Ukraine to the mountains of Afghanistan. It has brought out of the depths of hell the ghosts of Islam and Nazism. Russia is always the target, but its real victims are weak nations like Afghanistan and Ukraine that are used up and thrown away.

Its reign of global terror didn't start in 2014, or 2001, or 1989, or 1979. It started upon its hollow victory at the end of WWII.

Since then it has only brought terrorism into the world.

And terror invites terror. Recent history has imprinted this truth onto the books of nations and kingdoms. 

Countries that pursue the policy of supporting terrorist groups, whether nearby, or on the other side of the planet, deserve no sympathy when those groups grow a mind of their own and start acting independently. Included in this list are the United States, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, England, and France. 

Pakistan's decades-long assistance of the Taliban is a documented fact. The Islamic Republic of Iran has also befriended the terrorist outfit in the wake of the American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Both regimes took a short-sighted policy approach and they are now suffering the consequences of their strategic stupidity.

Israel's creation of Hamas is also a historical truth. So when Hamas and its kindred Jihadist groups blast misguided rockets towards Israel every blue moon it's hard to feel sympathy for this tiny nation.

The colonial powers like the U.S., England, Germany, and France, all of which have a history of funding, manipulating, and arming Islamic terrorist groups, have no one to blame but themselves for the disintegration of their once homogeneous societies. 

They raised a corpse from the grave, and directed it towards their political, economic, and ideological enemies. 

Now that corpse is more animated. It has ventured beyond the grave of memory and into the open field of history. Its evil gaze can be directed to a specific target, but for how long? It is at its core a mindless and unpredictable virus. 

Pakistan, and its owners in London and Washington, may think they can direct it towards India, China, or Russia, but they will ultimately fail. They won't be able to constrain the movement and transformations of terrorists. 

Israel learned this lesson in the aftermath of its dealings with Hamas. Iran is learning it in Afghanistan where the Taliban have created a Mad Max environment. Turkey will learn it in due time. 

Those regimes, armies, and groups that have been taught the dark power of terrorism by Washington, London, and NATO will regret it.

June 7, 2023

Something Stinks

Get ready for "climate lockdowns." These global death cult freaks will turn the outside world into a living hell to advance their depopulation agenda.

June 3, 2023

How Statesmen Think: The Psychology of International Politics


Robert Jervis (April 30, 1940 – December 9, 2021) was an American political scientist who was the Adlai E. Stevenson Professor of International Politics in the Department of Political Science at Columbia University. Jervis was co-editor of the Cornell Studies in Security Affairs, a series published by Cornell University Press.

He is known for his contributions to political psychology, international relations theory, nuclear strategy, and intelligence studies. According to the Open Syllabus Project, Jervis is the twelfth most-frequently cited author on college syllabi for political science courses.

Video Title: How Statesmen Think: The Psychology of International Politics. Source: WoodrowWilsonCenter. Date Published: April 5, 2019. Description:

Decision-makers and scholars often assume that diplomatic signals are received as they are intended. They have faith in both their ability to convey their messages to others and to correctly interpret others’ behavior. Robert Jervis’ research shows that this is not true and that international politics often resembles the famous Japanese movie Rashomon. Perceptions are strongly influenced by people’s theories and expectations on the one hand and their personal and political needs on the other. Both historical scholarship and policy-making would be improved by an understanding of how people perceive. 

Robert Jervis is Adlai E. Stevenson Professor of International Politics at Columbia University. His most recent book is How Statesmen Think, and his other books include Why Intelligence Fails: Lessons from the Iranian Revolution and the Iraq War, American Foreign Policy in a New Era, System Effects: Complexity in Political Life, and The Meaning of the Nuclear Revolution. He was President of the American Political Science Association in 2000-01, and was awarded honorary degrees by the University of Venice and Oberlin College. In 2006 he received the National Academy of Science’s tri-annual award for behavioral sciences contributions to avoiding nuclear war. 

June 2, 2023

What is New in War Aims of Ukraine and Russia?


Put on a suit you jackass.

Video Title: What is New in War Aims of Ukraine and Russia? Source: Vladimir Brovkin. Date Published: May 30, 2023. Description: 

In the context of the anticipated Ukrainian offensive new elements appeared in the war aims of Ukraine and Russia. This video is devoted to these new elements. What is going to happen after Donbas becomes Ukrainian? How will the Ukrainians deal with the Russian population in Crimea? If the Russians go into an offensive, where do they want to stop? Dr. Brovkin is a Russian born American Historian, now retired, used to serve as an Associate Professor of Soviet History at Harvard University, and the author of many books on Russian History, such as Russia After Lenin, Behind the Frontlines of the Civil War, The Mensheviks After October, dear Comrades, and others all available on Amazon.