Dear Saker,
I am so glad you accepted being proven wrong in your (relative) pessimism you held only a few weeks ago, as you now declared in your “Week 20”.
My gut feeling told me at the moment Putin started this campaign (to a considerable surprise for practically everyone, as he broke in a measured but daring way with years of principled self-restraint) that this would mark a turning point in geopolitics and a huge bright shine of hope at the very moment, where things turned to the markedly worse for my country, Germany (refugees, and “refugees”). I learnt from you, but also knew in my heart, that (a) Putin meant business (as he always does), (b) Putin would not act rash or get provoked by or into anything (the campaign starting slowly being NO negative sign), and (c) whenever Putin picks a fight, he intends to win, and he has as a great a chance of winning as any core resistance to the empire has (as the maniacs still have their clutches on the nuclear trigger).
I have never wearied of my basic optimism and I’m so happy you even sort of “declared defeat”.
Though it’s certainly an honorable way to err on the wary side; after all, as a public writer, you cannot just disseminate “gut feelings”, as a closet know-it-all like me. I just got the impression all along that you did branded a bit more people than really deserved it as bravado patriots and flag wavers. ! (Know what I mean?)
A great cheers to you, and keep up the good work,
xxxxxxx
Dear xxxxxxx,
Thanks for your email and kind words. Alas, I think that you are misreading me. The fact that the Russians did better and more than I expected them in no way changes the fact that there were, and still are, plenty of flag waving hurray patriots who 20 weeks ago never understood how dangerous this entire operation was and who still do not understand how dangerous and tenuous the situation still is. Think of a tightrope walker who manages to cross over a precipice on the day of high winds. I admire him and I am delighted that he made it, but those who expressed smug confidence just based on the fact that they liked the tightrope walker never understood how dangerous it all was. Please believe me that I am absolutely delighted that the Russians did as well as they did, I could not have hoped for better, but I am still acutely aware of how fantastically tenuous the situation still is. So far, the US and his own military commanders have, apparently, reigned Erdogan in. But in less than 24 hours we still might be looking at a nuclear war breaking out. As we did when the Turks shot down the Russian Su-24. So while I readily admit that, to my delight, the Russians did better than I thought, I do not in any way admit that the flag-waving cheerleaders whom I call the “hurry patriots” were right. They were wrong then and they still are wrong today.
Kind regards,
The Saker
That’s it… things are much easier when watched through a computer screen…
precise!
» how dangerous this entire operation «
Well, I’m not saying it’s not dangerous, but Putin said, at one point, that everything had been factored in. And I took everything to include the most obvious risks such as Turkey, Israel, Uncle Sam and his Euro poodles.
If we assume that nukes are the real deal then Uncle Sam can solve the problem with one strike on Hmeymim, taking into account that the counterstrike will destroy Incirlik, from where Uncle Sam would have quickly evacuated his aircraft, leaving the Turkey to roast in the blast.
On the other hand, if we assume that (a) such magic bullets aren’t available and that (b) modern Usanian warfare heavily relies on electronics and radio communication and that (c) Russia has developed highly effective electronic warfare counter-measures (as showcased by the USS Donald Cock incident – or was it USS Donald Kook? :) and that (d) Russia has developed highly effective anti-air systems such as the S-300 and S-400 and that (e) Russia has torpedos and missiles that can unceremoniously send any arrogant US vessels, including aircraft carriers, to the seafloor, and also destroy any US military bases in the region – then it appears that Uncle Sam’s military is currently unable to successfully counter the Russian initiative.
Yes, Uncle Sam could do something, but he would suffer a defeat, which would cost him his prestige, his status, his nimbus. Imagine an aircraft carrier sinks, or two, or three. Uncle Sam would be shown to be militarily much weaker than what his boasting would have you believe.
Don’t know if that’s true, I’m not a military guy, but I figured out over the years that boasting and hoaxing are major tools in Uncle Sam’s arsenal, whereas Russia, for some reason, does not resort to these tactics, except the occasional reminder of how Russia can reduce Uncle Sam to nuclear ash, which gives Uncle Sam a perfect excuse to back down, à la “We can’t risk nuclear war with Russia!”
Oh dear, Saker:
You again seem to miss the point of this genuine complement from a self-confessed “closet know-it-all”.
The comment was not about your views on what you refer to as “flag-waving cheerleader … I call the “hurry patriots””. They stand as your well-publicised views. The point was about your open admission of your conservative approach which gets it wrong much of the time that there is a significant ‘apparent’ discontinuity in the unfolding events. Open and transparent and a top notch analyst and communicator you are (in your chosen field). Intuitive and perceptive you appear not.
I’ve lurked around here for long enough now (from your old blog days) to see a pattern. Often at key geopolitical moments you are out camping in the forest (real or not) and only then, after some time has lapsed, do we see and hear an opinion. No complaints there — just the way it is with you, it seems. Indeed, it is a cautious conservative position that is well adapted to the professional military intelligence role you claim to have served in the past.
This well-known statement could well have been addressed to you I suspect: “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
Based on your blog performance, what you deride in this commenter’s complement, is foresight — an entirely different form of knowing (than linear post-event analysis) based on informed intuition and gut feel, which, according to the Cassandra principle, can only sound crazy until it becomes the reality du jour. As the writer says: indeed, respect to you with your responsibility and gravitas in slowly and cautiously dragging the linear thinkers from the past into the safe knowable present.
However, as another one of these intuitive “closet know-it-all’s” — and absolutely not one of your flag-waving cheerleader “hurry patriots” — I also saw the general strategic design some years ago when the first ‘rope-a-dope’ strategic moves were made and the end outcome was clearly an emerging Kurdistan in concert with Pete Escobar’s “Pipelinestan” thesis. Pepe’s Dadaism is right out there and art@work. He sees it unfolding and describes the game. You apparently see it unfolded and describe the events. Both useful perspectives (depending on purpose). And with all these foresighting hypothesis – the grounding is in assigning probabilities and declaring assumptions.
So, I expect a critical bashing from your 24×7 onsite blog fan club — the “Hooray Saker-ite” community — but nonetheless, achieving the intuitive insights is very much dependent on sites like yours (posts and subsequent comments). So, thank you.
And, as a post note, why I believe the Russian progress is so easy to ‘see’ in advance for reasonably informed “closet know-it-all’s” is largely due to (I suspect) that the Russians also use a high degree of this intuitive insight function in their strategic decision making. No doubt they also scenario out all the main options and risks as per ‘military intel’ — a communication strategy from those who intuit to those who don’t — but it’s so very mechanical and not exactly foresight: more strategic risk management and policy resilience testing.
Whether Putin himself has the intuitive perceptive features active, or he just listens well to those whom have, is less clear. But he is a Russian living in Russia and following a guided values-based path according to the re-emergent Russian core culture. He can’t go wrong unless there is a critical flaw in the culture – he has the mandate from heaven (for the moment) because he is well grounded. And, no doubt like Pierre Wack of Royal Dutch Shell fame, also a talent to disguise his future-making activities. In Wack’s case, with the Saudi cartel in the 1970’s oil embargo which saw Shell rise in rank from 7th the 2nd place in oil production value – not bad shareholder value improvement (and in today’s internet world likely to get him and Shell investigated which is why I suspect, myths aside, they down played it to hell). Putin is clearly several steps ahead of the ideology blinded money-changers ensconced in the DC Temple.
So while Prometheus works from Moscow the strategic future is Putin’s to mould. And while Epimetheus is opening Pandora’s box in Washington DC 2017 (or maybe Trump or Bernie will get the oval office?) then Obama’s neo-con Wall St gang will be left to just study what Putin does. Oh how far the mighty bald eagle has fallen under the Black Drone Assassin (and with a Moslem father to boot!). Now its ass is also as bald and bare for all to see. It surely is a dramatic universe and a great cosmic comedy (and farce even) for those with eyes to see.
Btw, there is an Arabic word “Mahrus” (Mahrous, Mahroos) which is both the name of the Arab horse and also means “protected by God”. I suspect Mr Putin may well qualify for such … he certainly appears to ‘Trust in God’ as he crosses the tight rope you describe — something no longer praxis in Disneyland!
End of soft-rant (and yes, it is a full moon here).
Yours sincerely,
Another “closet know-it-all”
Excellent comment ‘know it all.’ You said it perfectly.
@Saker
Thank you for your work. Unlike the NY Times, you are indispensible.
This was a formidable comment. A lot of food for thought; and I “intuit” that we are essentially d’accord. though I am both hesitant to say so (for fear of once more misunderstanding” Saker, whom I really want to praise, however qualifiedly) and because I so often feel like the child dabbling into adults’ discussions.
As you write, for the time being, Putin has the “mandate of heaven”. He is kind of a “Judge” for “spiritual Israel”. No formal ruler (since Christianity is a worldwide straying flock), but a kind of redeemer, a helper in direst distress. It’s only I am no longer so sure how exactly the power of God and the power of the devil relate to one another in this troubled world. This seems to be a very complicated arrangement, even proceding from strictly Biblical terms but reading them with the wisdom of the heart and the intuition of a (dabbling) closet-know-it-all.
I read your post carefully, and I enjoyed it.
Mr. X speaking,
first, dear Saker, I want to thank you for elevating my input into the open here on your blog.
As first I wrote to you personally, I was not too anxious to portray your position impeccably correct. So please forgive the slight misconstruction.
But there is one point where I think YOU misunderstood me. During these past weeks I got the impression that you erected a kind of dichotomy between flag wavers (hurray patriots) and the realists who are first and foremost keenly aware of the dangers of Putin’s undertaking to the poin of (it seemed to me) suspecting that this time, Putin went a step too far.
I fall into none of these two categories.
September 30th was a “happy day” for me, not because of any illusions about the objective dangers of the work ahead, but because the (up to now) dominant faction in the Western-based cryptocracy has long ago decided that “Russia is an enemy that can be defeated”. I took this as a given long time ago, and this implies being aware that either the Westerners prevail or at some point or other their onslaught must be broken, stalled or dispelled, until such happy time as some kind of final victory is possible, which may only come in the form of cracks and splits within the Western cryptocracy itself, helped along by tectonic shifts in the structural balance of (economic and civilizational) power, which is shifting eastwards due to the fact that this time the Cold-War party engaged in wrecking the foundations of its people(s) is the West.
From this basic idea I perceived Putin’s decision to break with his long-time pattern of absolute self-restraint with regards to military engagement outside of his home turf as AN ENCOURAGING SIGN, because it means that Russia will have a more defensible position than if they waited a few years and regime changes more and faced the choice between surrender and nuclear first strike (against the West) when challenged at home and with her back to the wall.
Of course, I am aware of the precariousness of the undertaking and the flimsiness of chances of ultimate success. But I am positive that none of this was exacerbated by Putin’s decision to turn the defense of the motherland (and by extension of the whole of humanty which is defenseless on its own) into a pro-active enterprise.
Quite to the contrary, I find that our chances of success have markedly improved.
And, by the way, a little afterword, with a monumental implication, criticising no less than the overwhelming mainstream of internet-based opposition against the imperialist, NWO, grab for total power: call me naive, but I find that their Achilles heel is exactly that very point, which most of them believe to be their strength: their so-called realism. The situation has worsened steadily over the last decade; ten years ago the outlook were almost even; now you have to search like for the needle in a hay stack to find a single well-informed blogger observing the discipline of reality-based optimism.
Some fights are for such high stakes that it simply does not matter in the first place what exactly are the odds of winning or losing, but wheter anyone with a human heart can afford to loose. Or whether their is any preparation available for life after losing.
Since I reckon shrewdly and rationally that life in a world where the Anglo-Zionist empire has got rid of any last strategic resistance is not worth living, but death being preferable to it, I am just not interested in hearing why some people find it is the most likely outcome. IT IS NO VIRTUE TO INTIMIDATE PEOPLE AND RENDER THEM HOPELESS AND THUS HELPLESS. As little as is left of my religious convictions of my youth, I have still enough faith in God to believe the He did not create this world to let it fall under total control of those who will not only kill the bodies but prove able to corrupt and ruin ANY soul, far beyond the worst depictions from the book of Revelation (which, at least, foresees a LOT of martyrs under Antichrist).
Wow, sehr gutes Englisch.
Makes me feel like a non-speaker.
Interesting thoughts btw.
@ X from Germany:
Good comment Mr X.
I was one of the “flag-wavers” …not really, but for sake of argument, let’s say I was.
Back when Russia decided to get directly involved in Syria, my reasoning at that time wasn’t that this move was a certain winner without serious pitfalls* ahead (*by serious pitfalls and dangers read: the Hegemon & Co. NOT! The head-choppers, who I was fairly certain could be wiped out, not without difficulty, but fairly easy)
…as I was saying; my reasoning was that: 1- it was a time to celebrate since ‘our side’ doesn’t usually have many reasons to celebrate, might as well do some “flag-waving” when we can. Because for all we knew, it could be short lived. 2- someone has to be the first one to stand up to the bully and break his momentum, in order for others – also sick and tired of the bully – to join in and stand beside you.
And that’s precisely what it looked like when Russia quit d!cking around and got into Syria.
Granted; it is a global shame that once again the responsibility of such bold and potentially dangerous act has to fall on Russia’s shoulders. I’m not a fan of that. Russia has done enough as it is, it’s about time someone else step-up to the plate.
But alas, who can? China? Iran? Not them! They’re too interested in breaking deals with the Hegemon itself and lifting “sanctions”… *eye-roll*
Who? Venezuela? They’re under some hardcore economic attack from the Hegemon and so far they’re losing…
Who then? The Greeks? They can’t even figure out that they’ll be better off outside – never mind the Euro zone – but the EU itself. Despite all the warnings they’ve had from the likes of Michael Hudson and others…
Who? Brazil? Another one of the BRICS countries currently under a program of severe ‘regime change’ against Dilma presidency… I could go on.
In short; us so-called “flag-wavers” were indeed uncharacteristically happy to learn that someone, ANYONE, finally stood up to the bully!
Big deal! So, sue us!
The Doomsday Clock has been stuck in less than 10 minutes to midnight for sometime now. What difference does it really make, anyhow? To be fair.
-TL2Q
PS: I second Martin thoughts. Your command of the English language is awe inspiring. Kudos, Mr X! :)
Mr X, Brilliant words of passion. Almost spiritual, and highly inspirational. I feel the same way, but cannot express it as well as you.
When Putin and Obama both spoke at the UN I knew something was about to happen. Putin is always careful in his choice of words, so at the UN when he said we won’t stand for it anymore it implied some action to stop the West was coming. And it did come in Syria.
The multifarious coalescing East is clearly saying that it will no longer bend its knee to the West. Those days are over. It is also obvious that the East sees the US and its vassals preparing for war so even though the East knows what a world war will cost in death and destruction it also knows that defeat is not an option and it has to prepare for war.
Russia has checkmated the West in Syria. Now we wait to see if the West gets the message to back off, or continues on its march to war with the East.
The US and its Anglosphere and EU vassals and its proxies in the MENA have caused immense suffering and death to millions. In the US people around me couldn’t care less and are content to fight over scraps from the US Deep State table. All US candidates for POTUS support more death and destruction.
We are now at a very dangerous inflection point. The East cannot back up and the West will not stop. A much more destructive conflict probably cannot be avoided. Let’s just hope that the lunatics in the West don’t destroy everything.
Super interesting letters.
I think even I can recognize in that Anonymous talking about the horse “Mahroos” an old friend senior strategist …. but maybe I’m wrong.
In any case, I am not a closet know-it-all , in any case, a small chest learn-it-all, and I am accustomed to inform me well, the better I can, but ultimately, as you can never know everything, I usually can not ignore also my guts, sensations and perceptions……
In the end, one has to take some risks and make a move, for example, to expose the traitors ….who has tried that you are out?, or to be sure who has sold you to the Vermin …. obviously…..who has more personal data on you?…..
Yes, you risk provoking the Vermin to the limit and lossing your life, but as the other closet-know-it-all, Mr. X , says, who would want to survive in a post-Russia world, with Nazis threatening you everywhere and the Anglozionists in charge?
Commenter,
We have noted your comment about capitals. The Saker moderation policy states no capitals as it is like shouting. Please click on the + sign when writing your comment and it gives several other ways to emphasize words – like bold, italics etc. We have to regularly edit capitals on many other comments too – not just yours. The Saker himself has asked us to keep an eye on capitals. If you have any questions about moderation – please contact the Head of Moderation or the Saker. It is not my place to discuss other moderators and how they moderate.Thank you. Mod TR.
Yes, you risk provoking the Vermin to the limit and lossing your life….
“I am not afraid of death, but would not want to die in some obscure or pointless way”.
Isabelle Eberhardt
“but maybe I’m wrong.”
Perhaps mistaken is a better word to use.
Friend senior strategist, where you venture?
I am being attacked from all fronts, worst than ever, clearly they want me out from writing my oppinions here.
Give me a hand, comrade!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bmCi7vRWKo
How about you and your associates, are you all well and having a good time?
I hope so!
» Think of a tightrope walker who manages to cross over a precipice on the day of high winds. « — Saker
» precariousness of the undertaking and the flimsiness of chances of ultimate success « — X from Germany
So do you think the Russian leadership would have risked this endeavour if the chances of success were indeed so small and the risk so high?
Putin said, shortly after the Su-24 ambush incident, if I remember correctly, that everything had been calculated, factored in, taken into account. As it should.
Analysis, assessment, planning, preparation, engagement, execution. There you go, the double APE methodology. A recipe for success.
Putin is not going to take Russia on a dangerous tightrope walk. The good old chessboard metaphor is much more appropriate. So have trust in him.
By the way, thanks for cryptocracy (only ever mentioned once on this blog up to this day), a useful complement to go with plutocracy, kleptocracy & pseudocracy to explain the true meaning of (real existierende) democracy.
» IT IS NO VIRTUE TO INTIMIDATE PEOPLE AND RENDER THEM HOPELESS AND THUS HELPLESS. «
Indeed. But this is precisely part of the enemy’s propaganda:
» Owning this massive structure of actors and entertainers were of course the planners of the Greatest Illusion ever created on Planet Earth in modern times. They provided pick pockets and shucksters to walk through the massive throngs of people in this Super Mall, relieving many of their wallets, unattended purses and belongings. They set up in all of the halls of this massive virtual structure great halls of mirrors of every kind, and had many fog machines for the fear effect. Anywhere you went in this massive super mall, named the 911 truth movement, was fear, fear and more fear. «
The 9/11 Truth Movement – The 30 Year Conspiracy – Phil Jayhan & Larry McWilliams
Und für meine lieben Landsleute:
Rainer Mausfeld: Warum schweigen die Lämmer?
Thanks for your reply, dear compatriot.
A few remarks: With “flimsiness of chances of ultimate success” I meant the perspective of final disempowerment of the ruling elite, not “just” victory in Syria. Otherwise I could plausibly be accused of mystification to the point of contradiction within my own words. I agree with Saker that even victory in Syria is a long shot, and a precarious endeavor, but it’s not an off-chance, but indeed a plausible outcome, as we see now coming into view.
“Cryptocracy” – I have the word from Michael Hoffman, (http://revisionistreview.blogspot.de/). Do your own research on him, in case you don’t know him. He is a teasure of personality, his (Christian) faith is much more unshaken than mine. He certainly would support what that other person using the word cryptocracy on the blog (see your link) said about the anti-Christian thrust, indeed its anti-Christian obsession of the Cryptocracy and about Zionism’s vice only being a derivative of what is wrong already in Talmudism (a standpoint few dare take in our days), but on the whole I can’t follow Mr. Hoffman on his unambiguously positive take of the Old Testament and of its (as he claims) contrary nature to the Talmud. In my eyes, the Old Testament is an ambivalent book: there are vast portions which simply lend themselves to an interpretation redolent of the abomination Talmudism has made of it, even though Talmudism is yet a travesty of the better parts of the bible, which includes the Old Testament, where they cohabit with the terrible ones.
Call me confused; perhaps I am. Yet perhaps the confusion was allowed by God to creep in the Bible itself, despite the vehement protestations of good Christians like Michael Hoffman whom I hold in high esteem.
Excellent comments and mature discussions… enjoyed it with my virtual coffee at the “moveable cafe” .
Top of the line analysis and petty grievances all in the one place. Like trash and treasure market.
The difference between the average punter chewin their fingernails or cheering will do what in the world scheme of things?