A simple question – try to answer it!

Isn’t there a likely third option: a variety of covert Russian interventions that prevent the nationalists from gaining control of the East, while denying NATO a public relations victory that can be used to easily justify proliferation of overt hostile actions? Meanwhile, elections in Europe, referendums in Ukraine.

It’s not the Junta nor the rabid Nationalists nor the fascists nor the Ukrainian oligarchs who are driving events in Ukraine. They are bit players, necessary for the production, but expendable. Events have been driven to this point by the Empire, with its primary pompous agenda of achieving/maintaining/expanding global domination.
They’ve been preparing and poisoning the situation in the Ukraine for many years now.

The global domination policy is still operationally influential, but it shows more and more signs of being repudiated, both by the global commons, and more and more countries. The central tactical reliance on the combination of lying continually with a straight face and the certifiable supreme crime of wars of aggression, direct and by proxy, is running out of steam. You have to have a lot of money and massive numbers of complicit fools and monsters, killers and liars, to sustain that approach.

And among the benefited hangers on, the fans of the Empire, even these can be fickle. They will only keep applauding over the years if the key actors have at least some minor competence. When the Empire features as star of the show the likes of Kerry mumbling in that twilight zone where make believe, stupidity, deceit and madness merge, your audience will melt away. Time is on Russia’s side.

The previous near complete control of the narratives by the presstitude media is in decline. Alongside the blogosphere etc, here and there some cracks of light of truth are emanating even from MSM – shocking stuff. I dial hopped the other night while driving and to my surprise some unknown American radio talk show host seemed more sympathetic to the Russians and Putin than to his ‘own’ US government.

One overarching question that hangs like a madman’s gigantic sword of Damocles over all of us pertains to US policy and hidden pressures regarding nuclear weapons. Since the end of the cold war, very important nuclear weapons policy changes have been made by the US. These amount to an obvious attempt to create an actual US nuclear weapons overwhelming primacy. The insane attempt is to reach the point where Russia has to choose between surrender or submit to being destroyed.

That is, the cold war never ended for US military planners. The nominal end of the cold war marked the transition from a balance of power to the attempt at clear nuclear supremacy. The ‘Star Wars’ stuff, missile shields, installing more accurate larger yield warheads on Trident II D-5 missiles on submarines, relaxing central control over usage of nuclear weapons, placing nuclear bombers back on alert from ready status: These are some elements of what the Russians understand is targeted specifically and primarily at them.

When JFK was under pressure to sign off on a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, he refused, called the advocates crazy, and was murdered.

Many of the people in power in the US and among their vassals seem pretty deranged.

The problem is that the nuclear weapons complex includes now in effect hair trigger components, so that false perceptions, technical failures as well as deliberate policy can usher in usage of nuclear weapons.

Not quite by way of aside, those Ukrainians who can should be very busy soon putting in their vegetable gardens, because there will come surely come a cold winter, and it’s one thing to be cold in winter, but much much worse to be cold and hungry.

The question arises of accidental escalation in a circumstance where NATO and Russia square off in a shooting war. The other question arises that asks if it is really accidents or intentions. The Americans have been thought to use tactical nuclear weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq and Israel is thought to have used them in Lebanon and possibly Syria. Here are two links in regards to NATO and nuclear weapons.

http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/aircraft-could-be-given-nato-tactical-nuclear-arms-mission/

Nuclear weapons continue to be a “core component” of NATO’s deterrence against aggression in Europe, the alliance stated in its 2012 Deterrence and Defense Posture Review. At the same time, the allies also said they were prepared to consider reductions to the current number of tactical atomic arms assigned to the defense of NATO nations.

Defense Department spokeswoman Cynthia Smith in an e-mail to Global Security Newswire said Welsh’s comments were in line with these U.S. and NATO policies.

And: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2014_01-02/Trapped-NATO-Russia-and-the-Problem-of-Tactical-Nuclear-Weapons

NATO does not confirm numbers, but it is believed that the United States deploys 150 to 200 gravity bombs under nuclear sharing arrangements in Europe. The alliance has declared its intention to engage Russia in a process of confidence building on tactical nuclear weapons in order to pave the way for future reductions. The allies, however, will contemplate changes to the nuclear posture only on the basis of Russian reciprocity.

Russia probably deploys around 2,000 operational tactical nuclear weapons and may have many more in reserve. Moscow insists that a dialogue on tactical nuclear weapons must be part of a broader settlement of differences over NATO’s missile defense plans and the asymmetries in conventional capabilities between Russia and NATO. Recently, Russia reportedly has raised the stakes by moving short-range Iskander missiles, which could carry nuclear warheads, toward NATO member countries. On December 19, however, Russian President Vladimir Putin denied press reports that the missiles have been deployed on the territory of the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, which is situated between NATO members Lithuania and Poland.[1]

In combination, NATO’s conditionality and Russian intransigence have created an impasse over how to deal with the nuclear weapons deployed in Europe. Almost 25 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the contribution of these weapons to nuclear deterrence and the core function of preventing conventional war in Europe has vanished. Nevertheless, both sides have been unwilling to take meaningful steps toward the elimination of Europe’s nuclear legacy.

In the long run, NATO’s nuclear posture is not sustainable. The hardware supporting nuclear sharing arrangements is aging. U.S. plans to modernize the B61 gravity bombs deployed in host countries Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey could potentially trigger public opposition to NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangements.

The alliance, therefore, must re-evaluate the linkages involved in its nuclear weapons policy toward Russia, clarify its goals in arms control and force posture, and, more broadly, reassess the usefulness of nuclear forces associated with its deterrence posture.

Whatever happens over the short term, the interesting part starts to happen when the Ukrainian government imposes IMF austerity measures on the country and then has to use Right Sector thugs to put down protests in WESTERN Ukraine as a result.
From what I have seen, the average Ukrainian soldier is too decent and has no desire to take part in Yugoslavia 2.0 so cannot be used either in eastern or western Ukraine for brutal repression which only leaves western-trained radical neo-fascits to do the job.
All this means that so long as the eastern cities can hold out, time will work to Russia’s advantage.

К событиям на Украине…
КЛЕВЕТНИКАМ РОССИИ.

О чем шумите вы, народные витии?
Зачем анафемой грозите вы России?
Что возмутило вас? волнения Литвы?
Оставьте: это спор славян между собою,
Домашний, старый спор, уж взвешенный судьбою,
Вопрос, которого не разрешите вы.

Уже давно между собою
Враждуют эти племена;
Не раз клонилась под грозою
То их, то наша сторона.
Кто устоит в неравном споре:
Кичливый лях, иль верный росс?
Славянские ль ручьи сольются в русском море?
Оно ль иссякнет? вот вопрос.

Оставьте нас: вы не читали
Сии кровавые скрижали;
Вам непонятна, вам чужда
Сия семейная вражда;
Для вас безмолвны Кремль и Прага;
Бессмысленно прельщает вас
Борьбы отчаянной отвага –
И ненавидите вы нас…
За что ж? ответствуйте; за то ли,
Что на развалинах пылающей Москвы
Мы не признали наглой воли
Того, под кем дрожали вы?
За то ль, что в бездну повалили
Мы тяготеющий над царствами кумир
И нашей кровью искупили
Европы вольность, честь и мир?….

Вы грозны на словах — попробуйте на деле!
Иль старый богатырь, покойный на постеле,
Не в силах завинтить свой измаильский штык!
Иль русского царя уже бессильно слово?
Иль нам с Европой спорить ново?
Иль русской от побед отвык?
Иль мало нас? Или от Перми до Тавриды,
От финских хладных скал до пламенной Колхиды,
От потрясенного Кремля
До стен недвижного Китая,
Стальной щетиною сверкая,
Не встанет русская земля?…
Так высылайте ж нам, витии,
Своих озлобленных сынов:
Есть место им в полях России
Среди нечуждых им гробов.

А.С. Пушкин, 1831

If Russia does not intervene: the population of East and South Ukraine will be suppressed, even brutally, while some window-dressing rights will be granted for the sake of Western audience.

If Russia does intervene: federalization, independence or accession to Russia will happen.

I prefer the latter, because the former means that Russia itself would be the next in line to be “Westernized”. The former will increase West’s appetite, it will grow more arrogant and ambitious.

Eastern or Southern Ukrainian people are going to suffer either way. But the blame for that should be put on the West.

From Voltairenet.org

Ukraine Crisis Accelerating the Restructuring of the World
by Pierre Charasse

http://www.voltairenet.org/article183542.html

There is already talk of Putin coming to Obama’s rescue, as he did in Syria.

The EU is a politically weak 28-headed beast. Aready the cracks are showing, while Russia speaks with one voice.

The pro war Ziocons are losing their influence. Like Bandar Bush they could find themselves sidelined.

The Western media machine continues to bleed credibility with every false pronouncement. Propaganda can’t make WW3 ‘popular.’ The West is slowly adjusting to the reality that a political settlement between Russia and the West will be necessary. Some are already looking for a face saving way out.

The attacks in Ukraine are meant force Russia’s hand. They won’t. Putin holds all the cards. The 70th anniversary of the defeat of fascism is just days away. The overwhelming symbolism will further erode Western credibility.

Putin might soon be grinning from ear to ear — and taking no calls, at least not for a while.

Very interesting question, Saker!

If Putin really doesn’t intervene, I suggest that what will happen will be very similar to what happened in Germany in 1933 and the years following.
While the USA administration may be extremely relaxed about that, the rest of Europe may just come to their senses.
That is why I believe that Putin will intervene.
As I’ve said before, it won’t happen before May 9th, but will before the NATO ‘exercises’ in the Ukraine planned for July.
I have the gut feeling – which means diddly-squat in real life – that some Ukrainian Right Sektor national Guardistas may provoke this by crossing the border to Russia and attacking a Russian village.
Please take note that especially in Germany the Odessa murders are turning more and more people off the current Kiev regime.

Ukraine: U.S. Campaign Stuck Without Russian Intervention And German Support

By Moon Of Alabama

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38404.htm

In the first scenario (no Russian intervention now), Ukraine minus Crimea steadily becomes ever more of a basket case than it is now.

Europe doesn’t want to bail it out; it already has more than enough basket economies to worry about without adding an even worse one. We will see in the coming months what we see now—lots of heated anti-Russian rhetoric, and no actions of consequence.

America doesn’t want to bail it out either. President Obama and the Democrats are already facing a rout in the midterm elections, and the last thing they need is to present the American people with a bill for tens of billions of dollars in aid to a country they can’t even find on a map or globe, especially with that aid going to corruption and paying Ukraine’s bills to Russia. And the American people are solidly against getting involved in another military adventure. It is too soon after the Iraq and Afghanistan and Libyan misadventures. Memories are short but not that short.

Russia will not help out during these first six months because it has nothing to gain by that. The U.S. instigated and backed the coup, dragging Europe along, so “they broke it, they own it.” Until winter approaches in September and October. With its bankruptcy, and its currency worthless, Ukraine will not be able to pay for its escalating energy needs as winter approaches. The prospect is for millions of Ukrainians to die from freezing, just as they died of starvation under Stalin.

Putin does not want to go down as another Stalin. Russia intervenes militarily, swiftly and in force, as a “humanitarian” gesture to save the ethnic Russians and pro-Russians from dying. Ukraine will be so desperate and scared of the coming catastrophe that it offers only token resistance. Europe and America do nothing to stop the Russian takeover. The only question is whether Russia will take over just eastern and southern Ukraine, or the entire country.

In the second scenario (Russian intervention now), Russia will win, of course, but with lots of bloodshed and widespread resentment among the Ukrainian people, as well as continuing sabotage in the future. Russia will be saddled with something it does not want—another Afghanistan.

I think Russia will opt for the “humanitarian” intervene-later approach. Let the Ukrainian people see that their “friends” in the U.S. and Europe offer only words of support, nothing more. Let them face the prospect of freezing. As temperatures drop, they will beg for a Russian rescue. Or to prevent actual takeover they may have another coup, installing a pro-Russian government that will deal with Russia on Russia’s terms.

Like it or not, Ukraine’s future lies with Russia, not the U.S. and Europe. Its wiggle room is whether it wants to be a nominally independent nation subservient to Russian interests, or part of Russia as Crimea is now. Its best course of action would be to accept that geopolitical reality and have another coup with the installation of a pro-Russian government. That leaves them a few crumbs of dignity and the map (which Americans won’t read) will still say “Ukraine” rather than “Russia.”

First and foremost: welcome back, we dearly missed you.

Russia is not keen to intervene, aims at a federal state where the East and South are “in its bag”. Without such an outcome, and with a government immediately recognized by the West, Russia will play it by ear. Such a government has a limited “shelf life” as not supported by the East and South. With IMF-conditions applied to the population, unrest will increase and expand, with Ukraine becoming a failed state. That will be an outcome which will prompt Russia to intervene, restore law and order, and realize its geopolitical interests: create a buffer zone, and acquire a second Black Sea port: Odessa

I think FUKUS sees the Ukraine as a strategic opportunity not an economical one. Russia should arm the anti-Kiev defenders to the teeth [like we do in Syria, f.e.], but stay out of the conflict. Give Yats enough rope and he’ll hang himself. The economy is against the regime and FUKUS is in no position to bail out the Ukraine.

But at the end of the day, it is up to the Ukrainian populace to decide what they want.

As per usual, enough innocents lives have already and will be destroyed. Kiev’s wagons are circled around town and the thugs are howling for blood in the background.

The GRADs, tanks and artillery are in place. GRADs are large area meat mincers, that don’t know the difference between human beings, thus kill everything in their path.

See @ http://rt.com/news/157240-slavyansk-surrounded-citizens-assault/

Well, Obambi, time to polish that shiny statue once more and fly over the Don-basin to show it off…

http://www.dedefensa.org/article-destin_e_russe_06_05_2014.html

In french

First prediction: Government sends Right Sector (Nazis), paid for by oligarchs, to squash separatists. West European football hooligans go to Ukraine and join the Nazi army. The east and south are brought under control. Nazis become an organized military force. They overthrow their masters. The economy is in turmoil. Moskals and Jews are blamed and pogroms result. Germany becomes alarmed. The Americans say their just blowing off steam. Germany and America are devided. Europe begs Russia to do something. Russia invades and takes over the whole country. Not a peep from Europe. John McCain says the Russians had this planned from the beginning.

Second prediction: Russia invades and takes southeast Ukraine. Cold War 2 is on. The US sends 100,000 troops to west Ukraine. Sanctions hit the world economy hard. Europe is determined to stop buying Russian gas, Southstream pipeline is stopped, silk road has no chance. Germany is now an American poodle.

First and foremost: welcome back, we dearly missed you.

Russia is not keen to intervene, aims at a federal state where the East and South are “in its bag”. Without such an outcome, and with a government immediately recognized by the West, Russia will play it by ear. Such a government has a limited “shelf life” as not supported by the East and South. With IMF-conditions applied to the population, unrest will increase and expand, with Ukraine becoming a failed state. That will be an outcome which will prompt Russia to intervene, restore law and order, and realize its geopolitical interests: create a buffer zone, and acquire a second Black Sea port: Odessa

IMO, the best solution would be for a Russian intervention, but not one aimed at any partition or further separation of what’s known as the state of Ukraine.

The idea instead would be a nation-wide “regime change” with the complete removal of the fascist junta. No more territory would be formally annexed into Russia, but the country would be brought solidly within Russia’s sphere of influence.

There would be a federalization – something similar to Belgium – with Russian and Ukrainian speaking regions and a bilingual region in Kiev.

The folks in Galicia would be generally left to go about their business, but radical anti-Russian activity would not be tolerated, and permanent Russian military bases would be established throughout the country.

IMO, the best solution would be for a Russian intervention, but not one aimed at any partition or further separation of what’s known as the state of Ukraine.

The idea instead would be a nation-wide “regime change” with the complete removal of the fascist junta. No more territory would be formally annexed into Russia, but the country would be brought solidly within Russia’s sphere of influence.

There would be a federalization – something similar to Belgium – with Russian and Ukrainian speaking regions and a bilingual region in Kiev.

The folks in Galicia would be generally left to go about their business, but radical anti-Russian activity would not be tolerated, and permanent Russian military bases would be established throughout the country.

It remains axiomatic to the orthodox geo-political analyses of both the Anglo-American West and Russia to demonise Germany as the prime mover in both 20th century wars. Mikhail II 01:46 illustrates the Russian perspective rather well. Both orthodoxies are wrong and Russian adherence to this orthodoxy is its Achilles heel – witness Putin’s just-announced “defense of the Nuremberg show trials” laws making it illegal to question the absurdities of – for example “The Holocaust” narrative or Germany as the perpetrator of the Katyn massacre (in spite of the opened Soviet archives confirming it was the Soviets).

The dominant leitmotiv of the current West-Russia impasse is still stuck in those false orthodoxies I’m afraid. They have been very cleverly and successfully cultivated over decades of wall-to-wall propaganda and I can see no way out right now. For a far more realistic appraisal of who was really responsible for WWI – see this and linked pages. Hint it was the Anglo-Deep-state which morphed into the Anglo-American club after Versailles when it set about Conjouring Hitler for exactly the same purposes.

And so it continues to this day. The differences being that both Judaic influences (not to say control of) the Anglo-US establishment, and its military capabilities are vastly greater than at the start of those two disasters.

Those driving the western agenda have made their decisions. They will not back off (other than for short-term tactical purposes) until one of three things comes to pass:

1. Russia is defeated and torn apart.
2. Russia decides to ‘see things the west’s way’ (ie per ‘The Godfather’, is made an offer it can’t refuse)
3. The Anglo-American-NATO system collapses under the weight of its own pure bloody evil.

which of those it will be and how we get to one or other of them, I have no idea, but I an not optimistic that it will happen without another vast blood-letting.

Some of the comments above are superb in their perceptiveness and understanding of the complexities so it’s probably unfair to pick on any one as an exemplar but for me Lysander 01:36 is one of the best. I agree with his three options.

1. First case scenario will see same thing as happened to Serbs in Croatia – mass exodus.
2. Can go two ways -WW3 or cold war stand off
I don’t like any of my predictions so I hope Putin will come up with something different :)

I have a slightly different viewpoint.

Russian intervention will be hailed at home and in parts of Eastern Ukraine, for a while. Shortly thereafter reports of Russian troops killing innocent civilians in friendly fire or collateral damage type of event will appear (regardless whether true or fabricated). Animosity will grow. Towards the end of the year with no gas in sight, everybody in the Ukraine will hate Russians.

A better solution would be a two pronged approach:

A)avoid direct combat but provide sifficient military aid through indirect means. Sure, everyone will know its from Russia with love, but how to trace? Shipments of arms can come semi-officially from Belarus or Hungary, while being physically shipped through Crimea. Polite green men can call themselves volunteers and fly any color they want, apart from Russian. Putin can hire Vietnamese mercs… whatever. There is enough covert military aid that can be made available to the resistance forces, Kiev will be hard pressed to put something against them. I highly doubt NATO/US would step in to engage the East directly. End result – chase the junta west of the Dneiper and create an Eastern Ukraine Republic with RUssian protectorate.

B) Simultaneously with the above, jack up gas prices for everyone outside Russia, and demand payment in RUR. Embargo sales of petro products to any country that supports sanctions against Russia, directly or indirectly. Sell balance to China/India etc. Stop sales of LNG to Japan or double price and demand payment in RUR. Place severe import quotas on anything of US/EU origin, unless such import is deemed of strategic importance, and even if that is the case, offer payment in RUR on extended credit terms. Bestow preferred trading partner status on Germany and Finland, creating two avenues for bilateral trade without restrictions. This will create surplus demand for German/Finnish goods/services, ergo will place great pressure from businesses on German/Finnish politicians to abstain/fight sanctions, etc. This will minimize domestic inflation by choking imports and support rouble/purchasing power through sales of resources in RUR.

While the net effect will probably be felt in a time frame greater than 6 months, the immediate effect should be that of shock and horror and hysteria in the western establishment and MSM, hopefully creating additional internal resistance/wakeup calls among the general public of affected countries. While this approach is not of the graphic violence variety of red team vs blue team that one can enjoy on TV over a bowl of popcorn, it should show the world sufficient “soft power”, for people to start waking up and uniting against their respective AngloZionist regimes, making anything related to the current guys in Kiev terribly unpopular. As a result the junta will lose its lifeblood and will be quickly taken out by the East thereafter.

Firstly after massacre in Odessa current government will never gain control over SE Ukraine.
Secondly if Russia intervenes military as you have said it will result in many civilian casualties, so this will be worst scenario for next 6 months. But in longer term it will be best for Ukraine to be with Russia (no IMF loans, no open market to EU goods and so on; better deal on gas, economical cooperation) it’s just that price for better future is high. I hope thant there is still some way to better Ukraine cheaper than that. Many Russia can come up more sophisticated plan militarily intervention, Ukrainians are on Russia’s side.

So now the situation changes yet again. NATO General Breedlove said yesterday that the NATO must now think about permanently stationing troops in the Baltic and Poland:
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/nato-erwaegt-dauerhafte-truppenpraesenz-in-osteuropa-12927056.html

Many ordinary people see this as something which has been planned for a long time, and that the Ukraine is used as the convenient nail on which to hang this.

How much this helps with ‘de-escalating’ the situation in the Ukraine remains to be seen, given that both Kerry and Ashton are already threatening Russia with more sanctions, while not doing anything at all to haul back their client regime in Kiev.
Oh – and Madame Merkel received a visit from the ‘chocolate tsar’ yesterday. now we know who’ll be the next president of the Ukraine, don’t we!

(In case it wasn’t sent. I’m sorry, but I’m unfamiliar with this platform.)

Führer-wannabe Tymoshenko commented that she would bring ‘third round of revolution’ to Ukraine, if unelected. Real democrat, this one. I consider democracy as nothing more than a system designed to appeal to the collective jealousy of the masses. It is dysfunctional, highly corruptable and based on overly propagandised and illogical arguments, but none the less, if that is the system a nation selects and aspires to, and a politician (I shan’t direct any other insult toward her, as this is surely the worst of them) claims to work within, this sort of statements are beyond unacceptable. Of course – what are we even talking about? – there is no democracy in Ukraine, or for that matter, almost anywhere else. The Western ‘partners’ are uninterested in anything beyond achieving the goals set by the monstrous beasts that work behind th curtain – not democracy, not the well being of others, and not the national interest of their own nations. If there are any who are interested in such matters, they are brainwashed to the point of believing that the neo-liberal approach, which is contrary to all that is moral and logical, is actually conducive towards ensuring a favourable outcome in those fields.

Apologies about the protracted introduction. Onto your question: It is important to note that we are dealing with self-cornered animal, and that Russia, China and all other forces of light — that I, as an Orthodox Christian, and someone who believes religion to be the most precious jewel of humanity, can more readily associate ‘light’ with an essentially communist country, than a nation whose institutions, and even banknotes, prominently feature the word ‘God’, is telling indeed — must act cautiously, and serve as the voice of reason. It falls onto Russia’s shoulders to save not only itself, but also its enemies. This is akin to a confrontation between the staff of an asylum, and the mentally ill – the ratio of power is perhaps reversed, but the analogy is relevant. The staff have no desire to injure the patient, and the confrontation, for them, is as much about ensuring the safety of the patient, as it is their own. Of course, we are dealing with a more complex situation, but it is nonetheless Russia’s moral responsibility to save the West, too, by pacifying it as much as possible, and allowing the rotten edifice to crumble, so that something healthy may grow out of its rubble. The good in the West will grow, once light and water reach the withering shoots. But first, what is blocking the light must be destroyed.

That may be a little over-phylosohised and inapplicable at present, because the West will sprad its darkness across the world for a good number if years still, but it may be something to consider once better days come. For now, Russia needs to be very careful. It is clear that the West is trying to lure it into attacking the Nazistan, and attacking on someone else’s terms is always a bad idea. They need to turn the situation around, so that they are the ones making the attacking move. I fear that right now, Russia is somewhat on the defensive. It may not be facing a serious threat, but it is facing an unknown potential outcome, and that is also rarely good.

There is also the issue of people’s lives being put at stake. Russia, unlike its counterpart, is concerned about the well being of the people who are currently suffering at the hands of US puppets and willing associates. It doesn’t have the same freedom as the amoral, dehumanised western powers, that couldn’t care less whether it is 100 or 1000 Russians that burn alive.

Someone above mentioned all-out war. There is no chance of that happening, given that you have one same side, and one side that is strapped for cash. The dark forces that would benefit from an all-out war – we have seen them profiting from the ruin of numerous countries – are hardly willing to finance it. Their modus operandi has always been to put the ‘right people’ into power, or buy off those that already are, and to direct the spending of public money in this way. That is where the financial backing for all of America’s wars have come from – public money” but given that the US has none, the public debt. Bribing politicians and media, and building up the mechanisms of propaganda, is one thing, but financing such a large war is another.

This is my hope, at least. I wouldn’t out it past the lunatics in the West to actually start a war – it is my hope that the financial disincentive will prove as powerful enough to discourage such insanity.

a) Russia does “nothing”. If the usa really wants a war then the ukrainian army will use the grad (stalin organ) with their tacit permission. If they do not use these types of weapons and keep situation as is, and elections are held on the 25th. New legitimate government will be in and give green light for nato to move in. EU will then bare the debt of ukraine and their corporations will rape resources,industries of ukraine. The gas will still flow, russia will still get income from this. China, russia, iran et al will form stronger bond and implement, in the time it suits them, abandonment of petrodollar. Sanctions would be lifted from russia. People have to live , so mining,industry etc will start up again in ukraine, but their will be instability from the south east unless federation is implemented.The dollar is going to devalue by 50% by july this year.
b) Russia attacks:- with quick air-attack most artillery, grads, etc can be destroyed without russian loss of life. Sanctions will be increased, gas to eu will be stopped. Russia will have to accept the burden of ukraines huge debt and the world will be against russia. Although china, iran, india will still bond and carry on with original agreements.
Personally I would prefer the “missile” shield to be close to me so if ever it became necessary I could send my special ground forces in to quickly neutralise it?

The putsch, coming as it did in response to the reasonable negotiated settlement of February 21, is the soft point of the current regime and the NATO position. The putsch government simply has no legitimacy, and the crude violence of the neo-nazi mobs cannot be explained away. The rhetorical hysteria coming from NATO is mostly aimed at Russia and reveals intentions to step up NATO:s drive eastward and provoke war. NATO will get its wish only if Russia intervenes blatantly in Ukraine. Otherwise, NATO is stuck defending illegitimate neo-Nazi atrocity-prone rump government. The BRICS countries are paying attention to the NATO hypocrisy and double standards, as are informed people across the world. The long game is best chess move here.

By now it seems obvious that Russia wants to stay out of Ukraine.

In six months of now and assuming that Russia stays out and some “president” is “elected” and recognized by the West, we can safely assume that the West will pump in merchanaries and weapons like crazy. And so will Russia. And of course both sides will deny the fact. “Evidence” will show up showing Russian hardware and also western hardware and personnel. At that time we will basically have a major war in the Ukraine between NATO and Russia – but it will be covered under “it’s the Ukrainians fighting each other.”

A very risky and a very dangerous game from both sides!

And if Russia would go for eastern Ukraine? Frankly I think that is not enough!

Russia should play the American approach: make sure that “this war machine” (Iraq! Syria! Libya!) can never ever go against its people again. Shock and awe!

In other words: I would go for full war with Ukraine:

+ protect the south and east
+ destroy every Ukrainian military hardware, infrastructure that can be used – especially in the North! Use the airforce for targets in the north + west.
+ capture with special units the Nazis in Kiev and the selfappointed government” and put them on trail.
+ capture or neutralize the Nazis.
+ a no fly zone for the Ukraine*

At the end I would withdraw to the east and south of Ukraine to protect them against what is left of the Nazis. Then I would make a referendum about: joining Russia or becoming independent (“new Russia”). Once this new country is somewhat stable and can protect its borders, I would withdraw my forces.

This whole thing is terrible, but if Russia moves in, they really have to destroy the means of their counterparts quickly and decisively!

One other reason this might be the better outcome – and it is a terrible one! – is that otherwise the escalation between NATO and Russia thru their “Ukraine”-proxis will continue and THAT can easily spin out of control. (How about some UKR-nazis in Russian Uniforms attacking the polish border??). The longer this conflict continues the more the Junta and its masters have a chance to come up with some justification why NATO has to enter UKR.

One more thing: timing!

I cannot say how important – as a symbol – 8/9th of May really is. However I am sure that 11th of May is a turning point: the referendums – legally a joke but a political statement! – will be held. At that moment a new dynamic will begin: the “elections” on 25th will not be held in the “independent” areas of UKR.

My best guess: IF Russia is coming, it will be after the 11th of May and protecting the new independent parts of Ukraine. This will of course create an outcry by the hypocritical West like one has never seen before.

However should there be some new blood bath this might trigger a Russian response at another time.

I can only stress one thing: if Russia goes into Ukraine – it is best for world peace (and yes this is highly perverted but the best choice of so many bad ones): use everything you have and make sure it is over quickly. Give Kiev no means to recover, regroup and negotiate or safe face – destroy the junta. The West has shown that it respects only one thing: force. Everything else to them is just blablabla.

I am really saddened that this is the best outcome. The problem is the West and its unwillingness to negotiate. Again they will only do so if they have no other option left.

After that we will have cold war II, but I fear it already is a fact of life.

Lets hope there is another solution.

* PS.: One step before troops enter the ground is to erect a no-fly-zone. Who does it first, wins! Just imagine NATO is doing this! They would say: well we have nobody on the ground, so we are not “really” involved! At that time Russia has only one thing left – besides pumping in little green men with guns – starting World War III. Remember the West also has the means to over escalate so the other side has just one option left. Time is of the essence!

(2/2)

And the people?

Absent from this analysis has been the impact on the Ukrainian people. The West looks towards Europe and the US, whereas the East and the South look towards Russia. The latter will feel they’ve lost their natural partner and will look for other ways to have their needs represented in Ukrainian government.

The people will be manipulated by all stakeholders: by the US, the EU, Russia, politicians and the oligarchs. While unemployment will hit everyone, the impacts will be unequal. People will not point upwards but downwards or sideways. The powers that be will divide the population, setting up the West against the East; Ukrainian speakers against Russian speakers; unemployed against employed.

General dissatisfaction will polarize the population, whose outlets are the usual nationalist manifestations. They will resort to violence and possibly even conflict and civil war.

I foresee, with no knowledge or first-hand experience to back this up, a failed state at Russia’s doorstep.

P.S. I realise this is only one part of what the Saker is asking for, but this analysis sucked my creativity dry. I think I’m calling this a day :)

FP (Foreign Policy) a trusted advisor for Global Leaders has an interesting article which relates to the current thinking of Russia:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/05/05/how_putin_is_reinventing_warfare

I agree with anon 02:03 who asked “… better or worse for whom“

There are many ways to frame the “for whom” part – ranging from one part of the divided Ukrainian population, through many quasi-nation-states, right up to humanity as a whole. For me, common humanity should trump every other consideration, but that is emphatically not the way those who will decide matters see things. For most of them, humanitarian considerations are nothing more than propaganda tools to herd gullible populations in the vast (dis)information war that defines the world we now inhabit.

What I am personally quite certain about is that a uni-polar planet under the tutelage and control of the Judaic-mediated Anglo-US-NATO military media and banking system we now have – ie the system bequeathed to us by two world wars and especially those who engineered both of them – is anathema and must be opposed. Putin’s Russia is now in the front-line of that opposition and thus deserves support. I have no idea how this will pan out but I think Saker’s 6 month time-frame is likely to witness cataclysmic events and I am deeply pessimistic about them.

I don’t think it’s important who would have been elected – the whole situation seems to be out of control.
it seems to me there is some controversity between the freaks in kiew, not all of them know what the others are planning or going to do next.

parubij seems to have a bigger part in this than is obvious. it’s the right sector as new “Sturmabteilung” and the SBU as new “GESTAPO” which seem to follow orders Yats’n’Turch can’t control.

the brainwashed masses will do and believe what the puppet masters want, so after the fight for the power is over there will be a (short?) quiet time(in the west of ukraine).

But the country is divorced for decades now – the poeple can’t trust each other as it was in the beginnig of nazi germany, people will live in fear of the SA and GESTAPO and the people will get used to it like the Germans in the 1930’s.

a russian intervention at this point wouldn’t make things better in ukraine, even if it would save a lot of lives, because the brainwashed masses in the west believing they are right with their nazi behavior because EU and US are backing it.

in elections 2012 more people in the west of ukraine voted for swoboda than germans voted for hitler in the 1930 elections in germany.

President Putin can’t do anything against it – it would be the same as if the Soviet Union had send troops to protect the german communists after 1933.

maybe he knows something we all don’t – but with all the accusations and lying by the west it’s the best thing to do nothing obvious.

the whole construct “Banderastan” will collapse by itself when the time has come.

if russia intervenes anyway the situation becomes worse than imaginable because any other russian haters will support banderastan in a guerilla war against the east.

it’s just my opinion of what could happen – but i also think i don’t know enough..

best regards

Ralph

That Berel Lazar link. I think I forgot it on previous post

The US secret government assumes that Russia is limited to precisely this choice, or more appropriately – this dilemma.

With Russian intervention 6 months hence the most of Ukraine will have been stablised. Should such intervention occur, it would not be limited to the east and south – the western border would be the logical end point to stop the senseless rot, depose the criminal cartel presently destroying so many lives and ensure the fascists do not pop up again in any organised fashion.

Without intervention, increasing wonton violence, bombings, abuse of all kinds, flagrant disregard for every conceivable fundamental human right and just about any other atrocity one can imagine – all at the direction of the US secret government acting as the guardian of some perverse claim of ‘democracy’.

The intervention will however not happen. Those in the east and south with the military ‘defectors’ will rise to the challenge and defeat the US puppets.

The US is teetering at the precipe socially and economically. It is overextended militarily and now well past the point of no return.

We are now witnessing the end of American hegemony play out. The final act may not be for 2 or 3 more years, but the end is nigh and they know it.

All Russia (and China) need do is remain composed and vigilant that their own systems are not undermined by the flailing giant that is now gasping for its final breaths. It will not go down quietly though and Ukraine is the surest that the ‘gloves are off’ and dirty tricks (when haven’t they been) will be deployed with increasing regularity.

As Ukraine descends into chaos the world will become increasingly aware it is at the command of the US elite cabal – the US will be exposed for this next criminal act.

This is the most likely course and the reason Russia will not intervene other than by pressing the UN to do so and in the process highlight how the US elite have almost complete control over that failed organisation.

It will be a painful experience for all involved by the greatest benefit to Russia will be in remaining on the sideline and allowing the US to ‘pivot’ itself into a third world state.

Well, the situation will be more or less status quo for the next week or so. Resistance on the Southeast will keep up as Kiev does not have enough military power to occupy big cities there.
The outcome depends on Putin’s visit to China. On February 22nd in Sydney, Russian and Chinese finance ministers provoked Christine Lagarde to admit that IMF is broke and refused to bail it out. If Putin finds common language with Chinese team, west will be faced with threat of real economic sanctions that could collapse US and EU economy within months. Ukraine will be a token in that case and they will have to back off with their support for Nazi thugs. Only then Russia will send “peacekeepers” to mop up. there will be piece of rope for Obama and EUrokrats to pull a bit of clean face but Eurasia will get its way as it keeps 85% of the worlds cash in their hands.
5 cents from Guru

Dear Saker, glad you’re back in good health!

In reply to your quiz question:
Before I start, I must say that I am quite influenced by Mike Whitney’s article on counterpunch: http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/05/obamas-bloodbath-in-odessa/ who believes that stoking violence and chaos in eastern and southern Ukraine is a deliberate tactic by the US, to lure Russia into a trap and bog it down there, and let Russia bleed. Ukraine would be an unwinnable situation if Russia intervened.

So considering your scenario – What would Ukraine look like in October?
If Mike Whitney’s hypothesis is right, then I would expect ongoing violence and massacres against the civilian population in the east, but also in the west (false-flag style operations to stoke civil war, and rally the western population behind the coup regime). The challenge for the US and the coup regime will be to create violence and chaos, but to make it look like an actual civil war in the western media, while Russia will understand full well, that the population in the east is being targeted in order to force Russia into an intervention.

How would that look? If the coup government manages to remain in power, rally the population of the western Ukraine behind it (not self-evident once they go hungry and freeze), and keep the important parts of the security forces on its side, we would have essentially a slow-burning civil war. The regime would keep committing atrocities against the population in the south and east, but make it look like somebody else did it (Odessa-style). Depending on the degree of organization of local self-defense forces and the amount of support they receive from Russia, they would try to repel these attacks, and eventually try to launch counter-attacks. I believe such a situation could go on for a long time, and with a terrible toll of lives (Syria, Lybia, etc…).

However if this is allowed to go on there will be costs:

— Refugees will come in large numbers to the EU and to Russia.

— The West will have to keep the Kiev regime on life support, through loans, food, weapons etc. if they don’t want it to falter in the middle of the civil war. This will not be an easy sell to the Europeans who are in financial trouble anyway (probably same for the US, but I am less informed about US financial situation)

— Russia will have to support the east in a similar manner unless they want to risk that Kiev will completely subjugate the east, but Russia will more easily be able to afford it, and it will happen in a climate of solidarity of the Russian people with the eastern Ukrainians.

— The longer this goes on, the more likely it will be that the lies in the western media are exposed and the truth comes out. In the end the truth always comes out. Also the longer this goes on, the less important it will be to public opinion in Europe who is to blame, and the more important it will be to stop it.

— As much sympathy as I feel with the ordinary people in Ukraine for having to suffer so much, I don’t think it is a good motivation for Russia to intervene. If Russia occupies the eastern part of the country it could not integrate it into Russia as easily and as quickly as Crimea. Chances are that eastern Ukraine will be some kind of Transdnistrija – kind of territory, at least until it’s completely pacified. More importantly, the civil war could still go on, the coup government would probably be able to keep a campaign of terror and violence going, which the Russian army would probably not be able to suppress completely. Also the Ukies would finally have the opportunity to kill proper Russians.

Part 2 follows!

Look beyond Ukraine to the bigger picture.

How long will it take to improve the gas pipelines through the Baltic to Germany so as to bypass Ukraine altogether? It surely won’t take long to arrange to sell to China any gas which the EU boycotts. Then The Ukrainians can kill each other without affecting the rest of the world.

Soon media attention will turn to some other trouble spot.The Americans will before long become obsessed with their next Presidential election. Ukraine can join the list of wrecked and forgotten countries, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya…

I doubt that the Russian government will let sentimentality lead them into a bear trap. It really doesn’t need anything from Ukraine, beyond avoiding having major American forces on its back doorstep – which the Americans can probably no longer afford in any case.

Life in Ukraine will probably become more miserable and more dangerous. Maybe east and west will separate relatively easily, but to achieve that the easterners need to get better organised, or accept a long guerrilla war. The troublemakers will doubtless continue to finance relatively cheap atrocities, perhaps with Blackwater and Mossad assassins shooting at both sides to stimulate hatred and keep them killing each other.

Ukraine – just another failed state.

Pretty simple really: Russia has to let the fascist Ukie regime destroy itself. It is very likely to happen given that the IMF/Western plan for plundering the country has already commenced. The downside is that in the short term, Ukie forces/foreign mercenaries/RS will capture and terrorise eastern Ukraine and there will be a lot of blood spilled (all blamed on Russia by the Western MSM, of course!). But like someone above has said, another Maidan will emerge that is not choked full of Banderite & useful idiot petit bourgeois types. Then we will see a counter-revolution (again, all blamed on Russia by the Western MSM).

The only caveat to all this is if NATO at any time even try to put bases & missiles into the country. Then the gloves are truly off and Russia will have no option other than to attack.

Dear Saker
First of all you have formulated your question intelligently.

1- If NATO/EU succeeds in Eastern Ukraine kicking out the Russian interest it will pave the way for further isolation, destabilization and fragmentation of Russia.

2- If Russia succeeds getting its sphere of interest in eastern Ukraine it will give Russia time to resist the destruction of Russia by NATO/EU terrorist organization. This “getting the time” might even be enough sufficient to enable Russia
to get off NATO/EU destruction radar.

From Germany , Deutschland