- There are 160 billion dollars invested by Russia in the West. There are 248 billion dollars invested by the West in Russia. Sanctions anybody?
- Russia still has the option of shutting down the NATO route to withdraw US forces from Afghanistan. This is an option with Russia did not exercise over the war in Syria, but which it will almost certainly exercise in case of a NATO intervention in the Ukraine. Sanctions anybody?
- The US is offering to sell its shale gas to Europe, which would be extremely costly as the infrastructure to do that would need to be built and it would take anywhere between 2 to 4 years to be ready for a first shipment. Sanctions anybody?
- Mikhail Dobkin, the ex-governor of Kharkov who had resigned to run for President has been kidnapped by the insurgent and is held incommunicado in Kiev. This is the second Russian leader in the eastern Ukraine to be kidnapped by the insurgents and this raises some painful questions about the degree of organization and planning of the Russian-speaking resistant in the eastern Ukraine.
- Ramzan Kadyrov, the President of Chechnia, has announced that he was ready to send Chechen forces to Crimea to fight any “shaitans” (devils) in Crimea.
- Official insurgent government websites have dropped the Russian language and replaced it with English. Now all the main branches of government in Banderastan are online only in Ukrainian and English.
- While half of the regions under Banderite control are not paying pensions at all, the new regime has announced that pensions will be cut by 50%.
US/NATO military options in the Ukraine:
In the recent days there has been a lot of news about what appears to be all sorts of US/NATO saber-rattling which, I think, have to be debunked. Specifically, we have been told that a few USN ships have entered the Black Sea, that NATO AWACs are patrolling in the skies of Poland and that some kind of drones have been shot down by Crimean/Russian unites over Crimea. So let me begin by the latest one and say that as far as I know, the drones in question were controlled by Ukrainian pro-nationalist forces. So what? This is not NATO or the US. Besides, the NATO/US don’t need such drones to see what is going on in Crimea. As for the AWACs, this is normal and rational policy – they want to keep an eye on the events in the Ukraine. These AWACs are no more a sign of impending US/NATO aggression as Russian AWACs doing exactly the same stuff on the other sides. Which leaves the USN ships. As I have already written elsewhere, these guys are simply doing what the Navy calls “showing the flag”. If they intention had been hostile, their deployment right within the range of Russian tactical aviation would be suicidal because the biggest threat to any navy is not the other guy’s navy, but the other guy’s airpower. And since the USN cannot count on air superiority over the Black Sea, these ships would be sitting ducks. The USN is many things, but stupid it is not. Having dealt with these rumors, let’s now low at the bigger picture.
Does the US/NATO have a military option in the Ukraine?
The answer is a clear ‘no’! First, to intervene, the JCS will demand a clear, limited and achievable objective, a limited timeframe and a realistic exit strategy. Yes, I know, the US had none of that in Iraq or Afghanistan, but these were not nuclear superpowers. The second thing which US strategists are acutely aware of is called “escalatory potential” potential: what happens if the other guy is neither shocked nor awed – then what? Finally, I don’t see any US general agreeing to see whether the US can succeed there where Napoleon and Hitler failed. So there will be a huge bias against any form of direct intervention on the side of the US military. The problems is, as always, civilians who don’t understand warfare and who will want to show to Russia and the world that “the US is boss”. What kind of silly notions might they be contemplating right now? Sending US/NATO forces into western Ukraine? Maybe, but for what purpose? Nobody seriously thinks that Russian tanks are going to over-run Lvov. Send them to Kiev? For how long? And that is dangerous as sooner or later (probably sooner) the central Ukraine is going to look like Africa with massive economic shortages triggering civil disorders. What will the US do then? Send US/NATO as far east as Donetsk or Kharkov just to find itself face to face with the Russian military? Crazy! How about a pure air operation a la Kosovo? Let me remind everybody here that the bombing of Kosovo was an absolute disaster for NATO: 78 days of non-stop airstrikes, 1000+ aircraft and 38’000+ air sorties and all that to achieve what? Ten or so Serbian aircraft destroyed (most on the ground), 20+ APC and tanks destroyed and 1000+ Serbian soldiers dead or wounded. That is out of a force of 130’000+ Serbs, 80+ aircraft, 1’400 artillery pieces, 1’270 tanks and 825 APCs (all figures according to Wikipedia). The 3rd Serbian Army Corps basically came out unharmed from this massive bombing campaign which will go down in history as arguably the worst defeat of airpower in history! Had it not been for the betrayal of the Serbian people in Kosovo (and elsewhere) by Milosevic, the Serbian military would still probably be in control of most of Kosovo. And that was against an old – but very smart – Serbian military who did not have modern air-defense means (but still shot down a F-117 “stealth” aircraft). You really want to try that against the modern Russian military protected by 4++ generation aircraft and the best air defense capability on the planet? I don’t think so.
Of course, there could be other, smaller options – send in some special forces to help the insurgency, but where would the airpower come from? Attack some key Russian units or facilities, but consider the risk of a retaliatory response? Limited options are, by definition, limited in what they can achieve but they all have a nasty escalatory potential.
Finally, let me tell you this: in the late 1990s I studied with quite a few of the very top force planners in Washington DC. They would give us lessons during the day, and they go to the Pentagon to prepare strike lists against Iraq for the next day. Solid experts who knew their business very very well. And they all said the same thing: if push really came to shove, the US was not willing to be obliterated in a nuclear war against the Soviet Union, even if the Soviet Union would be burned at the same time. All of them said the same thing – Europe and the NATO are not worth losing the USA. I think that they were right, by the way. So if American force planners and strategists were not willing to die in a nuclear war to save all of Europe in the last days of the Cold War, does anybody really believe that the US military is going to be willing to risk triggering WWIII over the Ukraine?! Of course not.
American politicians are arrogant, ignorant and stupid. But that is not the case of the top US military commanders who are mostly very intelligent, well-educated and, by the way, very patriotic folks who do not think like Dr Strangelove maniac. Let me add here that what I said about US military commanders also fully applies to their Russian counterparts – neither side wants war.
Which leaves Putin and Obama. Putin is not bluffing and the US military commanders know that. In fact, I am sure that their Russian colleagues have already conveyed that message to them as they have done in 2008. As for Obama – he is 100% bluff, hot air, empty grandstanding and vapid dull promises and threats. Yes, that does make him dangerous, but I have faith in the US JCS and generals who, when needed, will simply have to tell him “We are very sorry Mr President, but this is not an option”.
Yes, in theory, it is possible that the US/NATO would do something crazy. But I very sincerely believe that they won’t.
What is taking place today is a war of nerves, a psychologicalal war, but everybody has to keep his head cool and remember that words cannot change reality.
The Saker
Saker, Ahmad Kadyrov is dead since 2004.
The president of Chechnya nowadays is his son, Ramzan Kadyrov.
[]’s from Brazil
@Scan: ouch! my bad, lemme correct that ASAP and thanks!!
Cheers,
The Saker
Interesting article: http://todayszaman.com/news-341642-putins-pop-up-war.html
I agree that there will be no NATO interventions or strikes. Obama is looking for a face saving way out, the Ukraine story is already off of the front pages.
The wild card here is that the Putinists, with their desire for an asian supernational union ala the EU, may already have sold out to the NWO. In this case there may be a lot of vampire elitists who calculated that they would profit from a war, especially in light of the collapsing of the current global CB-fiat financial bubble.
Russia does not violate international agreements on safeguards the integrity and security of Ukraine.
Think about what I say, from the standpoint of international law.
1. In Kiev, was a coup d’etat. So-called “new authorities in Kiev”, seized power undemocratic, unconstitutional way, by force of arms, through mass murder and deception. These people are illegitimate. Moreover, they are criminals. It does not depend on the opinions of Washington and Brussels. It depends only on the rule of law. For all the norms of law, these people are criminals .
2. Via actions of these criminals in Kiev, Ukraine as State, actually was split into two parts. One part of this is part of the captured coup, including Kiev. And the second part – this is the part where the population and local authorities have remained faithful to the Constitution of Ukraine and the legitimate, democratically elected President of Ukraine.
And now think please: which of these two parts of the country, today has the right to represent Ukraine as a legal entity?
I mean: What today is the “Ukraine”, in terms of the Act:
– It’s the rebels who had committed an armed coup in Kiev?
– Or is the region to remain faithful to the Constitution and laws of the state government?
Well, go further.
Russia, according to an international treaty is obliged to observe the integrity of Ukraine and its safety. State – is primarily population. In this situation, Russia not only has the right to impose its troop, but must do it.
Because the deployment of troops to maintain the integrity of Ukraine and at the request of the legitimate President and the people of Ukraine – for Russia is a duty arising out of an international treaty. Furthermore, in the current situation coup sending troops is the only way for Russia to conscientiously fulfill their obligations under the international treaty for protection Ukraine as a state and legal entity.
In addition, the legal concept of “invasion” is contrary to the introduction of troops to restore constitutional order, at the request of the legal, legitimate, democratically elected President, with the support of 80% of the population.
We often hear from the western media that “Ukraine’s parliament dismissed Yanukovych from power.” But the parliament has no right to remove from power the President. Parliament can only declare impeachment. Impeachment was not.
And finally:
At the time of the vote, it was no longer a “parliament.” At the time of the vote, it was a bunch of criminal rebels and accomplices criminal rebels.
Because they supported an armed rebellion coup and has expelled forcibly all those members of parliament, who was did not agree with them.
You want to see how to vote these criminals? See here:
http://cubeupload.com/im/d8Bvfn.jpg
http://cubeupload.com/im/OsmCBf.jpg
http://cubeupload.com/im/wxnm6d.jpg
This is called the rule of law and democracy, is not it?
“Russia does not violate international agreements on safeguards the integrity and security of Ukraine.
Think about what I say, from the standpoint of international law.
1. In Kiev, was a coup d’etat. So-called “new authorities in Kiev”, seized power undemocratic, unconstitutional way, by force of arms, through mass murder and deception. These people are illegitimate. Moreover, they are criminals. It does not depend on the opinions of Washington and Brussels. It depends only on the rule of law. For all the norms of law, these people are criminals .
2. Via actions of these criminals in Kiev, Ukraine as State, actually was split into two parts. One part of this is part of the captured coup, including Kiev. And the second part – this is the part where the population and local authorities have remained faithful to the Constitution of Ukraine and the legitimate, democratically elected President of Ukraine.
And now think please: which of these two parts of the country, today has the right to represent Ukraine as a legal entity?
I mean: What today is the “Ukraine”, in terms of the Act:
– It’s the rebels who had committed an armed coup in Kiev?
– Or is the region to remain faithful to the Constitution and laws of the state government?
Well, go further.
Russia, according to an international treaty is obliged to observe the integrity of Ukraine and its safety. State – is primarily population. In this situation, Russia not only has the right to impose its troop, but must do it.
Because the deployment of troops to maintain the integrity of Ukraine and at the request of the legitimate President and the people of Ukraine – for Russia is a duty arising out of an international treaty. Furthermore, in the current situation coup sending troops is the only way for Russia to conscientiously fulfill their obligations under the international treaty for protection Ukraine as a state and legal entity.
In addition, the legal concept of “invasion” is contrary to the introduction of troops to restore constitutional order, at the request of the legal, legitimate, democratically elected President, with the support of 80% of the population.
We often hear from the western media that “Ukraine’s parliament dismissed Yanukovych from power.” But the parliament has no right to remove from power the President. Parliament can only declare impeachment. Impeachment was not.
And finally:
At the time of the vote, it was no longer a “parliament.” At the time of the vote, it was a bunch of criminal rebels and accomplices criminal rebels.
Because they supported an armed rebellion coup and has expelled forcibly all those members of parliament, who was did not agree with them.” in Zero Hedge
It is an interesting comment that a see in ZH. I think it is more or less a balance and compreensible position of the majority of Ukranians from the east. A pity that msm never have one analysis like this.
Saker, would you agree that the position of eastern ukranians is something like this?
An interesting entry on some of “Yats'” international connections, from a website that’s now been taken down:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/03/the-arseniy-yatsenyuk-foundation-has-disappeared/#more-22575
14:54 If this were one person speaking, it would be a textbook example of paranoid projection. Since it’s two “consultants” for Saakashvili, let’s just call it propaganda.
Anonymous Anonymous said…11 March, 2014 15:24
I didnt put the links of the jpgs, because in my net i could not view any anomality, the picture is very reduce to the center and a lot of blank space. But could you explain where is the anomality, or there is a censure on the picture?
I hope Saker is right about the top level US Military being level headed enough to avoid WWIII… it give pause however that Obama has been exceptionally busy in purging top-level US Military the last couple of years.
Why? Quite a coincidence, no?
Thanks for the informed and coherent reminder, Saker!
Just a quibble about the Milosevic decision to leave Kosovo in June 1999: I don’t think this was a wrong decision. I think it was the right thing to do for Milosevic at this time. But a forced decision it was, to be sure.
My understanding -I won’t be more precise- is that Milosevic chose to give in because he had received credible threats that NATO bombings, who had continually been extended in target selection criteria, would begin including civilian objectives ***designed for maximum killing***, if Milosevic did not order Serbian forces to abandon Kosovo.
The shameful truth is that NATO won the 1999 Kosovo war through pure terrorist strategy.
@Saker
1. It’s insanithy that Putin lets those brave people in the Eastern Ukraine be captured like wild animals & taken to torture chambers to Kiev. What does he think? Do these people mean anything to Russia? Why the spetsnas forces aren’t protecting them? It sends a message: “do as you please” to the thugs in Kiev. Wrong policy!
2. It wasn’t Miloshevich but Victor Chernomirdin who forced us to accept the Ahtisari’s plan hoping that he will become the next Russia’s president – as Al Gore promised him.
Putin sent him to Ukraine (?) to be ambasador of Russia.
Not only Russia missed all the lessons from the civil war of YU & how ziofasist West functions in that environment, it failed to get prepaired for such a scenario in its own backyard (Ukraine & Belorus).
I have no clue how the situation is going to be resolved now, and the longer it keeps dragging on like this, the worse for Russia.
This standoff is worse than anything else: gives time to the enemy to correct its mistakes while keeping those who are supposed to defend themselves (= Eastern Ukraine) shooting in the dark.
I don’t like this one bit!
Sorry for the rant.
Let me remind everybody here that the bombing of Kosovo was an absolute disaster for NATO: 78 days of non-stop airstrikes, 1000+ aircraft and 38’000+ air sorties and all that to achieve what? Ten or so Serbian aircraft destroyed (most on the ground), 20+ APC and tanks destroyed and 1000+ Serbian soldiers dead or wounded. That is out of a force of 130’000+ Serbs, 80+ aircraft, 1’400 artillery pieces, 1’270 tanks and 825 APCs (all figures according to Wikipedia).
The link to the “source” quoted in the Wikipedia article is broken so it’s impossible to determine the context in which this claim was made, but the USAF’s own claims are rather different: 93 tanks (about 15% of the Serbian inventory), 153 APCs (25%) and 389 artillery pieces (including mortars) – plus 100% of Serbia’s petroleum refining capacity, 70% of its road bridges and 50% of its rail ones, 65% of its ammunition production, and 70% of its aircraft maintenance capacity.
The proof of course is in the pudding: Serbia was defeated. Resorting to some sort of Serbian version of the Dolchstoßlegende to explain away this inconvenient fact isn’t helpful. Everything else aside if the Serbian economy wasn’t in fact on its knees and Milosevic determined to sell out Serbian interests anyway (and why on earth would he do that?) he would have been dead within 24 hours and replaced with someone with more iron in the spine. Serbia had far too much invested in this venture to throw it away because of one man’s perfidy.
14:54: That article has some obvious bias. Still claiming that Russia started the Georgia war when not one but SEVERAL international fact-finding missions (from UN and EU) came to the conclusion that it was the Georgians who had primary responsibility? Unbelievable. Or maybe not so unbelievable, considering the work history of the writers. Of course, one could argue that the Georgians had been PROVOKED by the small skirmishes earlier, but they certainly responded disproportionately by attempting a full-out invasion. Then Russia in turn responded even more disproportionately. What the heck did they expect?
Discounting the obvious bias, the article does make some interesting points, particularly about how useful it is to have “soldiers of no nation”. Putin has seen how effectively this was used in Libya and Syria by certain Middle Eastern states (making unofficial war on certain countries by sending thousands of local men to be terrorists there), and is trying a similar thing himself. Only unlike those terrorists in Syria, his people haven’t killed anyone yet.
Checkout this critique of US foreign policy:
The Flaw in ‘Cornering’ Russia
March 10, 2014
Official Washington, including its compliant mainstream media, paints Moscow as the “black hat” in the Ukraine crisis but the fuller picture would show that the supposed U.S. “white hats” are the ones who have violated the deal that ended the Cold War, writes ex-CIA analyst Melvin A. Goodman.
By Melvin A. Goodman
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/03/10/the-flaw-in-cornering-russia/
Excellent post by Saker today, imo. I have two very minor quibbles:
(1) Former Kharkov Governor Mikhail Dobkin was arrested in Kiev on charges of “inciting violations of the territorial integrity of Ukraine and anti-constitutional behavior,” said Dobkin’s lawyer Yulia Pletneva (source: http://rt.com/news/kiev-clashes-rioters-police-571/ ). Either Itar-Tass or Voice of Russia, I forget which, reported a day or two ago that Dobkin was in Kiev when he was arrested. I regard Dobkin’s arrest in Kiev as essentially not pertinent to the question of planning for pro-Russian resistance in the east of Ukraine.
(2) As an item of history, Milosevic asked the parliament of Serbia to vote in favour of surrender to NATO. The parliament made the decision to do so. Thus the decision was made by the representatives of the people, and thus it is unfair to characterize Serbia’s surrender as “a betrayal… by Milosevic”.
Saker mentioned the significant development that most Ukraine government websites have dropped the Russian language (I see one exception at the moment is http://www.rada.gov.ua/ru ). The following is another development which is significant, which occurred today, 11 Mar 2014, as reported at RT.com:
“Government in Kiev has demanded that the country’s cable and other TV providers stop broadcasting a range of Russian channels, including Vesti, Rossiya 24 and Channel One, by 7pm Tuesday, Ukraine’s National Council on Television and Radio said in a statement issued by its press service. According to the press service, over 50 providers have already stopped broadcasting these Russian channels.”
http://rt.com/news/kiev-clashes-rioters-police-571/
Do you think Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine is going to passively accept these language-related developments? No, you don’t. Is eastern Ukraine being pushed further into the resolve to secede? Yes.
Yes, I agree, the article I posted did repeat the lie that Russia started the war in 2008. Sorry about that. I was more interested in the new type of warfare it ascribed to RU.
Saker,
In regards to this article, is there a possibility that there could be strategists or generals that have a similar mindset as Curtis Lemay and others like him during the time of the Kennedy administration who were pushing for World War 3? They did actually believe in a first strike against the Soviets and that the losses from a retaliatory strike were acceptable. Please clarify if I am in error of the items I mentioned above. Thank you for the hard work you do. You’re posts are like a filter/scrubber from all the information pollution out there. All the best.
Brate Sokenekose, if that is bitterness and disappointment I detect in your tone, then I share them. We can rail about the slithering Uniat Yatseniuk’s leanings and sponsors, about the neo-Nazis, about the coup etc. etc., till the cows come home, but at some point we have to address how Russia just walked into this mess. Russia should have foreseen all this stuff and laid out contingency plans accordingly. Sorry to be a whiner, but this huge lapse is the elephant in the room.
@Lexington:but the USAF’s own claims are rather different:
That does not matter. First, the Pentagon is a known liar and falsifier of data (nobody expects them to fess up to the truth anyway).
The proof of course is in the pudding: Serbia was defeated.
You are missing the point. Serbia was indeed defeated, but not the 3rd Serbian Army Corps. Nobody ever doubted the USAF to bomb the shit out of the civilian population and the infrastructure it uses, my point is that airpower alone does not work to defeat a military force. All your figures prove is that NATO can bomb the shit out of a small country. We already knew that.
@EVERYBODY
I simply have no time to go into why and how Milosevic surrendered here, sorry. I will just say that the best evidence I have seen points out to a deal: you surrender the Serbs in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo and we will leave you in power in rump-Yugoslavia. For those doubting this, remember this: before becoming such a (fake) patriot, Milosevic was a commie apparatchik and a banker. Just saying.
Sorry, I cannot go into this further right now. But I would be delighted to come back to this topic if/when things cool down in the Ukraine.
Cheers,
The Saker
Stopping people from seeing their favorite news channel is bad but people wont riot for that. But people will riot if you interfere with their soaps so are the rulers in Kiev so dumb to close Channel One?
Europe would love American gas. Not so much because it would remove the necessity of Russian gas (it wont as supply is to small) or lower the price of gas in Europe (same reasonas Russia demands gas priced in oil) but it would increase the price of gas in the US
Russia or America: Who Is the Real Aggressor?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-or-america-who-is-the-real-aggressor/5372882
What the zionist western media and leadership has been saying about Russia and Putin is opposite to the reality and are a good description of western actions, instead. As the western claims of war crimes by targeted guvs invariably turn out to be far more applicable to the west’s own behaviour towards the people of those countries that the zionazis targeted for destruction and slander, I think the author makes a good point.
A recent example: the bandera nazis were/are flagging homes of people in western Ukraine with Russian backgrounds as Russian. The zionazi media/quislings covered this up by inventing a story that people in Crimea were doing this to Tatar people in Crimea.
вот так
Saker
“That does not matter. First, the Pentagon is a known liar and falsifier of data (nobody expects them to fess up to the truth anyway).”
That also applies to American historians in general and to the “history” most Americans are exposed to. There are a few American historians who are not jingoist America exceptionalists, but they are a rarity.
вот так
Saker, have you read the latest article by Pepe Escobar?
http://rt.com/op-edge/crimea-terrorism-saudi-tatars-050/
Do you (or anyone else) have any thoughts about potential Saudi meddling in the Crimea?
Putin Adviser Dugin Publishes Best Case Scenario: Russia Liberates Europe
http://www.dailystormer.com/putin-adviser-dugin-publishes-best-case-scenario-russia-liberates-europe/
This is his book “The Fourth Political Theory.” http://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Political-Theory-Alexander-Dugin/dp/1907166564/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-1&qid=1394584329
The comments are worth reading. I might get a copy myself.
If you go to the Wikipedia link at the top of the article, he’s described as a conservative traditionalist that wants the Orthodox Church more involved in the society, and appears to possibly be an admirer of German Fascism without the racism. His influence on the Russian government may be one reason for the anti-homosexual stand by Putin. His ideas appear to be a push-back against Liberalism, which is really the Frankfurt School method of destroying a stable society.
This item from his essay is pretty intense:
4. In Novorossia, resistance increases and gradually moves to the phase of direct rebellion against the Kiev henchmen. There is a bloody civil war. Russia deploys massive effective support structure; symmetrically the West supports Kiev. At a certain moment, in response to the sabotage in Russia and bloody actions of the nationalists and the repressive apparatus of Kiev against civilians and the east of Ukraine, Russia sends its troops into the east. The West threatens nuclear war. This is the existential moment for Putin. But he cannot stop. Going hard (possibly with heavy losses), Novorossia is liberated. The Left-bank Ukraine is conquered, with its border along the Dnieper. A new government is founded — for example, Ukraine or Novorossia. Or a version of Crimea may be repeated.
This is Novorussia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya
This is a pretty good picture of Dugin, taken from a review of his book on Amazon. It appears there is a lot of important missing information on Post-Soviet Russia, especially from certain Russians that moved to the west and present themselves as “experts.”
See the one star review titled: The nihilistic fascism of Alexander Dugin
http://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Political-Theory-Alexander-Dugin/product-reviews/1907166564/ref=cm_cr_dp_see_all_btm?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending
* Good analysis of the military solution. Despite all rational thoughts and intentions, however, it’s worth bearing in mind that the Cuban Missile Crisis is one of the few occasions where nuclear catastrophe was averted by a whisker. Obama’s chest thumping will raise these risks. Something triggering a nuclear war could happen due to a misunderstanding, as they often happen in times of war, because if you don’t shoot, the other guy might kill you, or – as another commenter mentioned – due to a single Curtis LeMay popping up somewhere, having had a bad breakfast or an unwilling subordinate or both.
> The US is offering to sell its shale gas to Europe, which would be extremely costly
Japan’s Abe is hell-bent on getting American gas, because Japan is running on 0% nuclear power most of the time for years now, due to Fukushima. Because of that, US regulators are already in the process of revising laws and making preparations to export gas – so they say.
However, I kind of doubt that
a) they are really going to do it
b) that if they do, it means anything
For one, it is costly to set up this infrastructure from scratch, as you mentioned, but furthermore, the “Saudi America” hype started by the likes of Daniel Yergin in 2012 is not only yet to materialize – despite gains in production due to MASSIVE investment, but take a look at this WSJ chart capital expenditures vs. production. It’ll bring tears to your eyes. That in addition to the last IEA assessment in 2003 that corrected its optimism from earlier changes to say that the newfound oil and gas riches will add a year or two in terms of world energy supply.
The current situation is pretty unreal if you look at all the facts, and I challenge everyone to reconcile the following contradicting facts:
* natural gas in the us is dirt cheap
* capital investment into natural gas is extremely high in the us
* natural gas production in the us, despite the boast, hardly exploded, even though it increased noticeably
* the new methods of oil and gas extraction are energy (!) expensive and depletion occurs rapidly, in contrast to the traditional “stick a straw in the ground” approach
To me this looks like a sophisticated form of pump-n-dump, to extract money from unwitting investors until it becomes obvious it is mostly hot air.
Otherwise it would be a no brainer for Obama to insulate the world from “Putin’s iron grip” by way of energy exports.
Honk
as a reply to Lexington’s comments about the number of artillery pieces, tanks, etc the US Air Force managed to destroy during the bombing of Serbia. The Serbians would make these inflatable tanks and use microwave ovens to have the USAF target them, so it’s no wonder the USAF’s numbers are inflated.
@Anonymous & Lexington:The Serbians would make these inflatable tanks and use microwave ovens to have the USAF target them, so it’s no wonder the USAF’s numbers are inflated.
Absolutely correct. I am so exhausted these days that I forgot to mention that, but I know that this is true. Generally, the key to the amazing survival of the Serbian 3rd Army Corps is in how well-trained the Serbs were in “maskirovka” (I would translate that as “pro-active camouflage, deception and concealment”.
Good point anonymous – thanks for bringing it up!
The Saker
Marvellous analysis, Saker. I have donated, I hope to see more :-)
Without intending to make any point regarding the fate of Yugoslavia and its parts, could it be that there was just symbolic political or military significance to the bombing campaign there (or in other places such as Libya)… little more than a commercial sponsorship of the bomb and missile manufacturers under the NATO (Naturally American Terrorist Organisation) figleaf.
@Lexington, you might be interested in this article, “Revisiting the Lessons of Operation Allied Force” (2009).
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.html#mozTocId425359
I read it a few years ago, so I don’t remember all the details. However, I recall the author being surprised by how resilient and clever the Serbian military was. And the author is clearly pro-NATO.
– Abraham
•
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/03/11/putin4prez/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=putin4prez
Tuesday, March 11th, 2014 | Posted by Kevin Barrett
USA Seeks to Join Russian Federation
By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor
Poutine, Président d’une Europe de l’Atlantique à Vladivostock.
Aline
Now that Wall Street seems to have obtained the Ukrainian gold reserves, perhaps they’ll lose interest in the place.
Saker, I don’t know how reliable this site is, but looks like all the Gold was taken out of Ukraine on orders from one of the ‘new leaders’. http://iskra-news.info/news/segodnja_nochju_iz_borispolja_v_ssha_strartoval_samoljot_s_zolotym_zapasom_ukrainy/2014-03-07-9122
Hi saker,
Just pointing out to you this concise and meaningful article!
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/03/the-arseniy-yatsenyuk-foundation-has-disappeared/
Regards,
Evia
Re: gold
Very likely true.
One explanation: Yats fears – worst case – an invasion by Putin, so he wants to store it somewhere safe. Legitimate, though probably unrealistic concern of a an illegitimate head of state.
Another explanation: This might be news to some, but Ukraine is as broke as broke can be. Ask Greece how nice the EU and Western institutions and IMF are. Gold is the ultimate security.
> Now that Wall Street seems to have obtained the Ukrainian gold reserves, perhaps they’ll lose interest in the place.
Yes! We finally got aaaaaaall of their shiny – what? just 40 tons? Damnit!
Honk
The following is new news in relation to Ukraine. For people without knowledge of the USA political scene, let me it preface it by saying the US Chamber of Commerce is the USA’s biggest and most important advocacy group representing large businesses and industry; and its views are seriously influential among Republican party politicians and in the US Congress in general.
The US Chamber of Commerce opposes the introduction of unilateral sanctions against Russia over political tensions in Crimea. “We in the business community do not want to be caught in the crossfire,” Myron Brilliant, executive vice president of the Chamber of Commerce, told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday. The Wall Street Journal says a meeting of the Chamber’s US-Russia Business Council (headed by Alcoa CEO Klaus Kleinfeld) with Obama administration’s national security advisers took place last week to discuss concerns over the sanctions proposals. The Wall Street Journal’s sources among current and former American officials say that the US and other Western countries would focus on “individual, targeted sanctions because broader economic sanctions could directly harm Western businesses”. http://en.itar-tass.com/world/723114
Have the Russians been scuttling ships?
There are quite a few reports like these-
http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ukrainian-navy-officer-looks-scuttled-decommissioned-russian-vessel-photo-165502190.html
http://navaltoday.com/2014/03/06/russia-sinks-ship-to-block-ukrainian-navy-ships/
floating about in the minor western press.
Smells fishy to me but I wondered if anyone here could shed some light on the matter.
Chairman Of Joint Chiefs: US Ready For “Military Response” In Ukraine
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-12/chairman-joint-chiefs-staff-us-ready-military-response-ukraine
So much for cool heads at the Pentagon. Here’s his quote:
From Bloomberg:
According to the Web site of the Atlantic Council, Dempsey said that “he’s been talking to his military counterparts in Russia, but he’s also sending a clear message to Ukraine and members of NATO that the U.S. military will respond militarily if necessary.”
“We’re trying to tell [Russia] not to escalate this thing further into Eastern Ukraine, and allow the conditions to be set for some kind of resolution in Crimea. We do have treaty obligations with our NATO allies. And I have assured them that if that treaty obligation is triggered [in Europe], we would respond,” Dempsey said.
According to the General, the incursion of Russian troops into the Crimea creates risks for all the countries of Europe and NATO allies.
“If Russia is allowed to do this, which is to say move into a sovereign country under the guise of protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine, it exposes Eastern Europe to some significant risk, because there are ethnic enclaves all over Eastern Europe and the Balkans,” Dempsey said.
Russia allows Ukrainian surveillance flight to confirm no troops near border http://rt.com/news/russia-allows-flight-ukraine-374/
“We have decided to allow such a flight. We hope that our neighbors are assured that there is no military activity that threatens them on the border.”
Antonov vehemently denied a statement Tuesday by Igor Tenyukh, defense minister for the Kiev coup-appointed government, that Russia had amassed more than 220,000 troops, 1,800 tanks and over 400 helicopters in regions adjacent to eastern Ukraine.
“Ukrainian military officials know full well that the entire [Russian] Southern and Western Military Districts put together don’t have that much equipment. The only way you could arrive at that number of soldiers would be if you counted their families,” Antonov said.
“I would dissuade Mr Tenyukh from adding fuel to the fire of the crisis, which is what he appears to be doing. He openly outlined the reasons for this himself, when he asked the Ukrainian parliament to issue him with more funding,” continued the Russian official.”
I like his tone. :)
вот так
Saker:
Col David Hackworth wrote about the air war in Kosovo at the time.
http://www.hackworth.com/15jun99.html
It was like a wrestling match between Little Orphan Annie and Jesse Ventura – the little redheaded kid being Serbia and Jesse being a muscle-bound NATO. Annie weighed in with a fourth-rate 1960s army, backed by 10 million people from a primarily agricultural state the size of Ohio whose economy pumps out less dough than Coney Island on a rainy day. Jesse hit the scales with the most powerful military machine in the history of the world, 800 million supporters hailing from 19 mostly rich industrialized countries.
After 78 rounds, Annie is still standing and singing “Tomorrow! Tomorrow! I love ya tomorrow!” while Jesse, who has had to spend too much energy preventing his 19 supporters from stabbing him in the back never got in a decisive hit.
When Serbia left Kosovo, its forces going out looked as good as NATO’s military machine did coming in. The bombed and blasted Serb Army vehicles and soldiers were parade-ground sharp. Their trucks and tanks were clean and well maintained, and their soldiers’ gear, uniforms and haircuts looked ready for a tough first sergeant’s inspection. No one looked battle-rattled or had that vacant 1,000-yard stare that comes from a few too many nearby hits.
After all those bombs and missiles and all of NATO’s glowing reports about battle damage inflicted on the non-white-flag-waving Serbian Army, 11 MiG fighters rose from an air base in Kosovo on the day the peace deal was final. They wagged their perfect, unruffled wings and headed north. After such a pummeling, how could 11 jet fighters, almost more than Great Britain used in the war, remain unscathed?
@Hunsdon:Col David Hackworth wrote about the air war in Kosovo at the time.
LOL! Very good way of putting it, he is spot on! Frankly, the notion that air campaigns can win wars is based on a complete misreading of Desert Storm and a fundamental misunderstanding of warfare.
I used to study with a VERY sharp USAF pilot who not only flew in Vietnam, but who also worked on the development of the YF-23. One day he told us “its all very well to win all the air battles, but it does you no good if when you fly back to base you find that the officer’s mess is occupied by enemy forces”. This guy new that “combined arms” or AirLand Battle means that the air component cannot do all the job by itself. Yes, airpower is a fantastic capability which changed the face of warfare forever, but at the end of the day, you will always need “boots on the ground” – and I don’t mean special forces, I mean infantry grunts. They – and artillery – really win wars and no war can be won without them.
Thanks for a a great text, I will store it in my files.
Cheers,
The Saker