Ukraine

...the failure of Russia to impress the West with an overwhelming exercise of military force in Ukraine means another step has been taken toward nuclear armageddon.

The rush to nuclear war is not primarily Russia’s fault. It is the West that is being provocative, not Russia.
• The West turned a cold shoulder to Russia’s security concerns.
• The West armed and trained the Ukrainian army and Nazi militia and pointed them at the Donbass Russians.
• The West placed US missiles in Romania and Poland and now in Slovakia.
It is Washington that is pursuing hegemony, not the Kremlin.

The Kremlin’s responsibility is in the weakness of its responses to provocations. First ignoring them for years, making only pointless diplomatic protests. Then when finally forced to intervene in Ukraine, doing so in as limited a way as possible and in a time-consuming way that gives Washington control of the explanation and opportunities to widen the conflict beyond the boundary of the Kremlin’s limited operation.

The Saker and Andrei Martyanov stress the superiority of Russian military tactics and weapon systems, but these important capabilities do not provide the margin of victory when the Kremlin is forever reacting minimally to the initiatives of Washington. The Kremlin’s inability to be proactive and unwillingness to clear Washington’s fifth column out of Russia’s ruling circles will be the hallmarks of Russian defeat."

I note that both Saker and MoA have remained largely silent on the sinking of the Moskva.
The Duran insists it's only a cosmetic propaganda-serving narrative of no military significance.
Southfront, on the other hand, has some sterner coverage (which I found surprising to find there — good for them), including Eric Zuesse's southfront.org/why-russias-ukrainian-campaign-is-failing/, and southfront.org/strike-on-moskva-missile-cruiser-is-only-precursor-to-change-in-military-situation-in-region/

The Russian Black Sea Fleet will become a priority target in the new phase of the military operations in Ukraine. This was clear from the military point of view. The fact of active operations of the Black Sea Fleet west of the Crimea is a constant threat of sea landing, more effective fire support of ground forces by reducing the flight time of subsonic cruise missiles, as well as the factor of threat to sea communications near Odessa, which is disastrous for both the Ukrainian and Western economy. For example, the lack of shipment through the port of neon needed by the global microelectronics industry. This is even more clear in terms of media coverage – the deaths of ships are always perceived more tangibly by the public than the deaths of units of soldiers; this fact is perfectly illustrated by the current shock state of the Russian media sphere.

The attack on the Moskva was not an accident. The cruiser was targeted both for tactical and propaganda reasons.
On the one hand, it is the flagship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, but on the other, it is a deeply outdated ship, worn out by its long service and chronic underfunding.

The Moskva strike was well planned and considered: it was launched in stormy conditions, in order to complicate the ship’s damage control and crew evacuation, and it was located far away from other ships of the Black Sea Fleet.

The operation was conducted in full cooperation between the Navy and NATO forces. According to air monitoring data of April 12, a British reconnaissance aircraft RC-135 was actively working in the Black Sea area and UAV RQ-4 Global Hawk flights were recorded at different times. On that day, Alliance reconnaissance confirmed the presence of the Moskva, checked signatures and received comprehensive data on the location of other Russian Black Sea Fleet ships."

Again, I think the [British] MoD is downplaying this because they don't want to expand the war beyond Ukraine and engage with NATO and this story clearly reveals that NATO is already engaging with them.

Paul Craig Roberts may be right that Russia's refusal to wage war, insisting rather that this is a 'Special Military Operation' is a huge blunder. The other side is waging war. Russia still has an IMF-dominated Central Bank whose power network is possibly more in charge of the country than the Presidency and Duma (as is the case in Europe and America for example).

War is something which cannot be waged by half measures. I think Russia is in a quandary and it is beginning to feel to me like they lack the ability to really take it to the enemy but prefer merely to respond and take counter-measures. I am no longer convinced that Putin is not an at least partially controlled agent...
In any case, if Russia fails to prevent NATO from expanding, the world is in for a protracted world war for many years which will cause untold suffering for billions - literally.

Posted by: Scorpion | Apr 15 2022