E.Rowell: This analysis asserts that the money being asked for in the US Congress will not help, since the problem for Ukraine is the lack of manpower. There are just not enough men to fight the war. The consequences of the war in Ukraine so far have been hundreds of thousands of deaths of Ukrainians, damage and destruction to the economies of Ukraine, the US, and Europe, all in the vain hopes of destroying Russia.
This war seems to be primarily about protecting a major source of money laundering and other criminal corrupt practices for global predators. Those who support this war are supporting these global predators who are currently also trying to destroy our constitutional republic.
By Daniel Davis, DEEP DIVE 29 February 2024
@inna2
Quite so. As Tom Luongo stated some time ago, they just want to see dead Slavs, but the focus remains on killing Russians and depleting their military abilities.
The globalists do not want Ukraine to win the war. They prolong it, which leads to weakening Ukraine and Russia, hundreds of thousands of deaths, destruction and despair. Many Western people do not understand what is going on in that region. Here is a good article answering many questions about this war and debunking the false narrative: https://news.berkeley.edu/2023/03/20/open-letter-to-jeffrey-sachs-on-the-russia-ukraine-war
Regarding Olaf Scholz’ opposition to using the Taurus system in Ukraine, it might be meaningful if anyone else was voicing such a position. Sholtz has adopted a ‘drag me to the wedding approach to every escalatory step in this war, and on every topic Sholtz was the last to fold, but he always folded. Hopefully the Taurus system will be the Sholtz’ moment to declare ‘you shall not pass’, but it is far more likely that he will instead do as he has done throughout the war, which is to comply after significant hesitation.
Notably, the recent release of the audio leak from the German Military may provide Sholtz with some significant support in holding back on the Taurus system. If you haven’t heard the leak, here is a link:
Good coverage of the material by Davis. One point which should be raised which Davis alludes but does not discuss is that even though Zaluzhney had a better sense of what needed to be done as the Ukrainian control over Avdiika was collapsing, he had no plan to do more than delay Ukraine’s collapse. So, yes, the failure to prepare defensive lines in the rear of Avdiika over the past six months was a crucial blunder, but the defensive lines would not change Ukraine’s strategic position which is marked by a dearth of troops and a dearth of munitions. These matters will not change for Ukraine, and all the defensive lines in the world would only serve to possibly improve the ability to stem the loss of territory which is now in the drip, drip, flood phase. Stating this differently, the well prepared defensive lines which Ukraine failed to build would never have led to Ukraine retaking the initiative in the fabled ‘march to the sea’, and without such a possible outcome, Ukraine can not win, leaving their best option to be in pursuing a negotiated settlement. The negotiations would however be far more profitable if Ukraine were not left with the option of fleeing from one settlement to the next because they faile to listen to Zaluzhny who, while not having a definitive solution to their problem, advocated for the best possible choice for Ukraine.