Ok, for all of you actually aware of the latest Geo-Political issues of the day, Russia appealed to the USA to move the nuclear weapons away from it’s borders. This is for the Ukraine nuclear placements, in case you are unaware. (Of course, the media is in full engagement about defending the Ukraine from Russian encroachment. Yada. yada. Yada. If you beleive that, then you are a moron.)

After the ultimation, the USA paused and much speculation has resulted from the delay in response.

But there should not be any confusion, actually. It’s all pretty historical

Whether war or terror, or attack, the systems are all simple boilerplate.

The classic terrorist tactic is the massacre of prisoners, or the sacking of a city which has refused to negotiate, surrender, or consider paying tribute. The execution of a conquered garrison or the sacking of a city has no immediate tactical advantage. But the act is intended to serve as a warning to other cities of the terrible consequences of resistance.

Genghis Khan was famous for his use of terror. During the Mongol conquest of China, his forces would arrive at a Chinese city and erect a large white tent for Genghis. If the city submitted to his rule, it might be looted, but the lives of the inhabitants would be spared.

Now, if there was no response to the white tent, then a red tent was erected in its place. If the city now fell the soldiers and male inhabitants of the city would be executed, but the women and children would be spared.

If the city continued to resist, a black tent would be put up – signifying that when the city fell, all of it’s inhabitants would be executed. And they were. It’s difficult to calculate numbers 800 years after the fact, but rough estimates indicate that 30 million people were killed in China by Genghis and the Mongols.

Terrorism worked.

Genghis’s grandson, Hulagu Khan (brother to Kublai Khan) used precisely these tactics in his conquest of the Middle East in 1258. He besieged Baghdad, and when it fell after a one-month siege, the Mongols executed almost the entire population of the city. Estimates range from 100,000 to one million. In 1260, Damascus surrendered to the Mongols rather than suffer the same fate.

Now, pay attention.

The notion that individual human lives have immense value is a western ideal.

It is not exclusively Christian, but the notion is certainly central to Christianity. It is historically true that the influence of Christianity had the effect of setting limits in warfare. It is a western, Christian, notion that civilian, non-combatants should not be targetted or deliberately killed.

It’s an artifical construct.

As the Christian consensus has evaporated in the west, the less likely the culture has become to value or protect individual human life. Pragmatism is antithetical to natural law.

So buckle up.

Terrorists are quite prepared to take innocent human life, because in their calculation this helps to achieve their ultimate objective (though this probably ascribes more rational analysis to terrorists than they deserve).

You are dealing with two differnt cultures. There is the “West” and there is the “East”. In the “Western Bloc” there is supposedly reason, and rules of war and society, and the entire rest of the world must obey them or suffer the consequences.

But in the “East”, this is just nonsense. And the blustering, and the posturing is ignored as some kind of crazy talk by lunitics.

The East (Russia and China) agree with dealing with the collective “Western Bloc”. They have come to (accurately) believe that thay cannot reason with the West. They cannot persuade them to abandon war and war-like ambitions. You can only defeat them.

Peace is never achieved by negotiation – only temporary cease-fires. Peace is achieved when one side is victorious over the other. It is something that they do not like, but are now fcing the facts.

…

After decades of encroaching war-mongering, Russia and China has decided to tell the United States and their allies (the collective West) to STOP.

This has been reported in the media in various bits and pieces, all of a haphazard nature, and completely omitting the signifigance of the events as they transpire. Those that read the “Western media” are completely ignorant of the gravity of the situation.

It’s extremely serious.

The world order must change or the United States and it’s European cronies will be vaporized.

That’s pretty fucking serious..

I searched the Washington Post, Bloomberg and Reuters earlier this morning and there was not one peep about yesterday´s meeting. Something happened.

 -John

So let’s not get too caught up.

Just let me say the following…

• Russia and China can decloak all stealth aircraft.
• Russia and China can decloak all stealth submarines.
• Russia and China and turn off all Western communication and targeting electronics.
• Russia and China can launch hyper-velocity nuclear swarm missiles to the American and European nations and destroy everything without a single defensive measure implemented.
• The Western Bloc has none of this.

Now, they do not want to do this.

However, the American nuclear missiles being placed in the Ukraine, Australia, Japan and planned in Taiwan will not be permitted.

Not. Going. To. Happen.

So…

So… What is the American and NATO response to the polite ultimation offered by Asia?

There are no official results from the meeting in Geneva yet.  The US has promised to give the Russians an official answer in writing within a week.  The Russians have declared that they have explained the Russian position to their US counterparts in minute details leaving no ambiguity.  According to Russian sources, the US position was a “diehard/stubborn” one.

Clearly, the War Party in the USA is, at least so far, prevailing.  When I listen to the delusional statements of the likes of Blinken, Psaki, Kirby & Co I get the strong feeling that for these people everything is a zero-sum game and that to them an agreement with Russia, any agreement, is simply unthinkable.

If so, then this is all good news.  Frankly, it is pretty clear that the War Party has won the day, at least so far, which leaves Russia no other option that to take further unilateral actions which is, I believe, the only way left for Russia to bring the leaders of the West back into the real world.

There are still further talks planned, with the Russia-NATO council and the OSCE.  Never say never and maybe a last minute breakthrough is possible, but I personally don’t see how that could happen, not when one of the two parties is absolutely, maniacally, determined to treat the other as some kind of semi-savage inferior race with whom no civilized western leaders will ever negotiate.  The western diplomatic toolkit is has shrunk to basically the following:

• Exceptionalism, messianism, racism and self-worship.
• Threats and imposition of sanctions for “bad behavior” like a teacher would punish a grade-school kid for being rowdy and not listening to the teacher.
• A total belief in both the West invincibility and invulnerability no matter what the “real reality” actually is.
• A total categorical refusal to admit, even by implication, that the world has profoundly changed and that the Anglosphere does not “rule the waves” anymore.

There is only one thing Russia can do to bring the leaders of the West back to reality: to turn up what I call the “pain dial”.

In the meantime, the Russian military has declared that it hopes to leave Kazakhstan within a week, but only if/when the situation in this country is fully stabilized.

President Tokaev has said that the CSTO forces withdrawal will being in 48 hours and will last no more than 10 days.  I hope that he is right.

However, it will take months for Kazakhstan and Russia to deal with the insurgents, especially in the West and South of Kazakhstan.  But that would already be a mopping-up operation which Russia and Kazakhstan can coordinate on a bilateral basis without any need to involve the CSTO.

For the time, we have to wait and see what actually happens in the next few days, things should become much clearer.

Andrei

…

Well, MoA covered the events.

With No Progress In Talks Russia Will Have To React

Monday’s negotiations over Russian security demands between the U.S. and Russia were, as predicted, a failure.

Russia’s core demand, to end the NATO drive to its borders by excluding membership for the Ukraine and Georgia, was rejected. A for once realistic NYT piece did not even try to hide the disaster:

In Talks on Ukraine, U.S. and Russia Deadlock Over NATO Expansion

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei A. Ryabkov, Russia’s lead negotiator, insisted after the meeting that it was “absolutely mandatory” that Ukraine “never, never, ever” become a NATO member.

His American counterpart, Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, reiterated that the United States could never make such a pledge because “we will not allow anyone to slam closed NATO’s open door policy,” and she said that the United States and its allies would not stand by if Russia sought to change international borders “by force."

Today’s talk between all NATO members and Russia in Brussels had similar results. Russia’s core requests were rejected and a bunch of stuff with which NATO would like to restrict Russian advantages was thrown up to divert the attention from the core issues.

As NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg summarized it:

Today Russia raised the proposals that they published in December, aimed at addressing their security concerns.

These include demands to stop admitting any new members to NATO. And to withdraw forces from eastern Allies.

Allies on their side reaffirmed NATO’s Open Door policy. And the right for each nation to choose its own security arrangements.

Okay then. Russia will certainly choose its own security arrangements. And NATO will not like to see them.

The NATO wishlist for future talk includes these items:

Allies would like to discuss concrete ways to increase the transparency of military exercises, to prevent dangerous military incidents, and reduce space and cyber threats.

Allies have also offered to look at arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation. Including to address reciprocal limitations on missiles, and to address nuclear policies.

On lines of communications, NATO Allies are interested in looking at ways to improve civil and military communications channels, and the possibility of re-establishing our respective offices in Moscow and Brussels.

None of those have any priority for Russia and, as it will surely point out, it was NATO which in October initiated the breaking off of civil and military communications channels by expelling 8 members of Russia’s NATO mission in Brussels

The alliance has also halved the size of the Russian mission to NATO, headquartered in Brussels, from twenty to ten accredited positions -- the eight expelled Russian officials plus two other positions that will now be abolished.

Russia reacted to that outrageous behavior by closing its outpost in Brussels.

After the meeting today Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman added a new U.S. demand to her list:

Sherman, the number two State Department official who is leading the U.S. delegation in separate meetings in Europe this week, said the NATO-Russia meeting ended with "a sober challenge" for Russia "to de escalate tensions, choose the path of diplomacy, to continue to engage in honest and reciprocal dialogue so that together we can identify solutions that enhance the security of all."

The deputy secretary said that the Russian delegation did not commit, nor reject, NATO offers for follow-up discussions. The delegation further made no commitment to de-escalate, Sherman said, but added that they did not reject de-escalation.

"Russia's actions have caused this crisis and it is on Russia to de-escalate tensions and give diplomacy the chance to succeed... There was no commitment to de-escalate. Nor was there a statement that there would not be."

There is nothing to de-escalate. A number of Russian troops stationed within Russia are training to guard Russian borders. They have always done so and will continue to do that. It is the U.S., not Russia, which is exaggerating their number, today with ‘additional helicopters‘ which no one has seen:

While troop movements have slowed, there are still 100,000 military personnel near the border and now the Russians have positioned additional attack aircraft there, American officials said. Attack and transport helicopters, along with ground attack fighter jets, would be a critical Russian advantage, should Mr. Putin decide to invade Ukraine.

Alexander Mercouris points out (vid) that the U.S. started the current affair when it, in March 2021, pushed the Ukraine to restart a war against it rebellious eastern Donbas provinces. Russia responded by quickly building up and showing off a force large enough to destroy the Ukrainian army.

That calmed down the Ukrainian issue for a while but the U.S. and NATO continued to pressure Russia with bomber flights near Russia’s borders and warships in the Black Sea. What did they expect but a Russian response?

There is nothing the U.S. can do about troop positioning within Russia. Exaggerating their numbers only builds more pressure. The constant false lamenting about ‘Russian military build-ups’ don’t help to calm things down.

The ‘de-escalation’ has to happen on the U.S. side. Otherwise it will be Russia which has to escalate. That is the warning Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has given to U.S. President Joe Biden. But it does not seem that the U.S. has come to understand that.

The talks will fail as the ‘western’ side is rejecting the main requests Russia has. The promised ‘military-technical measures’ will be implemented in Europe, Asia and probably also in Latin America. Given that Russia has throughout the last decade presented a number of revolutionary weapon designs we can expect some new surprises which the U.S. will be unable to match.

Fact is that Russia is capable to defend itself and its allies from military attacks and U.S. instigated color revolution attempts like in Belarus and Kazakhstan.

That the U.S. does not like that is not Russia’s problem.

Comments 1 – Economic not a hot war

“When I listen to the delusional statements of the likes of Blinken, Psaki, Kirby & Co I get the strong feeling that for these people everything is a zero-sum game and that to them an agreement with Russia, any agreement, is simply unthinkable.”

Agree completely.

When Ryabkov told the press conference that he had patiently explained to the US team that “Russia has no intention of invading Ukraine” my immediate reaction was ‘Oh no, why is Russia on the back foot, having to defend its position from criticism again?’

But then I realized, he must have been totally exasperated, he was talking to brainwashed muppets, utterly filled with hubris and Hollywood’s propaganda. At that moment I knew the talks were simply for Russia a “going through the motions” exercise.

Putin and his Kremlin know that they must force the hand of the deep state and its oligarchs who control the western powers that it does not pay to ignore Russia’s proposals/demands.

I do not expect a short military war, rather a lengthy economic war of attrition, with Russia and China applying an ever tighter squeeze.

Europe will freeze this winter, and next. Russian airspace will become either more expensive, or closed to western airlines altogether. The digital yuan will become more ubiquitous, the BRI will continue to grow apace, etc.

We are seeing the final fruits of decades of deterioration in western education and focus. It’s going to be a very bumpy ride.

WT

Comments 2 – A war to rally the country

"The loss of a carrier would elicit a nuclear reply, I am certain."

Comment 5 – Russia’s response

Russia’s response will be military-technical, asymmetrical, effective and unexpected. The Western side will pray Russia to return to the negotiating table. If there will be a Western side at all. This is a game where Russia has all the cards.

-Andreas

Comment 6 – NATO High Noon Shootout

Final MM Comments

This is a historical time.

The Collective West is in a terrible state of disarray and at a serious disadvantage. It is very easy fro them to back out from it; Just pull back their military forces and leave Asia. Unfortunately the egos of the collective “leadership” has repeatedly rejected these appeals.

The next step will not be so kind.

So far, both Russia and China have put up “white tents”. All have been rejected. The next stage is the “red tent”.

This will NOT be comfortable. In fact it will be slightly horrific. There will be econmic and social pressures placed on the collective West. Inflation will go ballistic, access to food, medicine and energy will be curtailed, and that will have a domino effect ont he societies so impaced.

If this is not successful, then what is next is the “black tent”.

That will be horrific. Let’s see just how intelligent the collecitve West actually is.

The US-led NATO military bloc has reverted to full Cold War strategy of “containment” towards Russia and seeks “full spectrum dominance,” Moscow's Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told reporters on Wednesday.

The diplomat added that Moscow believes NATO’s behavior is creating a “unacceptable” threat to Russia that it will have to counter. 

Grushko also alleged that the bloc is responsible for ending any and all cooperation with Russia on key common security issues such as the fight against terrorism, drug trafficking and piracy. He called out the US over the “collapse” of the arms control agreements, bringing up Washington’s exit from the INF and Open Skies treaties and dragging its feet on extending New START.

-RT

Forget about all you have read.

The system in place follow the standard “Old Domain” format. A “white Tent” opportunity was presented and it was rejected. Next up is a “red tent”. There will be pressures applied. In general, given the condition fo the “West” this will not be comfortable. Most of the population would generally agree to a calming fo the situation, but the leadership is completely oblivious. My guess is that they will create a situation promoting the establishment of black tents. This will not be good for anyone.

Sorry.

Do you want more?

You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning 2. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.

.

Articles & Links

.

• You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
• You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
• You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
• You can find out more about the author HERE.
• If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
• If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.