Have you ever wondered, ‘how do you really know what’s going on the other side of the world?’ My guess is that most people just accept things the way they’re reported in the news. Having been to a number of other countries that also had an interval in the news spotlight at one time, it’s true that facts on the ground may be different than what ends up on the evening news, so how do you know? The Russian war incursion into Ukraine is the conflict in question today. There are still multiple versions of news. Many are diametrically opposite versions. This is certainly the case when Russia is actively placating its domestic audience. This commentary is a synthesis of news stories based on agreed clues and logic since none of us can see exactly what’s happening on the ground.
There’s a war going on in newsrooms as well as on the ground. That extends to ‘the fog of war’ as well. There are hundreds of players with government and private groups that have a vested interest in various aspect of the war; some in winning, some in losing, many in extending the war as along as possible. Disinformation is a known weapon of war. There should be only one interest: the people of Ukraine.
What we know:
Russia invaded Ukraine. It seems stupid and redundant to have to say that, but it has to be said because there are some interests that act as if it were the other way around. This was an extension of prior actions started in 2014.
Did Ukraine goad the war into being? If a desire to enter a protective treaty, NATO, is goading, then yes, but sovereign nations do that. Sweden and Finland are in hot discussions to do the same. There is no intrinsic difference between Ukraine inquiring, Sweden and Finland applying, and England, France, and Germany participating in a mutual defense alliance. Maybe NATO is just a globalist shell, but then maybe it’s not. At the end of the day, it’s based on a legal document or contract.
Are Ukrainians and Russians really just having a brotherly feud and aren’t they really the same country at the end of the day? Both countries are made up of multiple ethnicities. Modern Ukraine was founded as a nation on August 24, 1991. In relative age, you cannot question the legal validity of any country without calling into question all modern countries including the United States. Ukraine obviously does not want to be governed by the autocrat Putin.
Was the US and other globalist using Ukraine as a proxy to goad Russia into intervening? This is entirely possible. It is also entirely irrelevant. The United States has a black history of meddling in the affairs of other nations, especially in fomenting regime changes. As a nation, we have innocent blood on our own hands. However, at the point at which Putin started amassing troops on the border and various parties tried to intervene, whatever covert shenanigans took place in the dark didn’t matter anymore. Internally, Ukraine has many internal political interests, some that we agree with, some that we don’t. Russia has only one interest and those are expressed exclusively through Putin. Apart from his probable psychological problems, his plan is consistent with long term Russian aspirations to reassemble its lost empire. This one prominent factor takes precedent over all other conspiracy theories being floated about why there is a war in Ukraine right now.
Who’s winning? Based on survivability and strategic damage done to the far larger invading Russian force, Ukraine should be considered to be winning but it’s thus far a pyrrhic victory due to the level of losses sustained. Otherwise, it is too soon to tell.
Is it true as Putin claimed that this is really a war with the US? Another way to ask this question is, how much of Ukraine’s success is because of unpublicized US involvement on the ground? This is probable, especially with intelligence functions, but entirely unverifiable. It’s undeniable that Ukraine has mustered its own fight based on the extraordinary involvement of much of its fighting age male population helping with the war. But as complex weaponry becomes more available, training, support, and strategic command functions will inevitably be pulled in from the US and other NATO countries. They will remain covert as long as possible. This is not an earth-shattering conspiracy; this is how wars with collective involvement are fought all over the globe.
Some say that Russia is really winning, could that be true? Russia’s exit from the theater of Kiev has to be interpreted as a defeat. Losing the quantity and scope of weaponry that they’ve lost is damning to their ambitions. Their naval losses alone, including their primary flagship in the Black Sea today counters the notion of any winning. To the extent that Russia verifiably continues to float nuclear options, this alone tells us all we need to know about how they view their own success and prospects.
Will Russia launch a nuclear war? Any nuclear exchange including low yield tactical launches would inevitably result in quick escalation. If it happens, it will result in a permanent national suicide for Russia but of course significant death and damage elsewhere. Unless Putin is or becomes absolutely deranged, I do not see him taking this option. We have no control over the level of Putin’s derangement. We can only be ready to respond proportionately.
How will this end? Putin only understands force. If he is anything short of deranged and does not take the nuclear option, and if his forces continue to sustain disproportionate losses, he will eventually bargain for some token compromise and go home. If he cannot win a decisive victory just in Ukraine, there’s no hope of winning a muti-front conventional war with Europe, to include the Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and Scandinavia, especially with wider open defense by the rest of NATO countries. This war is winnable for Ukraine and its unofficial sponsors. It needs to steadily pound the Red Army into oblivion with a continuous stealth influx of advanced weaponry. A man without his Army is done. Sooner or later, he’ll have to face his own people with that news.