APOCALYPSE TOMORROW. DEATH ZONE ON THE “BALCONY”
European leaders insist that in the coming years a war in Europe will begin with an attack by Russia.
These statements cannot be without serious grounds. I think European intelligence services drew major conclusions after their failure at the start of 2022, when only U.S. signals intelligence and British human intelligence uncovered Russia’s preparations to attack Ukraine, and that they now have solid reasons to give their national leaders such forecasts. Let us conduct our own analysis of the situation and form our own forecast of how it may develop, because this directly affects the fate of our country.
We will examine the Kremlin’s motives for unleashing a new war (the main one being the failure to achieve the aims of the war against Ukraine), its decision-making mechanisms, and the degree of its readiness to use nuclear weapons.
I. OBJECTIVES OF THE WAR AND THE DEGREE TO WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED
1. Preventing NATO’s expansion and its approach toward Russia’s borders is only a formal pretext for the war.
Yet Russia’s position in its confrontation with NATO has only worsened since the war began. Sweden and Finland have joined the alliance, and as a result the Russian Baltic Fleet has found itself among hostile shores and is even partially turning into a “lake fleet”: some small missile ships are being transferred to Lake Ladoga, where after launching Kalibr missiles they can at least hide from retaliatory strikes among the skerries. From Finnish territory, as well as from the Gulf of Bothnia, it is now possible to strike the bases of nuclear submarines located in bays along the northern coast of the Kola Peninsula—even with tactical missiles and drones. In addition, the Kandalaksha railway station—where the railways from St. Petersburg and Arkhangelsk converge and through which the peninsula is supplied with everything necessary—has come within range. Thus, a large part of the most important component of Russia’s nuclear triad has come under threat.
2. The real main reason for the war was not the conquest of Ukraine, but rather the conquest of Ukrainians themselves—another 40–45 million new subjects of the empire, since Russia’s population is shrinking.
In the Far Eastern Federal District, which makes up 40% of the country’s territory, only 7.8 million people live. The difference in population density on both sides of the Russian–Chinese border exceeds one hundredfold. With growing dependence on China, in the long-term strategic perspective this may threaten Russia with the loss of its eastern territories.
And now, instead of millions of quick-footed Ukrainian “guest workers,” the Kremlin has received an enraged nation ready to sustain a million-strong army—against which it must now also maintain an army comparable in size.
3. An attempt to overcome the crisis of Russians’ national-historical consciousness after the collapse of the USSR.
Wars are usually started by history teachers who talk about “primordial lost lands,” giving students pride in former greatness and a desire to reclaim what was lost. Real history is mercilessly falsified in the process. German militarism of the last century, in fact, began in the century before last, when a gigantic statue of Arminius was erected on the Rhine—the leader of local tribes who, by deception and betrayal, managed to destroy several Roman legions. At the same time Charlemagne, the founder of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation (which encompassed almost all of Europe), and his conquests were glorified.
Naturally, this led to a desire to return what had been “lost”—and, as a consequence, to the war of 1870 with France, to the First World War, to Hitler’s theory of a “super-race,” and to everything that followed. In the Russian version, this began with the theory of the “triune Russian people,” thereby appropriating the history of Kyivan Rus.
Post #10
3.03K
- ❤ 24
- 👏 4
- 👍 1
- 💩 1
- 🤡 1
- 💯 1