WAR

[the watcher]

Leaders express the interests of the owners of money. That's how capitalism works.

I am well aware of how it works, and the security state and military are the enforcement arms for the bankers. The problem here is (1) the masses routinely mistake the names they "elect" for "leaders" and (2) that the media has convinced the masses that they are actually the owners of money instead of them being the donors of money. The truth would be brutal at first, but necessary for understanding the situation we are in.

 

[Ringo]

Dear World
Several members of the United States Govt have publicly stated that war is good for our economy.
If you had any questions about why all of this is happening, there's your answer.

 

[Ringo]

This war is well described by the economic concept of the “irretrievable loss fallacy.” This is when a person who has lost a little in a casino, in the hope of winning back, loses his entire fortune. The West never wanted to fight seriously, its goal was an economic blitzkrieg and the surrender of the Russian Federation.
.
When the plan of economic strangulation and subsequent bankruptcy, the purchase of Russian resources for next to nothing failed (a copy of the early 1990s), they could not stop, on the contrary, raising their rates over and over again. The result was the economic collapse of Europe. And there was no Plan B provided. More precisely, it exists in theory, but will inevitably cause a nuclear war - and then goodbye to all the castles of the Cote d'Azur and private islands of the Caribbean. Goodbye to the little golden discs that the dealer prays to. And now, the ruined idiot stands in his European parliaments and howls loudly.

And outside the window, angry farmers are driving around on tractors, and you are a European political idiot, you can’t go out to them and tell them that subsidies will have to be cut, because world Capital has wasted a trillion greenbacks in the Ukrainian casino.
And the farmers who are still watering the authorities with manure, can remember the glorious traditions of violence.

 

[Silver Cat]

Not true, not true at all.

First of all, there were never any signals sent out about the attack. Not a single one, every single order from January 1941 until the attack happened was entirely hand carried. It was never discussed on the phone, via telegraph, and certainly never by radio. The very first radio message ever sent about the attack from when the operations was conceived in January 1941 was on 7 December when the lead pilot radioed back "Tiger" three times signifying they had complete surprise. That was the first form of electronic communication sent regarding the attack.

Plus, the Japanese military in their communications not only used the codes, but a secondary sequence of code words. Even if we had somehow managed to intercept plans of an attack, they never would have said "Pearl Harbor". That is why the US had to go to such an elaborate ruse in 1942 to learn that "AF was out of water". Of course, that would be of no help as the Japanese were using IJN code JN-25, which we did not break until 1942. The only code at that time we were regularly breaking was Purple, used by the Japanese Diplomatic Service.

This was common in all militaries, not only codes but also code words. That is why in both World Wars the "Codetalkers" were so valuable. Both the Germans in WWI and the Japanese in WWII did manage to capture several of the Indians that spoke the languages used. But they were worthless, as in addition to speaking in Choctaw, Cherokee, Cheyenne, Navaho, and other languages they were also speaking in code. So even with a native speaker, the messages made absolutely no sense. Like requesting an "Eagle put a potato on a turtle" and then a series of letters. That was a request to have an SDB bomb a tank, and the letters were the coordinates. But to somebody that spoke the language but did not know the spoken code that was completely nonsensical.

The problem was not in ignorance itself. The problem was in self-comforting wishful-thinking and active denying the necessarity o know anything about actual Japanese plans.
-------

W.D. Puleston, The Armed Forces of the Pacific, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1941, pp 116-117

The greatest danger from Japan, a surprise attack on the unguarded Pacific Fleet, lying at anchor in San Pedro Harbor, under peacetime conditions, has already been averted. The Pacific Fleet is at one of the strongest bases in the world - Pearl Harbor - practically bon a war footing and under a war regime. There will be no American Port Arthur.
-------------
The very same problem we have now with the Russians. The politicians (especially Biden-Obama-Clinton group) don't want to hear anything about actual Russian plans or capabilities. They live in the world of illusions and in this world "we already have all the weapons we need". They simply do not care about reality. And this is direct way to a catastrophe.

 

[Ringo]

On February 22, 2024, the S-500 SAM system intercepted a hypersonic block of an intercontinental missile.

In the course of the intercept, the R-29RMU2 "Sineva" intercontinental ballistic missile was shot down. It was launched from the nuclear-powered submarine cruiser Tula in the Laptev Sea. The S-500 was at the Chizha range in the Arkhangelsk region, over which the missile was shot down. The system has proven its ability to track hypersonic targets, including advanced developments.

That is, the russians can intercept missiles that the West does not yet have. And they can't intercept missiles that the russians already have.

This is all you need to know about the arms race imposed on Russia by the West.

 

[Silver Cat]

On February 22, 2024, the S-500 SAM system intercepted a hypersonic block of an intercontinental missile.

In the course of the intercept, the R-29RMU2 "Sineva" intercontinental ballistic missile was shot down. It was launched from the nuclear-powered submarine cruiser Tula in the Laptev Sea. The S-500 was at the Chizha range in the Arkhangelsk region, over which the missile was shot down. The system has proven its ability to track hypersonic targets, including advanced developments.

That is, the russians can intercept missiles that the West does not yet have. And they can't intercept missiles that the russians already have.

This is all you need to know about the arms race imposed on Russia by the West.

What is even more important in the original message, is the words "the new ballistic trajectories" (AKA "suppressed ballistic trajectories"). The guys are making their trainings in the sudden counter-force attack.

 

[Mushroom]

In the course of the intercept, the R-29RMU2 "Sineva" intercontinental ballistic missile was shot down. It was launched from the nuclear-powered submarine cruiser Tula in the Laptev Sea. The S-500 was at the Chizha range in the Arkhangelsk region, over which the missile was shot down. The system has proven its ability to track hypersonic targets, including advanced developments.

That is, the russians can intercept missiles that the West does not yet have. And they can't intercept missiles that the russians already have.

OK, and first of all, why exactly would the US have an R29 SLBM? Not that the R29 is anything of particular interest or note, it is essentially equivalent to the TRIDENT I that the US first deployed in 1971. SO big whoop-de-doo, the Russians have finally intercepted the equivalent of a 5 decade old SLBM. The US retired all of their TRIDENT I missiles decades ago, and uses the UGM-133 Trident II.

As far as the US tracking, targeting, and destroying hypersonic missiles, they have been doing that for over 3 decades now. So congrats, apparently Russia has finally gotten to the point the US was at during the Bush Administration.

And I am talking about the First Bush Administration, of 1991-1994.

As for the last sentence, you know that is complete gibberish, right? Exactly what missile can "the west" not shoot down? And what missiles that the West does not have are you even talking about? Yes, it is true indeed that the West has nothing like the R29. They retired all of the missiles like that over 2 decades ago.

 

[Silver Cat]

OK, and first of all, why exactly would the US have an R29 SLBM? Not that the R29 is anything of particular interest or note, it is essentially equivalent to the TRIDENT I that the US first deployed in 1971. SO big whoop-de-doo, the Russians have finally intercepted the equivalent of a 5 decade old SLBM. The US retired all of their TRIDENT I missiles decades ago, and uses the UGM-133 Trident II.

As far as the US tracking, targeting, and destroying hypersonic missiles, they have been doing that for over 3 decades now. So congrats, apparently Russia has finally gotten to the point the US was at during the Bush Administration.

And I am talking about the First Bush Administration, of 1991-1994.

As for the last sentence, you know that is complete gibberish, right? Exactly what missile can "the west" not shoot down? And what missiles that the West does not have are you even talking about? Yes, it is true indeed that the West has nothing like the R29. They retired all of the missiles like that over 2 decades ago.

As far as I know, Trident II never used suppressed ballistic trajectory. Liquid fuel has its own advantages, one of them - it allow more sophisticated maneuvers.

 

[Ringo]

 

[Moonglow]

Somebody named George Santayana once said, "Only the dead have seen an end to war." In the past the U.S. has been involved in many wars. None since the Civil War have been justifiable. In WW II, we were just plain on the wrong side. We backed the Russians. Who were responsible for the greatest genocide in human history. Whom we also nearly went to nuclear war with in three different occasions. Along with their "Iron Curtain." (And now their attacking the Ukraine) Also, without the help of the communist Russians, it is unlikely that the Chinese communists would have taken over China. Who were responsible for the untimely deaths of tens of millions of Chinese. And these days, there is often talk of possible war with them. Both of them also helped out both the North Koreans and North Vietnamese in our wars with them.

Obviously, things haven't changed much since then. Look at our response to the 9-11 attacks. We attacked a country that didn't have anything to do with it. Iraq. When we should have attacked the country where nearly all the hijackers on 9-11 came from. Saudi Arabia. But instead we attacked Iraq. What did that accomplish? Handing the country over to Iran and creating ISIS. Also, what came out of our involvement in attacking one of the countries responsible. Afghanistan. After the loss and injury of many American soldiers over many years and spending trillions of dollars, all we ended up doing was arming and funding the hell out of the Taliban.

If we are going to have a war, how about doing it for a justifiable reason. Something called National Sovereignty! Right now our country is being invaded by and slowly taken over by illegals from just about every latino country there is. Only war will put a stop to it. As George Santayana said, there is going to be war no matter what. How about having a war for a justifiable reason, like I just spoke of. What do you think.

What you think and what humans do are not one in the same.

 

[whitehall]

Every war in the bloody 20th century happened during a democrat administration. Woodrow Wilson (or his wife) sent Doughboys to fight for France after the Princeton professor promised American mothers that he would never send their sons to fight in a foreign war. We had to do it all over again in about 25 years under another democrat president. Democrat icon Harry Truman sent Troops to Korea under an illegal Executive order and we lost anywhere from 35,000 to 50,000 Troops in three years of a mismanaged quagmire. LBJ had a better idea. He sent Troops to Vietnam under the guise of a phony "crisis" and we won every battle and lost the freaking war. The lesson? The media will always support the agenda of a democrat and even make up a fake legacy no matter how freaking screwed up the situations gets but a republican never gets a break no matter what happens.

 

[Deadstick]

Every war in the bloody 20th century happened during a democrat administration. Woodrow Wilson (or his wife) sent Doughboys to fight for France after the Princeton professor promised American mothers that he would never send their sons to fight in a foreign war. We had to do it all over again in about 25 years under another democrat president. Democrat icon Harry Truman sent Troops to Korea under an illegal Executive order and we lost anywhere from 35,000 to 50,000 Troops in three years of a mismanaged quagmire. LBJ had a better idea. He sent Troops to Vietnam under the guise of a phony "crisis" and we won every battle and lost the freaking war. The lesson? The media will always support the agenda of a democrat and even make up a fake legacy no matter how freaking screwed up the situations gets but a republican never gets a break no matter what happens.

You need to get out of this Democrat and Republican mode of thinking, it's the same in the UK with the Conservatives and Labour, most of the time especially on foreign policy they are on the same page, two cheeks of the same backside.

 

[Ringo]

 

[whitehall]

You need to get out of this Democrat and Republican mode of thinking, it's the same in the UK with the Conservatives and Labour, most of the time especially on foreign policy they are on the same page, two cheeks of the same backside.

War is politics and politics is war. The problem for the U.K. as far as I know is that there is no concept of freedom the the press and as such the media is the propaganda arm of (usually ) liberal administrations. Here in the Colonies the media has become a willing arm of mostly democrat administrations and as such the undereducated victims of the federal education system come away with a skewed vision of history. The truth is out there in a free society but you have to look for it.

 

[Ringo]

The world is now closer to nuclear war than ever before.
A failing declining US empire led by a senile fool is dragging all of humanity into the fire.....

 

[Ringo]

The living and the dead

Realized what my safety valve is.
When I meet people I actively worked with in the combat zone, I don't recognize them.
The day before yesterday I was buying some household stuff - a tablecloth. A fighter comes up: Ah, comrade correspondent! A smile on his face.
- Haven't seen you since Mariupol. - he reminds me.
And I - even if I bang my head against the wall - I don't remember.
Some memories come to mind later, like in October, where a local old man had his legs blown off. But even then, it's doubtful.
I have a perfect memory for faces, artistic.
So it's on purpose, consciousness is like cutting all that with scissors.

The only strange thing is that I can't remember living faces, but I remember dead ones as if they were alive. (c)

 

[Ringo]

 

[AZrailwhale]

Not true, not true at all.

First of all, there were never any signals sent out about the attack. Not a single one, every single order from January 1941 until the attack happened was entirely hand carried. It was never discussed on the phone, via telegraph, and certainly never by radio. The very first radio message ever sent about the attack from when the operations was conceived in January 1941 was on 7 December when the lead pilot radioed back "Tiger" three times signifying they had complete surprise. That was the first form of electronic communication sent regarding the attack.

Plus, the Japanese military in their communications not only used the codes, but a secondary sequence of code words. Even if we had somehow managed to intercept plans of an attack, they never would have said "Pearl Harbor". That is why the US had to go to such an elaborate ruse in 1942 to learn that "AF was out of water". Of course, that would be of no help as the Japanese were using IJN code JN-25, which we did not break until 1942. The only code at that time we were regularly breaking was Purple, used by the Japanese Diplomatic Service.

This was common in all militaries, not only codes but also code words. That is why in both World Wars the "Codetalkers" were so valuable. Both the Germans in WWI and the Japanese in WWII did manage to capture several of the Indians that spoke the languages used. But they were worthless, as in addition to speaking in Choctaw, Cherokee, Cheyenne, Navaho, and other languages they were also speaking in code. So even with a native speaker, the messages made absolutely no sense. Like requesting an "Eagle put a potato on a turtle" and then a series of letters. That was a request to have an SDB bomb a tank, and the letters were the coordinates. But to somebody that spoke the language but did not know the spoken code that was completely nonsensical.

Not only didn't the Kido Butai send any radio communications, they landed their primary radio operators who kept broadcasting normal traffic from the inland sea so the additional evidence that the interceptions were valid because the allied interception operators recognized the Japanese radio operators' "fists". Apparently, the way an operator strikes a morse key is very distinctive to any other operator.

 

[AZrailwhale]

On February 22, 2024, the S-500 SAM system intercepted a hypersonic block of an intercontinental missile.

In the course of the intercept, the R-29RMU2 "Sineva" intercontinental ballistic missile was shot down. It was launched from the nuclear-powered submarine cruiser Tula in the Laptev Sea. The S-500 was at the Chizha range in the Arkhangelsk region, over which the missile was shot down. The system has proven its ability to track hypersonic targets, including advanced developments.

That is, the russians can intercept missiles that the West does not yet have. And they can't intercept missiles that the russians already have.

This is all you need to know about the arms race imposed on Russia by the West.

The US has had ICBMs since the fifties. So think again.

 

[Ringo]

The West came together over 2 years ago like a Super Team to try to destroy Russia and get them out of Ukraine
The U.S. and friends have placed over 7,000 sanctions, spent over $200 billion and still can't beat Russia
Their narrative remains "Russia is weak" and losing the war