Vladimir Putin has “made a decision” and there will be “severe punishment” following Ukraine’s incursion into Russia, according to the Russian ambassador to the US.
Mr Putin was clearly frustrated at the Ukrainian incursion, but a ruthless Russian military response was only one option. Ukraine is short of military capability - soldiers and weapons - and it appears that they have deployed up to 10,000 soldiers (probably battle-hardened) into Russian territory. This “fixes” these Ukrainian forces well away from the frontline Russian action in the Donbas.
Mr Putin knows that progress on the frontline will slow when winter arrives, so his forces have perhaps 10 to 12 weeks remaining to achieve the objectives of his so-called Special Military Operation. By focusing on Russian main effort in the Donbas, Mr Putin knows that Ukraine has diluted the forces available to resist the Russian assault towards Pokrovsk, which might enable greater progress in the limited time available.
Once Russia’s objectives in the Donbas have been achieved, Mr Putin might consider that he can address the Kursk incursion in slower time.
What could ‘severe punishment’ mean?
I wonder if the west perceived Ukraine as a win-win for them in that they thought either Ukraine loses and they have all they need to then manufacture consent for direct war with Russia, or they win and NATO completes it’s objective and is on Russia’s doorstep now. Obviously that’s irresponsible and crazy to us but we don’t think in Empire Logic. Tfw when your state wages a war of attrition and starts atrophying :O
I think the original plan was based on a profound misunderstanding of Russian economy where the west drank its own kool aid regarding Russia having nominal GDP the size of Italy. The idea was that once the war started, western sanctions would swiftly crush Russian economy, and then there would be a possibility for regime change, and possibly even Balkanization of Russia.
Except, things didn’t work out that way. Turned out that Russian military industrial base was bigger than all of the west combined, and on top of that China and India refused to go along with the sanctions which made the whole plan unworkable out of the gate.
It’s also important to note that there is very little public support in the west for a direct war with Russia, hence why we continue to see the whole the west is not a party to the conflict narrative. The only option western leaders had was to continue using Ukraine as a proxy and to feed weapons there. After nearly three years of the war, it looks like the west is starting to hit the limits of the material support that it’s able to provide, and the economic situation in the west continues to deteriorate as a result of the economic war.
It’s really not clear to me what cards the west has left to play at this point.
Yeah I agree that this is probably going to end in the mother of all Blowbacks. It’s fascinating (and scary) how the elite think that they can literally control reality, just because they can manufacture consent by lying 24/7 and having their media and cultural complex sell it. Like gods. But hey, they also think that financial speculation is the same thing as actual value and production so maybe it’s not a big leap. I wonder if old school imperialists like Randolph Hearst were self-aware or if they too actually believed their own hype.
I suspect this is rooted in the idealist ideology liberals subscribe to. Idealists contend that ideas and thoughts are more fundamental than physical objects and events. In this view, reality is not solely determined by material circumstances but also shaped by our perceptions, beliefs, and values. Thus, idealism suggests the primacy of the mind over material reality, emphasizing that mental constructs can influence or even supersede tangible aspects of existence.
This inclination towards an abstract realm fosters a belief that one can conjure change by sheer willpower alone. Such idealistic perspectives often cause liberals to overlook practical considerations such as production capabilities and supply chains, leading to unrealistic expectations that remain elusive in the face of reality.
I guess being rich enough that they barely ever experience any consequences for your actions will give you the impression that yes, they do deserve to have all the wealth and power and this system is inherently good. If it gives them everything they could possibly need, it must therefore be good, right? Their utopia is our dystopia. A sober reminder that humans can believe ANYTHING under the right material conditions.