Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
December 04, 2021

U.S. Intelligence Has Found ... Easy To Disprove Claims Of A Russian Attack On Ukraine

A few years back:

In his State of the Union message in January, President Bush approvingly cited the report. “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,” said Bush.
On Thursday, standing beside British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush said of Britain, “Not only our intelligence, but the intelligence of this great country made a clear and compelling case that Saddam Hussein was a threat to security and peace.”


As tensions mount between Washington and Moscow over a potential Russian invasion of Ukraine, U.S. intelligence has found the Kremlin is planning a multi-front offensive as soon as early next year involving up to 175,000 troops, according to U.S. officials and an intelligence document obtained by The Washington Post.
“The Russian plans call for a military offensive against Ukraine as soon as early 2022 with a scale of forces twice what we saw this past spring during Russia’s snap exercise near Ukraine’s borders,” said an administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. “The plans involve extensive movement of 100 battalion tactical groups with an estimated 175,000 personnel, along with armor, artillery and equipment.”

The unclassified U.S. intelligence document obtained by The Post, which includes satellite photos, shows Russian forces massing in four locations. Currently, 50 battlefield tactical groups are deployed, along with “newly arrived” tanks and artillery, according to the document.

I am convinced by now that the U.S., NATO and the Ukraine have planned to attack the rebel held grounds in eastern Ukraine in early February 2022. 'Western' propagandists and media will not report of the Ukrainian attack on its eastern rebels.

(The August 8 2008 attack on Russian peacekeepers in Georgia took place when Putin attended the opening of the Olympics in Beijing. Russia has confirmed that Putin will attend in the opening of the Winter Olympics in Beijing on February 4 2022.)

The Ukrainian attack will likely have only little success. But the rebels can not hold for long without significant reinforcement. The Ukrainian army attack will thus provoke Russia into intervening. That counter-intervention will then get reported as the 'long expected Russian attack on Ukraine'.

The current U.S. propaganda of an Russian attack on the Ukraine is pure bullshit designed to prepare the public for the above preplanned narrative.

When the Russian counter-attack takes place the Ukrainian army will get destroyed by a rainstorm of Russian missiles. But Russian forces will not invade the country. Russia will only hold, via its proxy forces, on to the rebel republics around Donetzk and Luhansk. Russia's aim is to federalize the Ukraine as laid out in the Minsk agreements with the east having a veto against any NATO membership of the country. That aim does not require an occupation of the Ukraine.

We know that the above 175,000 troops number is totally made up just as the numbers claimed by the Ukraine. As the Washington Post report describes it:

While Ukrainian assessments have said Russia has approximately 94,000 troops near the border, the U.S. map puts the number at 70,000 — but it predicts a buildup to as many as 175,000 and describes extensive movement of battalion tactical groups to and from the border “to obfuscate intentions and to create uncertainty.”
The Russian military moves come as Moscow has raised eyebrows in Washington with a sudden mobilization of reservists this year and a dramatic escalation of its rhetoric regarding Ukraine.

Russian officials have defended the reserve mobilization as a necessary measure to help modernize the Russian armed forces. But the administration official raised concerns about the “sudden and rapid program to establish a ready reserve of contract reservists,” which the official said is expected to add an additional 100,000 troops to the approximately 70,000 deployed now.

The somewhat murky BARS-2021 program to establish a combat army reserve (BARS) in Russia was only launched in the mid of this year:

We are talking about reservists who will conclude a contract with the Ministry of Defense, receive certain money for being in the reserve and regularly participate in military training and exercises.

Such reservists have been participating in military exercises since 2016, as an experiment.

The message from the Ministry of Defense on the increase in the number of reservists also refers to the exercises in the Kaliningrad region, to which they were transferred in early September.

The aim of building that reserve force is to eventually do away with compulsory conscription. It has nothing to do with a war in Ukraine. The 100,000 "ready reserve of contract reservists" do not exist today. There are currently only experimental units some of which took part in exercises in Kalinigrad.  It will take years to stand up and train a 100,000 strong force of weekend warriors before it can be taken into any serious action.

The whole claim of a 175,000 strong Russian force by early next year is thus pure bullshit.

As is the claim of "100 battalion tactical groups". The Russian army has in total only 136 of those:

According to Defence Minister Shoigu, in every regiment and brigade, two battalions are formed by contractors, while one is formed by recruits, who are not involved in combat missions. Currently, there are 136 tactical battalion groups in the armed forces formed by contractors.

Russia is a county spanning 11 timezones. It is totally unfeasible for it to throw three quarters of its professional tactical units against the Ukraine as this would leave all other borders bare of protection.

The satellite pictures the report mentions are also not relevant. They simply show troops on their regular training grounds hundreds of kilometers away from the Ukraine. Troops train for war all the time. It is their job.

All together the claims made today are cheep propaganda not even intended to be taken seriously by any professional in the field.

"The British government has learned" was a lie. Saddam had not sought uranium from Africa. The  "U.S. intelligence has found" claim is likewise a lie.

The lies told today are to build a narrative that can later be used to obfuscate and hide the real initiator of a preplanned war in the Ukraine.

That is not going to be Russia.

Posted by b on December 4, 2021 at 16:44 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. -William Blake

Posted by: D0ng | Dec 5 2021 20:53 utc | 101

Most of the Web outlets I read are pro-Russian, and so I always take them with a pinch of salt. It always seemed absurd that there should be a war over Ukraine -- obviously the Russians weren't going to invade because it would lead to an endless occupation with guerrilla resistance, even if the fighting could be carried out by a puppet regime in Kyiv -- it would still cost the Russians too much in cash, to say nothing of reputational damage, and would provide pretexts for NATO to station more nukes on the Russian border. On the other hand I couldn't believe that the Americans would foment a war there, because their main enemy is China and getting defeated in Eastern Europe, even if it lured the Russians into a quagmire, would be bad for their global image and would certainly spook the Western Europeans (who like to talk big but much prefer to fight against enemies who are unarmed, and even then only from a safe distance).

But I have an old friend, turned (I suspect) spook and NATO propagandist, who's come to my university to check out the ANC records, possibly looking for material to use against them. I asked him what was going on and he simply said "Well, the Americans still want to maintain the empire they set up during the Cold War and obviously they don't want to see anyone else establish an empire, even a notional one like Russia's. Also, remember that perceptions are not always the same as reality". In other words, the fact that the Americans would probably gain little by starting a war in Eastern Europe which appears intended to disrupt an imaginary Russian war in Eastern Europe, does not mean that the Americans wouldn't do it. And much of Western Europe is extremely jingoist and wants distractions from its own problems, even though this kind of distraction would quite possibly bring down the rather shaky governments in Britain and France at least, and maybe Germany as well, in the long run.

Plus there are all those nukes floating around. I don't like it. I didn't like hearing that Biden had rung up Putin to yell nonsense at him about Ukraine, even if what they actually said was different from what the propaganda outlets say. Maybe my scepticism is misplaced; maybe we are in danger. Perhaps Mr. Xi can do something.

Posted by: MFB | Dec 6 2021 7:25 utc | 102

RE: Posted by: MFB | Dec 6 2021 7:25 utc | 102

“ "Well, the Americans still want to maintain the empire they set up during the Cold War and obviously they don't want to see anyone else establish an empire .”

Coercive social relations often use notions of “exceptionalism” to assuage their fears, and hence live in perceptional halls of mirrors where they primarily see themselves.

Paradoxically their fears are based on notions that others are like/want to be like the “exceptionalists” thereby doubting their own “exceptionalism”.

Fear is often an inhibitor of scope of thought, including, but not limited to, analytical cautions such as “Do you think your opponent is as stupid as you are ?”.

Fear is often a catalyst of resort to belief/emotion/conditioned responses, rendering those so immersed subject to reliance on levels of projection in analysis, and practice based there upon.

Consequently fear encourages "exceptionalists" to rely on increased levels of coercion in practice, based upon the misguided notion/projection that increased levels of coercion will engender greater levels of fear in their opponents to facilitate their opponents subjugation – (enhanced interrogation techniques)/torture being one example whose aims include to encourage others to tell the “exceptionalists” what they want to hear, in part to assuage the "exceptionalists" fears.

The opponents of coercive social relations have no wish to establish an empire since they are not as stupid or as insecure as the “exceptionalists”, whilst understanding that the stupidities of the “exceptionalists” renders them complicit in their own transcendence.

The "exceptionalists" consequently become:

Those silly kittens
They've lost their mittens
And don't know where to find them.
Leave them alone
And they'll come home
Wagging their tails behind them.

Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 6 2021 10:14 utc | 103

Posted by: Down South | Dec 5 2021 16:46 utc | 98

“You frame it in a way I had not thought of. “

Some hold that knowledge is wholly a function of knowledge a.k.a as precedent facilitating the conflation of knowledge with belief, whilst some realise that “knowledge” is a function of questions since co-operation catalyses transcendence including of knowledge.

Change/transcendence is a constant whether perceived or not, and hence frames are tools of obfuscation, including self-obfuscation, in attempts to limit questions often facilitated by the perceived conflation of register, including logical flow, with frames.

Those “We the people hold these truths to be self-evident” are dissuaded from asking questions since they do, or should, already know the answers, and if they are minded to pose questions, others try to ensure that the questioners are enmazed in linear frames, which like paradigms, frames can only ever be linear and hence tools of obfuscation, including self-obfuscation, encouraged in hope of avoidance of lateral (qualitative) change and perceptions of its possibilities.

One of the opponents' attempts at linear frames, which like paradigms, frames can only ever be linear, is illustrated by the television programme M.A.S.H. where it is hoped that most think they are, and/or sympathise with Hawkeye – the smartest kid on the block – in attempt of assuasion of residual alienation at being continually shit upon with contempt.

“Consequently the “colour revolutions” of 2008 and coup of 2014 in Ukraine were not surprises but perceived as sources of opportunity. “

Perhaps if so minded a useful portal to explore if/why this was the case lies in the crested questions.

Why did some know that a “princess” would walk down the hill opposite to Kreshatik to dispense plain bulkas to the congregation on Independence Square from blue plastic bags forgetting the salt and a drink to aid digestion?

A component part of an answer is contained in the title of this thread “US intelligence” but not in the framing you would likely expect.

Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 6 2021 12:09 utc | 104

The goal is not for Ukraine to win. If Ukraine were preparing for invasion, it would not forward position is troops, unless the Ukrainians and their NATO masters have really learned nothing about defensive warfare since the first years of WWI.

The goal is to put Germany in a position where it has no choice but to cancel NS2.

Posted by: Feral Finster | Dec 6 2021 16:31 utc | 105

RE: Posted by: Feral Finster | Dec 6 2021 16:31 utc | 105

“The goal is not for Ukraine to win. “

To paraphrase Mr. Rove

We are an Empire we create our own reality to which others react.
Whilst they are reacting we create another reality to which others react.

predicated on a “political adage” - tell the truth as much as possible few will believe you, but interpret what they expect and/or want to see - after all its only "representative democracy" where "..the people hold these truths to be self-evident."

The paraphrase was partly a function of Mr. Rove's emotionalism/frustration/hubris.

There is neither a defined goal nor defined “strategies” to achieve a defined goal.

There are childish bubblings and hopes as functions of facility.

Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 7 2021 11:33 utc | 106

RE: Posted by: Down South | Dec 5 2021 16:46 utc | 98


Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 6 2021 12:09 utc | 104

One of the constraints/inefficiences of frames and opportunities of transcendence.

Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 7 2021 13:58 utc | 107

RE: Posted by: Bemildred | Dec 5 2021 16:33 utc | 97

“Now leave me alone “

A portal is a pathway not a destination; and some seek to assign significances to thesemselves that others do not assign to them, whilst broadcasts through portals with an audience of one are not productive.

“Everything is projection when you get right down to it. “

That is a comfort blanket for spectators relying on absolutes, whilst practitioners test specific hypotheses by catalysing processes as you and many others illustrate.

Thank you for your co-operation in illustrating some contents in the petri dish of the opponents' culture encouraging Mr. Rove's observations on "reality".

Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 8 2021 12:32 utc | 108

“Everything is projection when you get right down to it. “

That is a comfort blanket for spectators relying on absolutes, whilst practitioners test specific hypotheses by catalysing processes as you and many others illustrate.

Thank you for your co-operation in illustrating some contents in the petri dish of the opponents' culture encouraging Mr. Rove's observations on "reality".

Posted by: MagdaTam | Dec 8 2021 12:32 utc | 108

You too, huh?

Posted by: Bemildred | Dec 8 2021 13:40 utc | 109

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.