Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 6, 2024
Ukraine – Faking News Still Does Not Help Winning

I find it amusing how little western media have learned from their own reporting on the war in Ukraine.

Two years ago a mystic 'Ghost of Kiev' was allegedly shooting down Russian aircraft left and right. The ghost turned out to be a fake character. The Ukrainian air force had never had such successes.

Two years on it is still the same story. The Ukrainian government claims something and western media print it as if it had really happened.

When the claim is debunked, often sooner than later, its simply vanishes from the headlines.

Yesterday we had this media wave:

The Russia side confirmed the attacks but denied any significant damage:

Rybar Force @rybar_force – 9:58 UTC · Apr 5, 2024

During the night, the AFU launched drones into Russian territory.

🔻The primary target was the Morozovsk airfield in the Rostov region, where Ukrainian forces dispatched 44 drones. The exact type remains unknown and will be determined upon analyzing the debris. However, there is a high likelihood that these are the same UAVs that the enemy has been utilizing in recent weeks.

Out of these, 26 drones were intercepted by Pantsir-S1 air defense missile systems, and 18 by rifle squads. Based on the videos circulating online, it is evident that the drones were flying at an extremely low altitude, enhancing the level of stealth.

There was no significant damage to the infrastructure. The debris hit a few buildings. Additionally, the substation suffered damage, resulting in a temporary power outage.

❗️ Thanks to the swift response of the air defense crews, any severe repercussions from the attacks were averted – claims from Ukrainian sources about the alleged destruction of six aircraft are fakes coming from enemy propagandists.

The Russia claim of no significant damage has been confirmed by the anti-Russian Institute for the Study of War:

ISW has yet to find any visual evidence that Ukrainian forces have damaged or destroyed aircraft or infrastructure at any of the four Russian airbases targeted by drones on the night of 4-5 April.

Such news cycles of fake claims of alleged Ukrainian successes are a major reason why some in the western public still believe that the Ukraine can win the war.

That is however not the case. The situation requires a change of attitude:

Instead of a new approach, the old pattern continues: NATO mulls over how to help Ukraine without provoking open war with Russia and fails, in the end, to deliver the kind of decisive assistance needed to turn the course of the war.

Another established pattern is the repetition of moralistic binary language. The West “cannot let Russia win.” The “rules-based order” could unravel. Then there is the new domino theory: if Ukraine falls, Russian hordes will flood further west. The personalization of the conflict onto one evil man, Vladimir Putin, continues with the death of Alexei Navalny. It is a Manichean struggle of good and evil, democracy and authoritarianism, civilization and darkness. There can be “no peace until the tyrant falls.” The Western alliance must not waver in its commitment to Ukraine.

The lack of realism in Western discourse is clear. There is indeed a serious risk that, rather than the West teaching Russia a lesson and putting Putin in his place, the opposite may occur. Is Russia, in fact, educating the West on what it means to use hard power and wage interstate conflict in twenty-first-century conditions? Russia advertises its version of great power sovereignty, in which a united, resilient, and unwavering state can defeat the pooled sovereignty of the EU and NATO.

We have all heard the objection that Putin simply cannot be trusted and that he wants nothing less than the complete elimination of Ukraine as an independent state. Yet, does not the blind continuation of the West’s dysfunctional Plan A also threaten the total physical destruction of Ukraine? It is for this reason that Pope Francis has called on Western leaders not to be “ashamed to negotiate before things get worse.”

A new approach to the war in Ukraine will not emerge from rhetorical and moralistic proclamations. Words alone will not prevent a Russian victory. What is needed is a clear accounting of what can be realistically achieved with the means available, as well as the cost, risks, and benefits of different scenarios. Trying what has failed before and expecting new results is, after all, not a recipe for success.

I see no appetite in any western nation to really intervene in the war and to experience the Russian wrath that any intervention force would be submitted to.

But the current crop of western 'leaders' is too committed to the failed case for Ukraine they now have made for more than two years. For now they are likely to try to just muddle through.

We will have to wait for some 'regime change' for a return to sanity and realism.

Comments

Re: canuck | Apr 7 2024 17:21 utc | 296
you suggest that “If one uses niobium computer chips rather than silicon EMP does not shut niobium computer chips”
I think you misunderstand how EMP works. In a billionth of a second, the E1 EMP wave will induce massive voltages and currents into anything that is electrically conductive. A medium distribution power line, under ideal conditions, will have 2 million volts and 5,000 to 10,000 amps induced into it by E1. Anything plugged into the grid that is not shielded will be hit by these massive voltages and currents. Solid-state electronics operate at very low voltage, and they will be destroyed under these conditions.
In an area about the size of Texas (the area beneath a nuclear detonation), E1 will induce massive voltages and currents directly into power cords, computer cables, etc. For example, the cord that provides power to your computer can have 5,000 volts induced into it. If you care to read my book, I provide detailed explanations of this.

Posted by: Steven Starr | Apr 7 2024 19:57 utc | 301

Thanks a lot, Steven Starr, for the bookshop link and for this comment.

Posted by: Avtonom | Apr 7 2024 20:26 utc | 302

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Apr 7 2024 8:13 utc | 241
And what if you will be dead before the first nuke will fly. If it will ever fly.
I am taking the bet that you will be dead before the first nuke will fly. Do you take that bet?

Posted by: Naive | Apr 7 2024 20:40 utc | 303

I can not see any urgent or impelling reason for RUSSIA to halt its SMO?
Posted by: snake | Apr 7 2024 20:50 utc | 65
I agree with you. Western economies are collapsing. Slowly but collapsing. So: no hurry.

Posted by: Naive | Apr 7 2024 20:55 utc | 304

Posted by: Newbie | Apr 7 2024 2:24 utc | 215
No problem
https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2024/04/05/news/ingresso_nato_ucraina_russia-422425005/amp/
Posted by: Down South | Apr 7 2024 7:03 utc | 238
Thank you very much!
But they’re still high on Hopium.
Crimea plus the now russian oblasts was on the table 2 years ago, but NEVER with the rest in NATO.
Now the RF has a cutting edge 5 times bigger 600k vs 120k (not considering other qualitative advancements), this proposal will never do.
If they hold a stump of Ukraine to pay the bills they’re lucky, and I think they know Trump knows what is a possible deal and what is an impossible deal. Hope Putin knows and holds.
If they throw the entire 18-26 generation into the fray they can only buy a year at most, even less can be said of NATO European assets (and if the US tried a deployment the atlantic fishes would have plenty of new (if sometimes radioactive from the reactors, not nukes) real estate and food.
On the other hand the US is risking a perfect storm of synchronicity, Ukraine+Middle East+Taiwan+South Korea could be the question with no answer for them, but 2024/2025 seems more of a moment for France to lose Africa. I’d bet on 2040 for a US debacle.
But that’s my 2 cents….

Posted by: Newbie | Apr 7 2024 22:34 utc | 305

canuck | Apr 6 2024 20:17 utc | 105
*** Only de-centralization will somewhat assuage this chronic, psychological anchor.***
Is that de-centralisation of government, or of control of big-business entities (which nowadays tend to own administrations at any level anyway), or both?
And how would destruction of the (often transnational) power of the latter, and of the banking/financial system, be attained without first acquiring the *national* power of the former in order to be able to do so?
Which would be entirely consistent with the advice of Adam Smith.
Was he a “communist”?

Posted by: Cynic | Apr 7 2024 23:58 utc | 306

“Russian”…
Posted by: Constantine | Apr 6 2024 19:53 utc | 95
А не пойти ли тебе нахуй, мудило заморское. Ёбаные пидорасы пиздящие о русской душе, ха-ха.
Russians have old culture. That culture does not have a habit of forgetting inconvenient stuff. You cannot have a culture without history and reflection on its good, bad, and ugly. You cannot have a culture if you turn your past into self-loathing.
Stalin was absolutely a cabnibal and mass murderer, and aside few loudmouth ideological zombies nobody in Russia would dispute that. He also got Russia through one of the worst existential crises it had in its long history, and it is not forgotten either.

Posted by: averros | Apr 8 2024 23:07 utc | 307