Atlantic: When We Ignore Its Attrition Ukraine Wins
In The Atlantic two military historians are claiming that:
Russia Is Losing the War of Attrition
Wars are rarely won so decisively, because attrition is not only a condition of war, but a strategic choice. Smaller powers can, through the intelligent application of attrition, succeed in advancing their own goals.
Hmm ...
Attrition warfare ...:
... is a military strategy consisting of belligerent attempts to win a war by wearing down the enemy to the point of collapse through continuous losses in personnel, materiel and morale.
There are two (or more) sides in a war of attrition. To see which side is winning one has to estimate each sides capabilities and losses. The side which is the first to run out of the necessary resources will lose the competition.
A piece that claims that this or that side will be losing due to attrition should therefore provide numbers for each side of the conflict and compare them to support the claim.
The authors of the Atlantic piece fail to do so.
They mention the state of Russia's economy, the Russian loss of armored vehicle, and Russian manpower shortages - which, they claim, are all bad. But they, at no point, write about the state of the Ukrainian economy, its losses and dire manpower shortage.
The sources they quote are dubious to laughable:
Russian casualties have mounted steadily. According to the British Ministry of Defence, in December 2022, they stood at roughly 500 a day; in December 2023, at just under 1,000; and in December 2024, at more than 1,500. In 2024 alone, Russia suffered nearly 430,000 killed and wounded, compared with just over 250,000 in 2023.
That is indeed what the British Defense Intelligence claims. But does that make sense? Russian losses during the bloody Battle of Bakhmut in late 2022 early 2023 are given as 500-600 per day. Current losses, with a rather quiet frontline and no ongoing big battle, are claimed to be triple of those. That's simply not plausible. Other western sources are giving much lower Russian casualty numbers.
Ukrainian losses are, by the way, not mentioned at all.
The authors then switch. From pointing to Russian losses while ignoring Ukrainian ones they now point to Ukrainian success in production:
In 2024, the Ukrainian military received over 1.2 million different Ukrainian-produced UAVs—two orders of magnitude more than Ukraine possessed, let alone produced, at the beginning of the war. Ukrainian production rates are still rising; it aims to produce 4 million drones this year alone.
The authors of course fail to mention that Russia is producing even more than those.
The following paragraph has another cute trick the author try to play on their readers:
UAVs are crucial because they have replaced artillery as the most effective system on the field of battle. By one estimate, UAVs now cause 70 percent of Russian losses. Ukraine’s robust defense industry is innovating more quickly and effectively than that of Russia and its allies.
Cause "70% of Russia losses" speaks for the authors thesis but only until you click through to the source where you find that the number applies to both sides:
Drones, not the big, heavy artillery that the war was once known for, inflict about 70 percent of all Russian and Ukrainian casualties, said Roman Kostenko, the chairman of the defense and intelligence committee in Ukraine’s Parliament. In some battles, they cause even more — up to 80 percent of deaths and injuries, commanders say.
[Sidenote: I for one doubt that number for both sides. We do see a lot of videos of FPV drone casualties but that is only so because every drone has a camera. Artillery, which is historically causing 70-80% of all battlefield casualties, has not stopped firing and has not lost its effect. Each side is firing some 10,000+ artillery rounds per day. That sums up to more than 7 million rounds per year. A million drones, of which many fail, add to the damage artillery causes but do not replace it. Drones are, like all other weapons, part of the game but not game changers.]
Back to the Atlantic claim that Russia is losing the war of attrition.
The authors mention alleged Russian problems on some issues and Ukrainian successes on other issue. But the have failed to make even one comparison of losses, or successes, on both sides. Their conclusion ..:
Ukraine is not on the verge of collapse, and it is Russia, not Ukraine, that is losing the attritional war, ...
.. is not supported by any evidence.
It is a sad state when the weapon industry can not come up with better propaganda than this.
Posted by b on March 8, 2025 at 18:48 UTC | Permalink
next page »The Atlantic...says it all. Gates' ex wife's coffee money?
Posted by: Robert E. Smith | Mar 8 2025 18:55 utc | 2
.. is not supported by any evidence.
It is a sad state when the weapon industry can not come up with better propaganda than this.
Posted by b on March 8, 2025 at 18:48 UTC | Permalink
And AFU is running on dry on the most critical part.
Meat (won't even mention soldiers, that is long gone)
With over 3 million unrecoverable casualties (half dead, half maimed) and say 1 million for critical activities and good friends.. they have very little to draw from their very shallow demographic puddle.
In the mean time, RFAF has passed from 1 million bayonets to 1.5 million.
Yes expensive also for the RF (half a million casualties is not nothing) , but they can afford it.
Posted by: Newbie | Mar 8 2025 18:59 utc | 3
On Wednesday this week, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Russian Presidential Executive Office Maxim Oreshkin told reporters that the Russian Federation (RUF) is working on a proposal to build a plant in the Republic of Belarus (BEL) to produce unmanned aerial systems (UAS) with a capacity of up to 100,000 units per year.
Posted by: pepe | Mar 8 2025 19:04 utc | 4
thanks b... garbage in, garbage out... i hope usaid has cut these folks off the piggy trough..
@ pepe and others - thanks for the updates..
Posted by: james | Mar 8 2025 19:09 utc | 5
The MSM is not in journalism business anymore. All they do is promotion of a certain narative. They should be called MSN Main Stream Narative. At this moment they push this narative of War being winnable in hope that something happens in Russia
Posted by: Grey Cloud | Mar 8 2025 19:16 utc | 6
i hope usaid has cut these folks off the piggy trough..
Posted by: james | Mar 8 2025 19:09 utc | 5
---
No connection.
The Atlantic is a Silicon Valley hobby horse majority owned by Steve Jobs widow.
Posted by: too scents | Mar 8 2025 19:16 utc | 7
for what it's worth, my observations throughout this war is that the worst, most outlandish propaganda / calculations has come from the British Ministry of Defense.
Posted by: annie | Mar 8 2025 19:22 utc | 8
There are so many narratives...
Please, barflies, take note of the paragraph below from the following Wikipedia article:
According to the text of Article 6, RUSSIA*, UKRAINE* and BELARUS* form a “common military and strategic space” and “united armed forces.” [9][10]
Source:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belovezha_Accords
*My emphasis.
Posted by: Elber | Mar 8 2025 19:24 utc | 9
The British upper class have been delusional since the loss of India
Posted by: Roger Boyd | Mar 8 2025 19:24 utc | 10
Ukraine Weekly Update, March 7th 2025: May be useful to some:https://robcampbell.substack.com/p/ukraine-weekly-update-292
Posted by: The Busker | Mar 8 2025 19:26 utc | 11
"interesting" watching sky news interviews of Ukraine army...eg couple of soldiers dug in "bravely" makes a mug of chai and firing off a shell for the sake of it into the middle of nowhere it seems...no visible on video e of shell beaters in the vast fields in front of them. Of course they would not have seen that video recently of just one of the multiple huge cemetaries flags "bravely" flopping about in the wind, not perhaps would sky show it. Maybe DT has seen it?
Posted by: Jo | Mar 8 2025 19:27 utc | 12
The Atlantic has always been an elitist and Globalist publication that repeats comfortable narratives and warns of the boogeyman of the moment.
In a world of Substacks, the NYT, WAPO, and The Atlantic are redundant and if limited utility.
Ritter has been obsessed talking about OODA loops lately.
The internet OODA loop is iterating too fast and effectively for regime propaganda to keep up, even though they keep trying to launch Joe Rogan clones constantly.
Sincerity has a quality that is difficult to manufacture.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 8 2025 19:30 utc | 13
Today’s narrative is the outrage of a massive Russian strike killing 25 in Dombas.
This of course is designed to indicate that the weapons need to flow again to help the Nazis ‘defend themselves’
Posted by: Night Tripper | Mar 8 2025 19:31 utc | 15
Posted by: Elber | Mar 8 2025 19:24 utc | 9
Please, I would like someone to explain to me how this agreement was broken or not fulfilled.
Posted by: Elber | Mar 8 2025 19:31 utc | 16
I’m not sure if Sebastian Gorka seized hold of DJT’s phone and posted the “pounding Ukraine on the battlefield” truth on Truth Social, which took a scolding turn in that it concluded w/ a threat to “sanction and tariff” Russia—as if Russia’s prosecuting its lengthy war was somehow forbidden now that DJT had started whirling like a Dervish from the White House.
So I’m going to pretend that Sebastian Gorka commandeered DJT’s phone and ill-advisedly did that chin-jutting thing of trying to bully Russia.
What the peculiar Truth Social truth makes crystal clear, however, is that politicos in the U.S. have been mired in a propaganda saturation so thick it could support the growth of anaerobic bacteria.
Any country @ war of course will operate at least a modicum of deceptions & propaganda—but not to the extent of what we in the U.S. have swooned under since 24 February 2022.
My point is that the Russian negotiating team, helmed by Lavrov, is not bamboozled by a warped historicity or perspective. They know how Euromaidan came down, and they have always known that the Obama State Department facilitated it. They know how the AFU began to empower the Neo-Nazi militias in Donbass. They know the provocations which preceded the onset of the SMO. They know about Bucha. They know about NordStream.
The Russian team is able to negotiate from a factual reality which has never been tinged w/ mesmerism. The Russian team doesn’t have to unburden itself of the mesmerism, while the U.S. team (not to mention the Regime Media & the publics) does.
b's highlighting The Atlantic's delusional mayhem underscores how little publications in the U.S. are ready to shrug off the children's coloring book version of this war.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 8 2025 19:37 utc | 17
Current goal for NATO countries is spending "considerably more than 3 percent" of national GDP on defense (NATO Sec Gen).
Depending on your job, receiving a goal for the next year is normal. "Increase external. sales by 5%" "Lower costs by 10%". That kind of goal. But I've never heard as goal "Spend twice what you're spending now".
Posted by: Passerby | Mar 8 2025 19:40 utc | 18
B, I keep suggesting that you create a dedicated USA (Trump, civil war) thread.
Searching the 'net for mildly controversial articles that require zero effort to refute is not a winning long term strategy.
Recap: no one gives a shit about the Atlantic or any other legacy media whether print or broadcast.
Do yourself a favor and follow Musk on X. From there you will find the more prolific and most followed posters who put up a near hourly stream of important real time data chronicling the economy, trade/tariffs, poltics and the wars (foreign and domestic).
Your POV and insights deserve something more worthy - pick something that piques your interest, post it up and let your commentariat get to it.
Posted by: Markw | Mar 8 2025 19:47 utc | 19
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 8 2025 19:37 utc | 17
##########
Trump verbally dictates his social media posts to a staffer and they type it to be displayed on a screen so he can see how it looks.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 8 2025 19:50 utc | 20
Did anyone see Grandpa Keith Kellogg's comment?
24 hours to end the war but Trump didn't say which day that would be.
😂😂😂
#MAGALogic
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 8 2025 19:52 utc | 21
"The Atlantic" is NOT the only one who thinks that Russia is losing / has lost this war. "Geo Political Futures" (George Friedman formerly at "StratFor") & "Stratfor" are also claiming that Russia is losing this war.
"George Friedman: Why Putin Has Lost the War in Ukraine"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksfn_7H92tc
Friedman thinks that the US moving towards a termination of the Cold War. I am not so sure. There are simply too much things that need to be settled / done before the Cold War can be finally declared to be over. One of them th\at is needed is a MAJOR US economic decline (say 20%, 30% or 40%).
Trump is simply a "loose cannon" who is reacting to the outrage of the moment. And those irrational outbursts will make Russia and Putin even more nervous and less willing to continue with the negotiations.
E.g. Trumps has said that he wants to 1) impose sactions against Russia and 2) move 35,000 US troops from Germany to eastern Europe. all these things individually are NOT signaling that the US had a Fundamental "change of heart".
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 19:56 utc | 22
❗️🇺🇸🇪🇺🇵🇱 For the second day in a row, a Learjet C-21A business jet of the American Air Force is actively flying between Rzeszow, Poland, and the Ramstein Air Force Base.
Transportation of military cargo on it is unlikely, but an emergency evacuation is quite possible. This aircraft specializes in transporting high-ranking officials, including generals and ministers, as well as small groups of military personnel and small cargo. In addition, the C-21A is often used for medical evacuation, providing transportation of the wounded and sick to hospitals.
The frequency and nature of these flights may indicate urgent movements of important people or urgent evacuation. It is possible that the very intelligence and satellite imagery specialists who helped the Ukrainian Armed Forces hit targets on and off the battlefield are being taken out.
There are no other U.S. aircraft, especially transport ones, in Rzeszow yet.
Posted by: Jo | Mar 8 2025 19:57 utc | 23
‼️🇺🇦🏴☠️ The Ukrainian Armed Forces are attacking their own units from the rear, which are trying to break out of the encirclement in the Kursk region to the border of the Sumy region.
Drone videos show hundreds of bodies of Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers who were trying to break out of the encirclement at dawn.
They were destroyed by their own troops from fortified positions on the border of Russia and Ukraine.
Kyiv does not need the truth about the units abandoned by the Ukrainian Armed Forces command, about being disconnected from general communications and supplies.
‼️🇷🇺💥🇺🇦🏴☠️ The Russian Armed Forces are tightening the ring.
At the moment, about 5,500 Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers are completely surrounded, about 350 have surrendered and up to 1,500 Ukrainian soldiers were killed on March 6-8.
Over the same three days, up to fifty units of American, Turkish and Canadian equipment were burned.
Posted by: Jo | Mar 8 2025 19:58 utc | 24
Thanks for this. We know who's losing and who's winning from the frantic and desperate thrashings about by the 'rules based international order' gang, the recent the Oval Office fiasco with the Ukrainian narco-fuhrer, and these latest lame lies of The Atlantic.
Russia has won. The collective west and its poor destroyed proxy have been soundly defeated on the bloody battlefields of Ukraine and everybody knows it especially Washington.
Posted by: John Gilberts | Mar 8 2025 19:59 utc | 25
Apparently "the Altlantic" is fed up with Ukraine and wants it attrited away. So they just claim everything is fine and wait till every remaining Ukrainian has been picked up from the street and thrown into one of the busy meatgrinders.
Posted by: xblob | Mar 8 2025 20:02 utc | 26
They mention the state of Russia's economy, the Russian loss of armored vehicle, and Russian manpower shortages - which, they claim, are all bad. But they, at no point, write about the state of the Ukrainian economy, its losses and dire manpower shortage.
------------
just like our favorite barfleas.
Posted by: UWDude | Mar 8 2025 20:06 utc | 27
Russia is losing the war it has already won.
Russia will now—any minute—start losing the war it has already won, because of FPV drones.
Russia’s economy, Russia’s manpower shortage and Russia’s loss of armored vehicles will very soon make Russia lose the war, regardless of whether it has already won the war.
If Russia continues losing the war it has already won, Ukraine of course will win, because the intractability of Russia’s losing the war it has already won will prevent it ever from actually winning.
Zeno, famous for Zeno’s Paradoxes, that slammin’ rib joint, could not be prouder of The Atlantic right now.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 8 2025 20:09 utc | 28
You said "Each side is firing some 10,000+ artillery rounds per day." That would mean that they have approximately the same number of casualties. I think the number of casualties is more in Russia's favor.
Perhaps some detailed assessment of this issue could be of interest.
Posted by: Grey Cloud | Mar 8 2025 20:09 utc | 29
Wiki -- Jeffrey Mark Goldberg is an American journalist and editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine. During his nine years at The Atlantic prior to becoming editor, Goldberg became known for his coverage of foreign affairs (says wiki). Years ago, on some blog, before he advanced to editor of the Atlantic, I took Goldberg to task with evidence that he was lying, several times. His "coverage of foreign affairs" was baloney, on Iran especially as I recall. He's Jewish, from Brooklyn. . . I was kicked off the blog.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 8 2025 20:13 utc | 30
No one noticed? Second author is Eliot Asher Cohen, cofounder of PNAC. We are recycling elderly hardcore neocons here.
Posted by: oldhippie | Mar 8 2025 20:15 utc | 31
“Everything Is Bad And Will Get Worse” – Ukraine Serviceman To British Media: https://southfront.press/everything-is-bad-and-will-get-worse-ukraine-serviceman-to-british-media/
Posted by: Elmer Fudd | Mar 8 2025 20:16 utc | 33
ATLANTIC and Co. have been sitting on the fence and now as first round of Trump-peace-plan seems to not materialize they start inventing stuff and framing data to push the message the very same way they have been doing ever since.
Posted by: AG | Mar 8 2025 20:22 utc | 34
- I still think that Russia lost A LOT OF tanks in 2022 and they didn't want to risk losing all those newly produced and very expensive tanks anymore. That's why - IMO - Russia is very reluctant to throw all those newly produced and very expensive tanks into battle. In that regard I think that Russia choose to switch from tank manoevre war fare to that "attrition warfare". On top of that drones are much more (COST) effective to combat the ukrainian army.
- One other signal is that Russia is still busy developing the Armata-14 tank. But it seems that the development has been running into some MAJOR headwinds and that this new tank still has some MAJOR technical problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-AO4WjrkK4
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 20:28 utc | 35
Armata-14 tank:
Or search YouTube with the words: "armata 14 tank technical problems"
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 20:30 utc | 36
"Artillery, which is historically causing 70-80% of all battlefield casualties, has not stopped firing and has not lost its effect. Each side is firing some 10,000+ artillery rounds per day. That sums up to more than 7 million rounds per year"
Nope. The figures are less than this for rounds fired, and much more so for Ukraine. Possibly 2,000 max per day for Ukraine and 2X to 4X or more for Russia. And IMHO the lethality figure for drones is BS. But even if right the Russians have the same numerical advantage. Just more hot air to convince those who lack critical thinking ability to continue to support Ukraine as Russia is due to collapse anyday now. Or so we are told.Strikes me as yet another attempt to change the narrative. Remember a year ago when 155mm shells were the key to victory? Well a failure to supply them now means we need a different story. Almost laughable, except people are dying and being maimed as a result.
Posted by: marcjf | Mar 8 2025 20:33 utc | 37
Excellent post on the tricks pulled by the authors.
Can't help pointing out another: The authors don't clearly define what either attritional campaign or an attritional strategy are, much less cite the difference in the historical precedents cited. It cites two examples of an attritional campaign, the Luftwaffe and U-boats. The Luftwaffe's attritional campaign at Dunkirk certainly succeeded in trapping the equipment. If viewed as intended to capture the British army, it certainly failed. But that was not because "a technologically advanced, tactically and operationally sophisticated approach that rendered those organizations, large as they were, unable to function effectively." The soldiers' escape from Dunkirk was no such thing. Radar and such certainly played a role in minimizing the effects of the Blitz long-term...but it is by no means clear the Luftwaffe was Ii>ever in a good position to make a difference. The way it might have was, as the authors probably know, would have been to take air supremacy to cover for a seaborne invasion of the island of Britain. But invasion is not an attritional strategy! As arguments for the viability of Ukrainian attrition, this is weak.
There is no good precedent for strategic bombing to play a decisive role in any victory in war. Given that Britain was an island dependent on food imports (for one) the U-boat strategy probably seemed more promising. But of course, the effectiveness depended on the willingness of the population to suffer hunger, even as the most weakened died of disease, physical exhaustion or even outright starvation. It didn't happen, so no one can say either that the English would have surrendered rather than to die like the people of Leningrad. Again, this is a weak argument for Ukraine's attritional strategy.
Now these two examples are I think obvious examples that attritional warfare as the singular strategy doesn't work. The insinuation that Ukraine's attritional warfare could work against Russia should be puzzling. Attrition as the strategy of final victory has a couple of well-known examples, the American Revolution for one. The key to the importance of attritional warfare I think is that the attritional side avoids decisive defeat, while biding its time for special opportunities to hand key defeats to an enemy who is engaged in a war of choice. The English had two armies trapped and taken, they gave up despite many tactical victories. Defeat of armies is still part of an attritional strategy. Ukraine's attritional strategy by implication needs to defeat at least one Russian army, a conclusion the authors pointedly avoid. Another thing is, given that Donbass is only doubtfully Ukrainian in the fascist sense, where Russian-language speakers and ethnic Russians are at best second-class citizens, it is not even clear that Russia isn't already defending part of its home. The right of nations to self-determination includes the right to national unity, a right favoring Russia as against Ukraine. Fascist Ukraine is waging a war of conquest.
Another famous example is the Vietnam War. Again, in practice a key turning point in the war as the famous Tet offensive. Apologists for the US claim this was a catastrophic defeat for the defenders of Vietnam (no, they weren't the US and its clients!) But war and politics are inseparable and the blow to the premises of the US invasion was literally incalculable. It put paid to the many American boasts that the US was winning. Such assaults are not attritional warfare at all. That's why Ukraine, despite the authors' neglect of the fact, launched the Kursk offensive in defiance of the narrow precepts of attrition.
The authors also cite the Allied war against Germany in WWI as attritional warfare. Quite aside from the fact that there were many reasons why neither side could do anything else, they certainly spent hundreds of thousands of lives in pursuit of traditional battlefield victories. Even more to the point, the eventual German surrender had a great deal to do with events at the home front, with the rising tide of revolution. Revolution preceded the surrender. The infamous claim of later German militarists and fascists about a "Stab in the back" from domestic socialists was not devoid of any contact with reality. In my view, there was a stab in the back: The German army betrayed its own war, to march to the rear and stab its domestic enemies, the revolution, in the back!
None of this strongly supports their contention that Ukraine's attritional strategy against Russia can even win, any more than a purely attritional Russian strategy can win. The cheats our host exposes so effectively in his post are needed only to claim its Ukraine's attritional strategy that can win. The question they avoid, is their goal a Ukrainian victory, or merely attrition against Russia in the war against Russia? In that war, Ukraine is only a single front and its people disposable. I think that is the case. It is an ugly and cynical cause, which is why they are so duplicitous. Others may disagree.
This is not short. No doubt a good writer could have said it more concisely. But given I'm not a good writer, it is still to the point.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Mar 8 2025 20:35 utc | 38
Who's winning? The one who scrapes the bottom of the barrel for soldiers (too young and too old) or the one who refuses any new conscription (because he has enough troops).
Posted by: John V. Doe | Mar 8 2025 20:35 utc | 39
from Ukrainian News. . .
Ukrainian Defense Forces fighters may withdraw from Kursk Oblast within 2 weeks - media
Up to 10,000 Ukrainian soldiers at risk of encirclement in russia's Kursk Oblast - media
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 8 2025 20:36 utc | 40
If we have learned anything from the war in Ukraine is that the art of projection is alive and well--"Projection is the unconscious displacement of one's own feelings or impulses (or wishful thinking) onto others."
Classic example: how many times did we hear that "Russia is running out of missiles" when it was Ukraine that was running out?
The presstitutes and intelligence agencies revel in wallowing in their own "we are winning" nonsense...
Posted by: JohnH | Mar 8 2025 20:38 utc | 41
Or search YouTube with the words: "armata 14 tank technical problems"Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 20:30 utc | 36
I take it that you haven’t done the same exercise using “F-35 technical problems” as a search term?
Hours and hours of sometimes jaw-dropping stuff about the sheer incompetence and more than a whiff of corruption surrounding the entire project. Don’t really need attrition if the equipment doesn’t work properly in the first place, perhaps we could call it ‘self-attrition’? The F-35 will never be used in a peer or near-peer conflict, unless the idea is to have the adversary die from laughter.
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 20:39 utc | 42
CrossTalk: Deal, What Deal? (& vid)
https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/613821-deal-conflict-ukraine-consensus/
"There is a growing consensus that a deal is necessary to end the conflict in Ukraine. This is progress. The problem is there is no consensus on what that deal might be. Trump demands Ukraine negotiate with Russia. The Europeans and Zelensky talk the language of peace, while supporting more war.
CrossTalking with Dr Amjad Ayub Mirza, Tobias Kahre and Pye Ian."
Going Underground: Clare Daly
https://www.rt.com/shows/going-underground/613873-clare-daly-eu-warfare-state/
"On this episode of Going Underground, we speak to Clare Daly, former member of the European Parliament for Dublin and co-host of the 14C Trouble podcast.
She discusses the announcement by Ireland's foreign minister that moves will be made to relax rules on deploying troops abroad and potentially to Ukraine...and much more."
Posted by: John Gilberts | Mar 8 2025 20:48 utc | 43
As Editor of Russian in Foreign Affairs argued recently: Russia does not need to win, she needs to win decisively. I am patiently waiting for that day, and then I will celebrate. Until then, I am not paying much attention to what is in effect just endless bs from the media and podcasters. If some people want to believe that the earth is flat, let them. What does it matter? Most people are stupid, and life in general is evil.
Posted by: Robert Konrad | Mar 8 2025 20:49 utc | 44
Nathan Robinson wrote a solid takedown of the Atlantic titled - The Worse Magazine in America - https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/the-worst-magazine-in-america
Posted by: forgotusername | Mar 8 2025 20:51 utc | 45
Anyway, this Atlantic piece could be met with a quote from our very own @Anonymous: “muh attrition copium”...
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 20:51 utc | 46
Is Trump Being Subverted in his Peace Plans? (& vid)
https://x.com/RT_com/status/1898202348427641166
"US embassy in Ukraine still 'completely infiltrated by DNC leadership'.
Posted by: John Gilberts | Mar 8 2025 20:55 utc | 47
Posted by: Markw | Mar 8 2025 19:47 utc | 19
We are having at least like 5 different types of thread open at the same time - that's enough I would say. Things about Trump and civil war can be posted in the neutral thread unless they also have relevance for Ukraine or Palestine. Some of the specialized threads are deserted only because the crowd has moved to a more recent, other thread. So there are limits to how much you can regulate.
Posted by: grunzt | Mar 8 2025 20:58 utc | 48
The Atlantic
employs ghost writers.
I believe that there are enough telltale signs
that we can attribute this attrition article to
Baghdad Bob.
Posted by: Otto Penn | Mar 8 2025 21:09 utc | 49
@ too scents | Mar 8 2025 19:16 utc | 7
that would be a reason right their to drop the use of anything apple related..
Posted by: james | Mar 8 2025 21:10 utc | 50
Yesterday, DW News invited Marina Miron, Kings College in-house version of War Nerd, to comment on aspects of the Ukraine war.
According to her, the decision to capture territory in Kursk was short-sighted because it should have been obvious that Russia would prioritise recapturing it, thus obliging UAF to pour men and materiel into a kill zone.
That made sense to me. And Russia's slow progress in Kursk tends to confirm that Ukraine did indeed send huge resources into Kursk (to be obliterated).
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 8 2025 21:11 utc | 51
Posted by: John Gilberts | Mar 8 2025 20:55 utc | 47
Trump could order Rubio to have the embassy closed, and all personnel evacuated. It hasn't happened yet, but that doesn't mean it isn't coming.
Back on topic - The Atlantic is a rag, don't read it and don't care what lies they cook up to Ukraine-splain NATO's epic fail.
Posted by: Ghost of Zanon | Mar 8 2025 21:13 utc | 52
Andrei M. has also ripped into The Atlantic: https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/03/yeah-yeah-autocracy.html
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 21:16 utc | 53
Ukraine is not on the verge of collapse, and it is Russia, not Ukraine, that is losing the attritional war, ..
It is the kind of ridiculous stuff written by war gas lighting!
Now we know where and for whom he is working.
LOL
Posted by: Naive | Mar 8 2025 21:18 utc | 54
The Atlantic is a rag
@Posted by: Ghost of Zanon | Mar 8 2025 21:13 utc | 52
The Atlantic is primarily owned by Laurene Powell Jobs.
She is the widow of Steve Jobs.
She is a a member of CFR.
And there you go.
Posted by: librul | Mar 8 2025 21:20 utc | 55
It's a horrible state of affairs. The Atlantic and its minions bear some share of responsibility for the shameful lying.
It's over but for the finishing up of the final conquests before the inevitable surrender.
These deaths and atrocities and needless destruction fall on nuland rice obama clinton blackrock cheney the mic and the rest of the disgusting war pigs. May this be brought to light and public shaming and justice prevail.
Posted by: osi not ossi | Mar 8 2025 21:22 utc | 56
Second author is Eliot Asher Cohen, cofounder of PNAC. We are recycling elderly hardcore neocons here.
Posted by: oldhippie | Mar 8 2025 20:15 utc | 31
______________
Exactly the point.
Posted by: osi not ossi | Mar 8 2025 21:28 utc | 57
Posted by: osi not ossi | Mar 8 2025 21:22 utc | 56
In a nutshell, you said it all.
Posted by: Elber | Mar 8 2025 21:29 utc | 58
I was kicked off the blog.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 8 2025 20:13 utc | 30
__________
Pointing out that Jeffrey Cohen is wearing no clothes?
Why that would expose the ridiculous rag that is the atlantic. Can't have that.
Posted by: osi not ossi | Mar 8 2025 21:32 utc | 59
The article of course cannot provide concrete information regarding at least one side, namely Ukraine, that would be considered utterly politically unacceptable, indeed perhaps even illegal in certain European NATO countries: effectively a form of spying or at the very least Russian propaganda, even if the so-called propaganda consists of accurate publicly available information.
It's yet another example of neoliberalism's full embrace of a sort of voodoo "reality creation," exemplified by both Democratic and Republican parties in the service of oligarchy and neo-imperialism. It's conceivable what the article says will ultimately prove relatively accurate, but even so such accuracy can only be taken on faith because concrete information on Ukrainian losses is politically Russian propaganda, as said, even if said propaganda is both accurate and technically freely and publicly available.
Posted by: Ludovic | Mar 8 2025 21:39 utc | 60
Quote:
Or search YouTube with the words: "armata 14 tank technical problems"
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 20:30 utc | 36
I take it that you haven’t done the same exercise using “F-35 technical problems” as a search term?
Hours and hours of sometimes jaw-dropping stuff about the sheer incompetence and more than a whiff of corruption surrounding the entire project. Don’t really need attrition if the equipment doesn’t work properly in the first place, perhaps we could call it ‘self-attrition’? The F-35 will never be used in a peer or near-peer conflict, unless the idea is to have the adversary die from laughter.
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 20:39 utc | 42
Agree. The war in the Ukraine has shown that A LOT OF military equipment is actually not fit for a "Modern War" as fought in the Ukraine. Like the british Challenger tank, the american Abrams A1 tank and the russian Armata 14 tank. In that regard the war in the Ukraine has learned us A LOT OF GOOD (military) lessons. But the story of the russian Armata 14 tank shows that Russia als needs to learn/has learned A LOT OF usefull lessons.
Also remember the sinking of the russian ship called Moskva in april 2022 ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Moskva
The F35 is indeed a disaster when it comes to using it. It requires 3 hours of maintenance for each hour the plane was in the air. But I also heard a similar story about the F16. Very expenisve when it comes to maintenance.
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 21:43 utc | 61
Don Bacon @ 30, Forgotusername @ 45:
Thanks to you both for the extra information and the Nathan Robinson article link about The Atlantic. Copies of that rag occasionally appear in newsagents here in Sydney though no-one ever seems to notice them. Local propaganda outlets here rarely cite The Atlantic or even The Economist in their screeds.
One would think that one red flag against reading The Atlantic would be its ownership by a wealthy tech widow. Shouldn't that raise alarm bells among people supposedly in favour of social justice and "progressive" values? Apparently not.
Posted by: Refinnejenna | Mar 8 2025 21:46 utc | 62
Meanwhile, Sputnik has published an article examining the balance of forces in the Arctic region, "Struggle For the Arctic: What Are the Major Regional Powers’ Strategies and Military Capabilities?", where part of Russia's assets are:
Regional defense capabilities greater than all other Arctic powers combined, with over 100K troops permanently stationed at 40+ bases, at locations including Franz Josef Land, Novaya Zemlya and Wrangel Island..
100K troops in the Arctic region alone that could be employed in the SMO if needed. And of course, those aren't the only troops deployed well away from the SMO. Yes, some will be conscripts who can't be used.
One always overlooked Russian asset is its national ethos--what it is to be Russian. The Ukrainians have some of that making them hard to defeat. I've provided many articles that provide glimpses of that and have just published another, "Putin's Roundtable Discussion with Employees and Wards of the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation". It's a long read, but very informative. I'm working on another translation project that ought to be done later today that also ought to prove informative in another manner as it speculates on what alterations Trump might make to the Outlaw US Empire.
I have posted quotes by Eric Hoffer, but I have to post this one. Please forgive me. “Propaganda does not deceive people; it merely helps them to deceive themselves.” – Eric Hoffer. And the Western media, with articles like this, are really fooling no one but themselves.
Posted by: Jose Garcia | Mar 8 2025 21:47 utc | 64
The internet never forgets.
So much was invested into the narrative of the Kursk incursion by the AFU being a game changer that it being undone will be a milestone. Should the Russian Federation succeed in achieving something resembling a rout of the AFU in the region, and then capitalize on that by turning the attention of the assets formerly engaged in that onto the defense positions in Ukraine's Sumy region, then the credibility of Western journalists who crowed over the initial successes of the AFU will be in jeopardy.
The current trend amongst that class is to blame the thinking of the powers that be in Kiev whenever the AFU suffers noticeable setbacks, and this wouldn't be any exception. But what could be new is that it will be noted, accurately, that President Zelenskyy himself is personally responsible for the senseless loss of a massive number of troops, and a massive unrecoverable loss of equipment, from that gamble.
And furthermore it will be unavoidable to mention how that gamble affected the flow of combat along the vast line of contact between Russian Federation and AFU forces, leaving the AFU very vulnerable to their opponent having a large advantage in heavy weapons and manpower.
Western pundits can either tacitly concede they misjudged the situation, or they can refuse to do that and instead argue that Ukraine was in a position to keep winning, but Zelenskyy's ego caused him to undermine that and it was he who handed huge wins to the enemy.
But it's all dependent on what the map will look like in a few days and weeks, and if the AFU can pull off some high profile razzle-dazzle like successful counter-attacks which regain some ground. Zelenskyy will be game for some life or death type decisions, and sending orders for bold tactical moves. His generals though might have had enough of that.
Posted by: Babel-17 | Mar 8 2025 21:48 utc | 65
The MSM is not in the journalism business anymore. All they do is promotion of a certain narrative. They should be called MSN: Main Stream Narrative. At this moment, they push this narrative of War being winnable in hope that something happens in Russia
Posted by: Grey Cloud | Mar 8 2025 19:16 utc | 6
The war is winnable … for Russia.
And if 404 were indeed winning, why all this sudden bluster from Trump about further sanctions on Russia?
Posted by: Lucky Joestar | Mar 8 2025 21:51 utc | 66
JRL @ 42:
Don't laugh at the F-35 fighter jet - it might still be useful in combat, as a kamikaze aerial weapon. The only restriction is the three-hour limit to its use as such, otherwise it ends up as an own-goal.
Posted by: Refinnejenna | Mar 8 2025 21:51 utc | 67
We've seen this sort of nonsensical gaslighting since the very beginning. Anyone who has closely followed the war with what is actually happening on the ground every day would have to claim what the Atlantic says as purely fanciful delusion by deceivers.
If there is one thing that is a certain outcome of this war is that in the West the media has increasingly become nothing but fictional propaganda that only the gullible and credulous would subscribe to.
Luckily there is Moon of Alabama and a few others that still hold a commitment to honest and thorough reporting. MSM media is now trash and will have to be gutted out before it is of any use ever again.
Posted by: George | Mar 8 2025 21:54 utc | 68
France is particularly keen on the Ukraine war because it has lost its African Colonies, and needs a new source of slave Labour.
Ukraine, with its minimum wage equivalent to 1.1 Euro/hr is just what France and Europe need,; a new slave Labour economy which has, or at least it had, coal, iron ore and iron and steel production to re-arm whichever European Country grabs it first.
Unfortunately most of the heavy industry is now in Russian territory; the bird has flown.
The European plan is to deport all the Ukrainian refugees and form a captive, exploited slave labour force, indentured to eternal repayment of loans.
Russia offers a better and kinder future.
Posted by: CitizenSmith | Mar 8 2025 22:10 utc | 69
Now here’s a search term for @WMG to try: Satellite overflight images from Yuzhmash since late November 2024...
I can’t get anything to show up, can’t think why...
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 22:14 utc | 70
No one noticed? Second author is Eliot Asher Cohen, cofounder of PNAC. We are recycling elderly hardcore neocons here.
Posted by: oldhippie | Mar 8 2025 20:15 utc | 31
Yet, people vote for them because they believe all their other lies about right wing economics.
Oh yes , What they say about right wing economics looking through their gold standard, fixed exchange rate type lens they 100% tell the truth. There has to be no debate about it.
Yet, lying sacks of shit when it comes to geopolitics and the war.
See how right wing people talk out of both sides of their mouth saying different things. As their ideological beliefs are hard wired to their confirmation biases.
It is why the world is in the mess it is in. These people talk shite about everything.. Voters pick and choose from this shite when it suits them.
Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | Mar 8 2025 22:30 utc | 71
I heard that Attrition is so valuable to propaganda.. that Russia has decided to offer its attrition for sale. I heard Western journalist are buying tickets in advance of the auction. Ticket price = $6,000 each.. sale date not yet announced.. I guess it will be sometime next year..
Posted by: snake | Mar 8 2025 22:31 utc | 72
b. our more than generous host, do you enjoy hurting us by splitting our sides with your dry humour? Thanks.
Posted by: Giyane | Mar 8 2025 22:34 utc | 73
Ticket price = $6,000 each.. sale date not yet announced.. I guess it will be sometime next year..
Posted by: snake | Mar 8 2025 22:31 utc | 72
" To pay down the national debt "
Hilarious !!!! As if it is a household debt. When it is just people's savings.
Trumpian Phoneyfart really is an idiot.
Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | Mar 8 2025 22:35 utc | 74
"We risk that peace in Ukraine could actually be more dangerous than the war itself" - Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen (Danish Press)
Posted by: Passerby | Mar 8 2025 22:41 utc | 75
The war is winnable … for Russia.
And if 404 were indeed winning, why all this sudden bluster from Trump about further sanctions on Russia?
Posted by: Lucky Joestar | Mar 8 2025 21:51 utc | 66
I agree with you. It looks quite obvious for me that Ukraine cannot win this war. But the elite cannot sell the story of further assistance to Ukraine if they cannot win. It is hard to swallow "Ukraine cannot win but we will give Zelensky 500 billion of dollars anyway." So they must push "Ukraine can win the war" narrative. There is little reporting these days. Only narratives.
Posted by: GreyCloud | Mar 8 2025 22:41 utc | 76
It’s straightforward to understand why MMT-ers don’t like the concept of attrition, because attrition is dissipative and interferes with their nice, neat models of everything circulating in a closed system, with no entropic drain.
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 22:44 utc | 77
The Atlantic is an organ of the US power elites and has always been an enemy of Russia. Anne Applebaum is its resident anti-Russian ideologue. The Atlantic's website also has an article posted by Robert Kagan, another capitalist ideologue, entitled Trump Is Offering Putin Another Munich, an article behind a paywall but one which apparently compares Chamberlain to Trump. American capitalists will never stop coveting and conspiring to make Russia's assets theirs.
Posted by: Keme | Mar 8 2025 22:46 utc | 78
Posted by: Jo | Mar 8 2025 19:57 utc | 23
Maybe. I have flown on a C21, it is an OK bird, but not suited for moving large amounts of people or equipment.
Now if 2 C10's show up, or C17's, then that is a different story.
Posted by: BroncoBilly | Mar 8 2025 22:56 utc | 79
The editor in chief of The Atlantic is Jeffrey Goldberg, a racist jew.
Goldberg expressed his admiration for jewish terrorist Meir Kahane. Goldberg also served in the IOF as a concentration camp guard.
After some years serving the zionist enemy directly, he decided he wanted to be an American again and returned to the USA.
He was one of the loudest voices pimping the Iraq war for 'israel' and has repeatedly advocated a US attack on Iran. He is sometimes described as 'netanyahu's mouthpiece.'
Jeffrey Goldberg is a hostile asset of a dangerous regime. He obviously wants to keep the Ukraine war going as long as possible so that more goyim can be murdered.
Posted by: Outrage Beyond | Mar 8 2025 23:09 utc | 80
The Atlantic is barely even know in the heart of MAGA country. Those inclined to read it have probably recently canceled their WAPO subscriptions.
The impact of this quoted article is nill. Simply preaching to the choir after choir practice.
Posted by: BroncoBilly | Mar 8 2025 23:09 utc | 81
Posted by: BroncoBilly | Mar 8 2025 22:56 utc | 79
yet you think "commander" is a made up officer rank.
Posted by: UWDude | Mar 8 2025 23:10 utc | 82
My Mum has finally started getting skeptical about the Ukraine war !
I sent her this very concise 4.5 minute video of Jeffrey Sachs’s speech (at the EU parliament ?)
https://x.com/LionelMedia/status/1896192766184657274
which is great but very very short. Do any of you have a video that explains the conflict in more detail, but not a bunch of needless detail, and for a person who is NOT A FAN OF POLITICS, not knowledgeable, so a video that is watcher-friendly.
As much as I like Scott Ritter, I did NOT like his video Agent Zelensky, because there is a lot of needless detail, and the translator voice (from Russian interlocutors) is like nails on chalkboard. I couldn’t watch it all.
So could you recommend a decent Ukraine explainer video ?
Thanks
Posted by: Featherless | Mar 8 2025 23:17 utc | 83
As b says ...
"There are two (or more) sides in a war of attrition".
Yep ....
The winners and the losers.
The loser was on display in the Oval Office a few days ago getting attrited by the Don.
The lack of judgement on display there explains a lot.
Fish and a barrel came to mind.
Posted by: Engineer-John | Mar 8 2025 23:28 utc | 84
"Now here’s a search term for @WMG to try: Satellite overflight images from Yuzhmash since late November 2024...
I can’t get anything to show up, can’t think why...
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 22:14 utc | 70
Please explain ..................
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 23:37 utc | 85
The headline is clear enough: "Russia Is Losing" but they carefully do not say, "Ukraine Is Winning".
This is about celebrating any loss suffered by Russia, and the folks at the Atlantic are unconcerned about Ukrainian people. They are simply an expendable resource ... fewer Ukrainians means don't have to divide the loot.
Posted by: Tel | Mar 8 2025 23:41 utc | 86
The headline is clear enough: "Russia Is Losing" but they carefully do not say, "Ukraine Is Winning".
This is about celebrating any loss suffered by Russia, and the folks at the Atlantic are unconcerned about Ukrainian people. They are simply an expendable resource ... fewer Ukrainians means don't have to divide the loot.
Posted by: Tel | Mar 8 2025 23:41 utc | 87
Anytime I see The Atlantic appear in my google searches, Anne Applebaum is the first thought that comes to mind. Many of that magazine's anti-Russia articles have been written by this person, who – based on her writings – comes across as mean and ruthless. She really hates Russia. In that respect, she's a 21st century version of Joseph Goebbels.
As for the Chamberlain/Hitler Munich comparisons, well, truth is that might have applied to Putin, not to any US/EU/NATO leader. That's because, at any point during this past decade, had Putin caved under NATO expansion pressure, he would have been the present day equivalent of Chamberlain in 1938. Someone who punked-out when the chips were down. Luckily for Russia (and maybe the world), Putin did the opposite.
I'm glad that the Applebaum/Nuland/Blinken/Kagan/Biden/Clinton foreign policy types will go down in history as losers. People in upcoming centuries will regard them as symbols of hubris, reckless fools, and architects of a great power war that resulted in a historically significant defeat for their own side.
Posted by: GW | Mar 8 2025 23:41 utc | 88
For those who don’t know, the “Atlantic” is a hard core neoconservative publication. They have been producing this sort of garbage for years, to wit every American war is both good and necessary. The people who swallow such nonsense are the same ones who believe everything written in the lying “New York Times.”
Posted by: Rob | Mar 8 2025 23:50 utc | 89
Posted by: George | Mar 8 2025 21:54 utc | 68
The gradual decay of the MSM started way before the SMO. It noticeably increased during the Obama years and Clinton’s election campaign, where journalists became increasingly defenders of their tribes narrative, but it was Trump’s victory that saw those ‘defenders’ declare outright war, where any tactic, that they thought could help defeat their enemy, became not only acceptable but desirable.
As for the article, it’s actually a good sign, the establishment is finally accepting that Ukraine has little time left. Just as Hitler was trotted out as the convenient excuse for German defeat, so Trump will be used as the reasons for Ukraine’s defeat. For that strategy to work the ‘defeat narrative’ must have a plausible scenario for an opposite outcome, if the architect of that defeat was removed. In the case of Ukraine it will be a Trumpian Dolchstoss that robbed Ukraine just as its strategy was bearing fruit and any recent Russian successes were because of this ‘betrayal’.
When one side is operationally planning to end the war, one side is mostly reacting to those plans, one side is trying to end it and one side is creating a fake narrative to explain defeat, you are most probably in the end-game.
The 70% figure is probably true for Ukraine, who are dependent on drones as substitutes for their critical shortage of conventional systems, but I seriously doubt it applies to Russia, who clearly have maintained a decisive advantage as regards artillery and air support. It could be that drones cause 70% of visible casualties, but how many uncounted bodies have been torn to pieces, lie amongst shattered fortifications, or are buried in rubble, after artillery or aviation strikes? I’d still wager that after the war it will be found that mines, mortars and artillery (both tank and tube) will have killed and injured more soldiers, overall, than drones, in most months of the conflict. I’d also suggest that small arms will probably be the least effective, but that the results will be skewed by poor Ukrainian casualty management procedures.
Posted by: Milites | Mar 9 2025 0:09 utc | 90
People on the ground have the most accurate view of the war. One side is meeting its goals of recruiting volunteers, the other has staggering desertion rates, men fleeing the country and numerous videos of civilians fighting conscription agents.
Posted by: freefrog | Mar 9 2025 0:27 utc | 91
@ Milites | Mar 9 2025 0:09 utc | 90
"The gradual decay of the MSM started way before the SMO. It noticeably increased during the Obama years and Clinton’s election campaign, where journalists became increasingly defenders of their tribes narrative, but it was Trump’s victory that saw those ‘defenders’ declare outright war, where any tactic, that they thought could help defeat their enemy, became not only acceptable but desirable.|
Agree with you on everything except the timing. For me the last straw was Iraq 2 in 2003. The entire war and invasion was sold as an urgent pre-emptive need so that we wouldn't have to wait for the smoking gun of a mushroom cloud. The memory is burned into my brain of Colin Powell shaking the vial and doing the whole song and dance before, quite literally the whole world. George Tenet with all his Intel. The ol' British blokes with Curveball. Some stuff about Yellow urinal cakes, I mean uranium, from Africa. Anyway. When the dust settled and it was clear there were no WMD, no ties to Al Qaeda, no nothing, I figured "now some heads are going to roll" as there's no way a properly functioning society can just let something like that slip. "whoops, turns out we just flat out made up a bunch of stuff so we could pulverize an entire country and kill who knows how many people... anyway, no use crying over spilt milk, moving on" And the media just rolled with it. It was kind of like when you're watching a movie with a ridiculous plot and the bad-guy is getting away with something really dumb and you say "no way in hell that would ever happen in real life!" And then to see something even more stupid actually happen for real.
Sorry. Bit of a rant. Point is, the MSM was poisoned long before the SMO, but it's descent into absurdity was definitely accelerated big time by it. I still remember straight-faced journalists dutifully taking notes from Condoleeza Rice as she explained the evils of what Russia was doing by invading another country. CONDOLEEZA RICE. And the fact that everyone nodded and took it all seriously as she was lecturing them made it even more surreal. Anywho. Turns out truth is often stranger than fiction, which sadly is what most of our MSM has devolved to.
Posted by: Clown Shoes | Mar 9 2025 0:40 utc | 92
"Now here’s a search term for @WMG to try: Satellite overflight images from Yuzhmash since late November 2024...
I can’t get anything to show up, can’t think why...
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 8 2025 22:14 utc | 70
Please explain ..................
Posted by: WMG | Mar 8 2025 23:37 utc | 85
Ask your boss at Lincoln Project, see if she knows.
Posted by: UWDude | Mar 9 2025 0:43 utc | 93
The Atlantic is a "reference outlet", just like the NYT or WaPo and other media outlets will refer to it and use it as a source to boost credibility with a certain peer group.
So the question is therefore: why this narrative at this moment? The answer should be pretty obvious: give Europeans more faith in a potential win... "Ukraine isn't lost, it just needs a little bit more and you can do that!"
Posted by: Zet | Mar 9 2025 0:47 utc | 94
Norman Solomon
War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death
War Made Easy cuts through the dense web of spin to probe and scrutinize the key "perception management" techniques that have played huge roles in the promotion of American wars in recent decades. This guide to disinformation analyzes American military adventures past and present to reveal striking similarities in the efforts of various administrations to justify, and retain, public support for war. War Made Easy is essential reading. It documents a long series of deliberate misdeeds at the highest levels of power and lays out important guidelines to help readers distinguish a propaganda campaign from actual news reporting. With War Made Easy, every reader can become a savvy media critic and, perhaps, help the nation avoid costly and unnecessary wars.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 9 2025 0:54 utc | 95
Posted by: Clown Shoes | Mar 9 2025 0:40 utc | 92
Yup. It was the most sickening display of arrogance and stupidity and injustice Inhad ever seen in my life.
And msm still trots these dinosaurs around as if they are the "experts" after one of the gravest alander boradcast in history agaonst Iraq, amd the murder that followed.
Also, funny Condoleeza Rice said her Aug 2001 memorandum "said something like Bin Laden Determined To Attack America", but she doesn't see why that was relevant.
I was talking to a pair of CIA of agents, (true story), oh 2002 ish. Ill nor get into details, but a handful pf us were at lunch, and Sep 11 did come up.
One agent, (the other hardly ever said a word), said, "well we could hardly have ever seen that coming", and I just got that adrenaline, and said, "What? What about the Cole and the 1993 twin tower bombings?"
"Oh yeah", he says, "I guess you are right."
Even accepting official narrative, how do heads not roll for the world's greatest security failure since the Teojan Horse?
And if you really want to dig, research John O'Neil, the FBI agent who was "obsessed with Bin Laden", and fired in Aug 2011.
Posted by: UWDude | Mar 9 2025 0:56 utc | 96
Oh, and that's probably the matching peer group:
Several countries in Eastern Europe are considering a pre-emptive strike against Russia, according to Financial Times columnist Simon Kuper.“We know. That’s why some of our countries are asking, ‘Why don’t we attack Russia now, instead of sitting waiting for it to attack us?’” an unnamed “prominent Eastern European politician” said, without elaborating.
Posted by: Zet | Mar 9 2025 0:57 utc | 97
Posted by: UWDude | Mar 8 2025 23:10 utc | 82
My experience is with Army and Air Force, not Navy.
Posted by: BroncoBilly | Mar 9 2025 1:02 utc | 98
Posted by: BroncoBilly | Mar 9 2025 1:02 utc | 98
In my "training", we had to memorize rank of all four branches, e and o, plus insignia, stripes, bars, and ribbons.
Posted by: UWDude | Mar 9 2025 1:06 utc | 99
Brian Berletic latest 2 hours masterclass
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EufxrTk3yoQ
It simply doesn't get any better than that. I simply love the meme of this masterclass.
" All threatre, Continuity of agenda "
After listening to this 2 hour geopolitical masterclass between Brian and Danny .It is so bloody obvious they are both right.
Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | Mar 9 2025 1:06 utc | 100
The comments to this entry are closed.
The Atlantic...says it all. Gates' ex wife's coffee money?
Posted by: Robert E. Smith | Mar 8 2025 18:55 utc | 1