|
Sitting In A Damaged Glasshouse Throwing More Stones
Ukraine: “Let’s attack Russian refineries. The Russians will run out of gasoline and diesel. There will be protests and Putin will be deposed.”
Result:
Emergency power outages have been introduced in the city of Kyiv as well as Kyiv, Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk and other oblasts on the morning of 27 October.
…
“On the orders of Ukrenergo [Ukraine’s state-owned electricity transmission system operator], emergency power outages have been introduced in Kyiv, Kyiv Oblast and Dnipropetrovsk Oblast.”
…
In addition, Sumyoblenergo, Sumy’s distribution system operator, announced emergency outages for its consumers.
The same situation is occurring in Cherkasy, Poltava, Kirovohrad, Zhytomyr and Kharkiv oblasts.
Reaction (machine translated):
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has threatened Russia with “expanding the geography” of long-range strikes.
Zelensky wrote about this in his telegram channel after the stavka meeting.
“Russian oil refining is already paying a significant price for the war and will pay even more. We have defined tasks to expand the geography of our long-range range, ” the Ukrainian president said.
I seriously doubt that these people are sane.
“imo America’s imperialism is baked in and solid. “
@ johnno | Oct 28 2025 6:14 utc | 188
Skimming through some readings posted at NK last night, an occasional thing for me, I came across a listing of the monetary grip the empire has on Argentina, as well as some challenges Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador and Chile are facing from the shapeshifter money cartel empire now focusing on S.A. (I recommend reading the entire article.)
It seems that if the rich borderlands of Russia and Russia itself are now off the Vampyre Ball’s menu, Argentina and related lands will do…for now — no reverse gear.
~~
From Nick Corbishley:
The US Is “Getting a Real Strong Handle” on South America “in a Lot of Ways”, According to Trump by Nick CorbishleyOctober 27, 2025
Does he mean handle or choke-hold?
…I gave him an endorsement, a very strong endorsement.”
That wasn’t all, of course.
The Trump administration also provided a $20 billion swap line while also brokering a $20 billion Wall Street-led bridge loan. How much money has been used or will be used is far from clear. That was just six months after the International Monetary Fund extended a $22 billion loan, backed up by an additional $12 billion from the World Bank and $10 billion from the InterAmerican Development bank.
All of these institutions are Washington-based and their support comes with big strings attached. Without that support, the Milei government would never have made it to the elections with an in-tact economy. The central bank would have run out of reserves months ago and the currency would have collapsed even more than it has.
…Washington’s debt trap diplomacy and overt election meddling has paid off in Argentina. After giving Argentine voters a choice they probably couldn’t refuse, between supporting President Milei’s La Libertad Avanza (LLA) or suffering another sovereign default followed by a full-blown financial crisis, Javier Milei’s party won 40.8% of the votes against 31.7% for the Peronist opposition. Thirty-five percent of eligible voters decided not to vote at all.
…one thing Argentines know better than most is that financial bailouts tend to come with a hefty price tag attached. If anything, that’s likely to be ever truer for a US Treasury-led bailout than an IMF-led one.
~~
As the Argentine expert in international relations, Juan Gabriel Tokatlian, notes, the Trump administration’s “unprecedented” decision to bail out Argentina has more to do with geopolitical considerations than economic ones:
There is a possibility that in one year’s time South America will be almost totally identical, politically speaking, to the United States. We have elections in Chile, which could be won by ´´[the right-wing populist] José Antonio Cast, elections in Peru, which could be won by someone on the right, elections in Colombia, which could bring the right back into power, elections in Brazil which Bolsonaro could win [NC: presumably in reference to Jair’s son, Eduardo], the second round of elections in Bolivia, which someone on the right will win.
There is a possibility that in one year’s time South America will be almost totally identical, politically speaking, to the United States. We have elections in Chile, which could be won by ´´[the right-wing populist] José Antonio Cast, elections in Peru, which could be won by someone on the right, elections in Colombia, which could bring the right back into power, elections in Brazil which Bolsonaro could win [NC: presumably in reference to Jair’s son, Eduardo], the second round of elections in Bolivia, which someone on the right will win.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/10/were-getting-a-real-strong-handle-on-south-america-in-a-lot-of-ways-says-trump.html
Posted by: suzan | Oct 28 2025 15:29 utc | 244
“I seriously doubt that these people are sane.”
They’re psychos. Gaza shows that past doubt. But there’s logic to their insanity. Although we’re heading for straight military defeat in the Ukrainian theatre they still have the Russians over a barrel. The problem of remnant Ukraine, the problem that has been staring all in the face since February 2022, it still one to which the Russians have no good solution. It’s clear that the Western politicians, Trump included, will not assist with coming to any good solution.
The future of Eastern Ukraine is already determined though we don’t yet know how much of it the Russians will decide to incorporate within the RF. But remnant Ukraine, whatever that turns out to be in territorial terms, poses a problem as insoluble as ever,
First, Eastern Ukraine. Lavrov – And now that we’re liberating the remaining parts of Zaporizhzhia (that’s what we call this region in Russia) and Kherson, most people aren’t leaving these places, despite the Ukrainian army’s attempts to evacuate them to mainland Ukraine. They stay and welcome the Russian soldiers who liberate them. So this isn’t our will, not our “imperial spirit,” as some say. It’s our concern for the future of people who feel part of Russian culture.
https://www.mid.ru/ru/press_service/minister_speeches/2055699/?lang=ru
This fits with statements from the Ukrainian authorities to the effect that they were having difficulty evacuating Kupiansk. Many did not wish to be evacuated. The same was seen in Bakhmut and in other towns and cities.
Later on Lavrov returns to the subject – “Regarding the 1991 borders and the idea that Russia “must retreat.” Okay, hypothetically, in their dreams and delusional ideas, if we leave the territories within the 1991 Ukrainian borders, what will happen to those people whom they—the Ukrainian government agencies after the coup—publicly called “subhumans,” called “individuals”?
Incidentally, V.A. Zelenskyy used the term “individuals” long before the start of the special military operation . In November 2021, he was asked what he thought of the people in Donbas on the other side of the contact line, according to the Minsk agreements . He said that there are people, and then there are “individuals.” And in another interview, he added that if you live in Ukraine and at the same time feel part of Russian culture, his advice is, for the safety of your children, for the safety of your grandchildren, to get out to Russia.
So, in essence, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson—the populations of these four territories—followed his advice. They returned to Russia.”
All this could apply to the rest of the old Party of Regions area, though population movements will have greatly altered the population mix that obtained before 2014.
Whatever the current population mix, for those living in the old Party of Regions area it’d be better for them if as much as possible of that area became part of Russian. That view’s not based on dreamy recollections of Catherine the Great, though Lavrov draws attention to those historical associations. It’s based on Lavrov’s strictly utilitarian argument that the pro-Russian element of that mixed population would be treated badly if that mixed population remained under Kiev rule. None would wish to see a repetition of the atrocities Brayard catalogued after 2014:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFynJY_SeKc&t=10s
There are a thousand similar accounts. They cannot be brushed away by dismissing them as Russian propaganda. And the effect of such atrocities has been to change entirely the political orientation of the Donbass and likely the political orientation of much of other parts of the old Ukraine.
Because there is ample evidence that before 2014 most in the Donbass were not much concerned with the question of who ruled them. This was not Crimea. There was no strong separatist movement in the Donbass and indeed the early Donbass rebels after 2014 wanted neither independence nor union with Russia. They were federalists. Protection from the extremists in the context of a federalised Ukraine was their aim.
But as the number of atrocities mounted those atrocities could no longer be dismissed as isolated incidents. It became apparent to all that harassment of the pro-Russian element in the Donbass population mix was Ukrainian state policy. A country had declared open war on a significant minority within itself and Poroshenko’s declaration that “their” children would hole up in the basements whilst “our” children went to school was but one of many declarations from Kiev that that war would be pursued to the limit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7Bk
The result was inevitable. The Donbass, before 2014 accepted by its own population and by all outside including Russia as an integral part of Ukraine moved from that, to a desire for a degree of protective autonomy inside Ukraine, to becoming a region that would never again willingly submit to the post 2014 atrocities. The fighting spirit and determination of the LDNR armed forces, who often took the brunt of the fighting after 2022 and whose contribution to the final victory is uniformly ignored in the West, was proof of that. A “Westernised” Russian visiting the Donbass not long after the invasion found to her surprise that nowhere was support for the Russian invasion stronger than within the Donbass itself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4QVsQ72kOg&t=1126s
“Z’s” everywhere and a people resolute to see the war through. Yet we in the West see the Donbass quite differently. We see it as a region subjected to brutal Russian occupation and needing only to be freed from that Russian occupation.
It is in the context of those post-2014 atrocities that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is to be regarded. Me, I discount entirely the historical disquisitions of a Putin or a Lavrov. So what that much of modern Ukraine owes its origin to Russia? So what that much of it shares a common culture with Russia? Many countries in the world owe their origin to England and many still share a common culture with us. Try arguing with an Australian that that would justify their reincorporation into the United Kingdom! A ludicrous comparison, no doubt, but sufficient to allow us to dismiss any Russian historical claim to ancient lands. Panchenko states the true justification:-
https://t.me/panchenkodi/3344
The Russian invasion of Ukraine must be regarded as first and foremost a rescue operation and if one examines the dispute in Russia itself over that rescue operation, the question is not why it occurred but why it occurred so late. Putin has been and still is heavily criticised within Russia for allowing the harassment of the Donbass to continue for so long, not for finally moving in to put a stop to it. It is the still living memory of the Madonna of Gorlovka, not hazy memories of the doings of the Zaporozhian Host, that is the only justification for his moving in at all.
But that’s only the East. Those arguments do not apply to the bulk of Western Ukraine. That is, what will be remnant Ukraine. Forget all the Russkiy Mir talk. As Havryshko points out forcefully, the population in Western Ukraine is mainly anti-Russian. It will remain so. Russian occupation of that region would be as undesirable, and as hated, as British re-occupation of the Irish Republic. The Russian problem there is a near insoluble one: how to prevent remnant Ukraine remaining a spearhead of the Western assault on Russia. How to prevent it remaining, in Sleboda’s terms, “A zone of destabilisation and insecurity for the rest of our lives,”
Because it is of NATO but not in NATO remnant Ukraine can be used as a base for mounting assassination and sabotage missions into Russia. It can be used as a launchpad for missiles and drones into Russia that are ostensibly launched by the Ukrainians but that are in reality supplied and targeted by us. It can be and is so used without our fearing Russian retaliation against NATO or any NATO country.
It’s often pointed out that if it were the other way round and the Russians used, say, Mexico for such purposes then the Americans wouldn’t put up with it for an instant. Well, that’s true but how would the Americans cope with the problem? If they occupied Mexico to prevent it being used for that purpose they’d find themselves having to go to vast expense. They would be forever having to commit troops and security personnel for the purpose. Instead, what the Americans would aim for would be a neutral Mexico that refused to allow itself to be so used.
That, in reverse, is the problem the Russians face in Remnant Ukraine. The parts of Ukraine that wish to be reincorporated within the RF will present few problems – there it’s more a question of getting an economy that’s been heading for dereliction since 1991 back on its feet again. But remnant Ukraine is a real dilemma for them. They don’t want to occupy. But they can’t allow it to remains as a handy NATO attack dog. If drones and missiles continue coming out of remnant Ukraine afterwards then the Russian people will be asking Putin “Why did we fight this war if we’re still at risk from NATO missiles?” And if Putin has no answer to that question, after at least 100,000 dead and a major Russian military effort, then his administration will fall. The Russian hawks will take over and we’re at risk of a direct war between NATO and the RF.
That dilemma has been apparent since 2022, even before. The obvious resolution is for the Western powers to declare they will cease using remnant Ukraine in this way. But the Europeans and the American hard liners would not countenance that. President Trump, facing that internal and external opposition, could not offer such guarantees. If he did they could not be regarded as binding, “Not agreement capable” is how most of the world regards the West in any case. The Russian hope of an overall security settlement on the lines of the December 2021 proposed treaties is unrealistic and will remain so. It’ll be as much as they can do if the Russians achieve the main points of the June 14th 2024 speech to the Foreign Office officials. “I repeat our firm stance: Ukraine should adopt a neutral, non-aligned status, be nuclear-free, and undergo demilitarisation and denazification. These parameters were broadly agreed upon during the Istanbul negotiations in 2022, including specific details on demilitarisation such as the agreed numbers of tanks and other military equipment.”
https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1957107/
And even those conditions the West will not agree to. So we have the Russians over a barrel. Occupy remnant Ukraine to get those conditions met and the Russians are buying trouble. Don’t occupy it and the SMO will have been unsuccessful in that remnant Ukraine will still be used as an attack dog.
The only solution is for the Ukrainians themselves to decide they will not be so used in the future. But the current administration is still in the saddle and able to employ increasingly repressive measures to ensure it remains so. Alternative Ukrainian administrations could not deviate much from the line the current administration is taking. When we consider remnant Ukraine as it is now it increasingly resembles more an occupied country than a country in charge of its own future. This is a country that voted overwhelmingly for peace in 2019 only to find itself committed to war by the West and its own extremists. Unless Putin can come up with a solution – he’s not been able to so far – we could well see the Russians forced into occupation.
If so, the Russians will have won the war but will have lost any chance of a stable and long term solution to that problem of remnant Ukraine. These people we doubt are sane, the current politicians of the West, are logical enough. That is how they hope to see this war ending up.
Posted by: English Outsider | Oct 28 2025 17:14 utc | 273
Below is data from AI in response to what industries were exported from America to 7 other countries. AI refused my request for a complete list but this limited list clearly demonstrates a thesis is possible to suggest that imperialism since WWII is about expanding the limited in size American market to the globe. These companies who had participated in WWII discovered just how big the global market could be if only the people in those markets could afford to buy goods their companies could make. The problem: the people in other nations did not have sufficient buying power to pay for services or to buy products the too big to fail were making and selling. For the most part, citizens of other nations could not afford modern goods and services. So I proposed, they set out to take from America the source of that buying power and to distribute it around the globe.
Countries that received exported America Industries
Major Industries exported from America
Companies Involved
Canada
Machinery, Electrical Equipment
Caterpillar, GE, Honeywell
Mexico
Automotive, Electronics
Ford, General Motors, Texas Instruments
China
Electronics, Machinery
Apple, Boeing, Qualcomm
Japan
Automotive, Aerospace
Toyota, Honda, Boeing
United Kingdom
Pharmaceuticals, Machinery
Pfizer, Caterpillar
Germany
Machinery, Chemicals
Siemens, BASF, Bosch
South Korea
Electronics, Automotive
Samsung, Hyundai
Year
Country
GDP/Capital($USD)
National debt/capital ($USD)
Adjusted buying power $USD
1950
Canada
$5,500
$200
$5,300
Mexico
$1,000
$50
$950
China
$500
$10
$490
Japan
$1,000
$50
$950
UK
$9,000
$500
$8,500
Germany
$3,500
$150
$3,350
S Korea
$400
$20
$380
USA
$13,000
$1,000
$12,000
1960
Canada
$7,500
$300
$7,200
Mexico
$1,800
$80
$1,720
China
$120
$10
$110
Japan
$2,600
$150
$2,450
United Kingdom
$10,500
$600
$9,900
Germany
$4,700
$200
$4,500
South Korea
$700
$30
$670
USA
$16,000
$1,400
$14,600
1970
Canada
$15,000
$2,500
$12,500
Mexico
$2,500
$500
$2,000
China
$150
$10
$140
Japan
$2,500
$500
$2,000
United Kingdom
$10,000
$3,000
$7,000
Germany
$12,500
$2,000
$10,500
South Korea
$600
$50
$550
USA
$20,000
$5,000
$15,000
1980
Canada
$17,000
$5,000
$12,000
Mexico
$3,000
$1,000
$2,000
China
$210
$50
$160
Japan
$4,000
$1,000
$3,000
United Kingdom
$12,000
$4,000
$8,000
Germany
$15,000
$3,500
$11,500
South Korea
$1,000
$100
$900
USA
$25,000
$10,000
$15,000
1990
Canada
$25,000
$8,000
$17,000
Mexico
$4,000
$2,000
$2,000
China
$380
$100
$280
Japan
$28,000
$1,500
$26,500
United Kingdom
$15,000
$5,000
$10,000
Germany
$25,000
$5,000
$20,000
South Korea
$4,000
$200
$3,800
USA
$35,000
$15,000
$20,000
2000
Canada
$30,000
$12,000
$18,000
Mexico
$7,000
$3,500
$3,500
China
$1,000
$300
$700
Japan
$38,000
$4,000
$34,000
United Kingdom
$25,000
$8,000
$17,000
Germany
$32,000
$7,500
$24,500
South Korea
$10,000
$1,000
$9,000
USA
$42,000
$20,000
$22,000
2010
Canada
$38,000
$16,000
$22,000
Mexico
$9,000
$4,500
$4,500
China
$4,500
$1,000
$3,500
Japan
$40,000
$8,000
$32,000
nited Kingdom
$25,000
$8,000
$17,000
Germany
$32,000
$7,500
$24,500
South Korea
$10,000
$1,000
$9,000
USA
$42,000
$20,000
$22,000
2020
Canada
$43,000
$25,000
$18,000
Mexico
$10,000
$5,000
$5,000
China
$10,000
$3,000
$7,000
Japan
$40,000
$9,000
$31,000
United Kingdom
$39,000
$10,500
$28,500
Germany
$46,000
$9,500
$36,500
South Korea
$30,000
$3,000
$27,000
USA
$65,000
$32,000
$33,000
2024
Canada
$48,000
$27,000
$21,000
Mexico
$11,500
$5,500
$6,000
China
$12,000
$4,000
$8,000
Japan
$39,000
$10,000
$29,000
United Kingdom
$42,000
$12,000
$30,000
Germany
$50,000
$10,500
$39,500
South Korea
$36,000
$10,000
$26,000
USA
$78,000
$100,000
-$22,000
so, did the too big to fail WWII participants decide to normalize the globe into one big world market?
Does the above data support a thesis that de industrialization of America was about normalizing the buying power of everyone in the world?
Buying power is a function of jobs so did they export American jobs with intent to reduced the relative buying power enjoyed by the American market in order to increase the numbers of potential buyers by millions upon millions in the global market?
Gaining sufficient control of the national economies of the rest of world was difficult to achieve because of the corruption, culture and many other things. So the answer to that was regime change and take over the control of any nation that refused or proved incapable to adjusting to buying power parity.
And I think this is why the Glass house is throwing more stones.. this why the national debt has increased. Financing the export of American jobs to foreign lands left large deficits in both the American market and created enormous demand for cash in the job importing countries that were trying to learn how to start up and operate an industry that used to be American.
IMO, there is strong evidence to suggest de industrialization was about normalizing the global market. It looks like a Robin hood theft of America’s economic greatness by a few IOT create hew markets far bigger than the American market. Russia and China have called their hand. They have developed economies that are far stronger than they are allowed..
This is a crazy theory but the data fit. I would love some comment about it. You can see the data for yourself i published it above.
Posted by: snake | Oct 28 2025 18:04 utc | 288
|
