In modern weapon and ISR conditions, there is no justification for strategic offense, power projection, proactively meddling in other nations’ affairs. There is justification only for strategic defense. If asked to help another nation with their strategic defense, then that can be considered but only in context of the requirement to maintain one’s own strategic defense at optimal.
404 [so-called Ukraine] does not qualify as a requester of strategic defense, much less operational or tactical defense, because the regime there is artificial, not organic, an hireling of CIA-USAID-State Department.
One has to ask why from 1945 to 1991 Soviet Russia never came west farther than she had reached while defeating the Wehrmacht? She could have done, easily and quickly after 1950. But she did not, even though she wanted to bring the world the benefits of collectivism, she said. Answer: because deep Russian battle doctrine, the Russian soul, forbids it — offensive war — as wasteful and stupid.
The stand-off between 1945 and 1991 — the so-called Cold War, Bernard Baruch coinage, not Soviet — ended when deep Russia saw that she had no one to defend against. She saw that NATO could not harm her strategically. She was right. The Reagan military build-out did not convince Soviet Russia she could not win. Quite the opposite. That convinced her she could not lose, that NATO is a limp and toothless lion.
We are told POTUS Reagan cowed the Soviets with American-NATO prowess and capability. Quite the opposite happened. POTUS Reagan convinced the Soviets that Euro-American power is elusive like a dream, a chimera, not tangible. The evidence and marquee of that fact was the final flight of Space Shuttle Challenger. Today, Euro-Americans must rely on deep Russian engineering and fabrication capabilities to lift humans into space.
The Reagan military build-out was for taking on Iran, Iraq, and Hizballah, not Soviet Russia. Pipsqueaks, not the Soviet Russian General Staff. Soviet Russians read that accurately. All along, their intelligence architectures and assessments have been nearly flawless. By 1991 Soviet Russia had no military peer, knew it, and therefore had no enemy to keep her sharp, on her toes. If the other side won’t or can’t tango, you can’t dance, and your defensive architecture is going to undergo loss of purpose, severe scrutiny, and calls for reconstitution, repurposing. That’s not a bad thing, however unpleasant, so long as you don’t attenuate the project at some point in its processing.
Russians, sans Soviet overlay, famously gave notice of undertaking this very project in a speech at Munich in 2007. It was already well-launched, in fact. Euro-Americans openly laughed at the thought and the speaker. They are not laughing now.
In 2000, Russia emerged from a decade of attempted colonial subjugation by US-UK intelligence agencies and financialization schemers resolved to expand her diplomatic, financial, and military maneuver defensive posture, which she had never lost, only experienced contraction of, to protect herself from NATO’s — they call NATO nations the West and the combined West — inherently offensive attitudes and intentions regarding Russia.
Russia warned NATO not to abut her borders and not to meddle in her affairs. She offered NATO (aka The USA) mutually beneficial inter-national relations. NATO responded with obscene gestures. Russia threw up the wall and is now deciding — probably already has decided — which river line shall constitute her border with the West Eurasian Peninsula (Europe): Horyn-Zbruch-Dniester, Horyn-Zbruch-Prut-Danube, Bug-Vistula, Oder, or Elbe.
Soviet Russians were in Africa and MENA a lot during those years, 1945-1991, and they are fondly remembered there. Why? Because they were asked in and they came to help those countries actualize their defensive capabilities. They did not demand subservience to themselves in return. In Africa, US officials always called Soviet Russians imperialists. So do they still. However, Russians were and are nothing of the sort. They brought help against actual imperialists: France, Belgium, Portugal, Britain, USA. Now imperialists-colonialists undergo expulsion from Africa, and Africans in a goodly part of their continent wave Russian flags.
The one time the Russians tried imperialism during those years was in Afghanistan, and they got beaten at the strategic and operational depths although not at the tactical depth. Not cleanly, but they had to get out because back home, the Russian soul does not tolerate offensive warfare, either doing it or having it done to them. Euro-Americans do not understand this quality of the Russian soul. They see it as unscientific, gross, barbarian. Russians see it as a foregone conclusion, self-evident and tangible reality.
The USA-UK during those years, on the other hand, beat Germany at the tactical and operational depths but not the strategic depth — US and Canadian officials welcomed to Canada and The USA Nazi Officer and Enlisted Soldiers as well as civilian officials, quietly but in large numbers — beat Korea and China at the tactical, operational, and strategic depths, then gave away the strategic victory, along with the rest, on ideological grounds, beat Vietnam at the tactical but not the operational or strategical depths, got beaten at the tactical, operational, and strategic depths by Iran, beat Arabs at the tactical and operational depths but not the strategic depth, got beaten by Soviet Russia at the tactical, operational and strategic depths, beat Granada and Panama at all depths, and got beaten at all depths by leaders of drug cartels and other criminal organizations.
Following 1991, The USA-UK got beaten at all depths by Russia, again, and by Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan — in Afghanistan by choice, specifically by their own arrogance and incompetence— at strategic depth by Arabs, again, and at strategic depth in Africa, the Asia-Pacific, soon to come in Central Asia, and by China all over the globe.
The cause of US-UK war losses and unhappy or dishonorable war wins is the habitual impulse among US-UK politicians to gin up a posture of continuous national offense rather than provide their countrymen with a posture of indomitable national defense. The unremitting posture of Tier I US-UK and Euro-American officials generally is now by all the evidence suicidal. Everyone else hates it. A nation pugnacious in mind is a nation in lethal psychosis.
Learn and construct as default national grand strategic posture architectural capacity for maneuver defense, having inside it a maneuver offense capability, in diplomacy, finance, and war-fighting. Life for everyone will return to normal. Acquaint oligarchs and their NGOs with Hell.
Principle I
Principle II
Principle III
By Artists M and F Graham
At Puttaparthi, Andhra Pradesh, India
