Fascinating new RAND report urges Washington to get the hell out of dodge in Ukraine, as "US interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict," and "costs and risks of a long war...outweigh the possible benefits"!
RAND pushing US/Western escalation against Moscow for a very long time. In 2019 it published report on "Extending Russia". Many of its recommendations subsequently came to pass. Three years earlier, an investigation of US/China war also made a subsequently fulfilled suggestion:
RAND's reasons for ending proxy war are manifold, but "US ability to focus on competition [ie war] with China" looms large. Intriguingly, it is feared the longer this goes on, the closer Moscow and Beijing will become, which Washington absolutely fears, and does not want!
RAND is a highly influential body, which informs - and reflects - elite thinking and imperial policy. This report particularly significant given numerous US officials have similarly expressed doubts about Washington keeping this grinding on. We shall see...
Having now re-read this, it's remarkable how on the nose so much of the language is (this is a frequent feature of RAND reports - always study them closely!), and how in line it is with what anti-imperialists have been warning about *since before the war began*.
The hits keep coming. The "significance" of "international norms" and Ukraine's economy are "debatable", therefore Washington shouldn't give a shit about either, or indeed Ukraine reclaiming territory. I hope every US ally studies this report, and takes lessons from it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Absolutely amazing excerpt: the UK has "always" believed the risk of deploying its forces to Ukraine was "too high". This is after months and months of bellicose statements from Starmer that he is "ready and willing to put British troops in Ukraine" 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
All of the statements and pledges contained below never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening, it wasn't happening. The UK always believed it was too dangerous to deploy to Ukraine formally and would never dream of making such a commitment.
🧵: With news that Israel is still contemplating a "limited strike" on Iran, important to understand why the US is so resistant to this, why it would be a complete and utter disaster of epic proportions for the Empire, and why fears of a wider war on Iran are overblown...
Iran's strike on Israel last October was absolutely devastating. Its timing, scale, and severity caught Tel Aviv and the US completely off guard. A clear gauntlet was thrown down to both, and they had no response, apart from trying to downplay its impact.
US bases in West Asia are to significant extent relic of when Iran was Western puppet state under the Shah. Their proximity to Iran means the Islamic Republic would be able to take most of them out entirely with hypersonic and ballistic missiles almost instantly if war erupted.
Pretty astonishing that nine days after my investigation into how Ukraine is a British-led proxy war, and London was central to Kiev's disastrous 2023 counteroffensive, The Times publishes basically the same article with a bit more colour:
Key point here that I've made again and again. Britain has been training fascist paramilitaries like Azov, Right Sector etc in Ukraine since 2015. This policy was influenced by Chris Donnelly, #IntegrityInitiative chief currently overseeing Britain's management of the proxy war.
2015 Kyiv Post article on the fascist paramilitary training program, quoting Chris Donnelly and Lithuanian ultranationalist Audrius Butkevicius. They plotted the 2022 attack on Kerch Bridge together.
🧵: Made this point in countless articles and interviews in past few months, but it bears repeating here: it is completely unfathomable that European leaders remain determinedly committed to keep the Ukraine proxy war when it is irretrievably lost for the West. And scary too...
By any objective measure, this has been a disaster on every conceivable level for Europe. They've deindustrialised, wrecked their economies, borderline disarmed by sending equipment to Kiev. The Russians are still marching, and the US - even if slowly - is backing off. It's over.
Only now are European leaders and their mainstream lackeys getting serious about rearmament, conscription, increased defence spending, etc. Their populations don't want any part of it, and nothing implemented now will be remotely meaningful in the short-term. It's all rhetoric.
🧵: This is huge. Priscilla Johnson McMillan interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald in the Soviet Union in 1959. She played a key role in shaping public perceptions of LHO as mentally unstable lone wolf Communist after JFK's assassination. But her role in the coverup went a lot deeper...
In September 1964, the Warren Commission was desperately trying to square the circle of LHO being in two places at once - Mexico City, and Cuban exile Sylvia Odio's home in Dallas, Texas. The Mexico trip in itself was deeply suspect. More here:
Warren Commissioner Senator Richard Russell disbelieved the single bullet bullshit and that LHO had gone to Mexico. So Priscilla miraculously found a bus ticket stub showing Lee travelled there while interviewing his wife Marina at home. More here:
BREAKING: Absolutely *damning* ECHR ruling finds Kiev bears heavy responsibility for the massacre of scores anti-Maidan activists in Odessa, May 2014. Inevitable Western media blackout on this, as it confirms what Russia was saying all along.🧵...
This being the ECHR (with a Ukrainian judge presiding, no less), the ruling is at pains to 'bothsides' the burning to death of dozens of anti-Maidan activists by Neo-Nazi lunatics. Nonetheless, it acknowledges local police and fire services "deliberately" allowed it to happen.
Nobody and nothing stepped in to rescue the anti-Maidan activists as they burned to death, and the ECHR finds this failure "went beyond an error of judgment or carelessness". Maidan authorities actively wanted these people to die, for the crime of being Russian.