How the West sees the end of NWO
Today, the media is simply teeming with materials about mobilization. Western publications are hard at work dispersing the myth of mass protests. About the flight of men from Russia. Our press tells about the dispatches of those called up to the NVO zone, about the queues at the military registration and enlistment offices. Nothing unusual. That same information war in action. At the same time, the sending of replenishment is in full swing.
It is clear that in such a situation, not only positive, but also negative qualities of people really manifest themselves. There are those who, like fishermen in Primorye and Siberia, came to the military registration and enlistment offices without a summons. And there are those who really run to escape the mobilization. So it was and always will be. People are different. We'll figure it out later, after the victory.
I was also interested in another question. How do they react to events at the very top of the Western, especially the American, political elite.
It is clear that the resources of the West are not unlimited. In addition, military operations will very soon have to be carried out in winter conditions. And this fundamentally changes the situation. The West is not ready for such a war. The situation is somewhat reminiscent of World War II. More precisely 1941 ...
It is clear that the understanding of the fact that the war must somehow be ended must somehow change the attitude of the Western political elite towards the conflict. In order to understand this, you need to carefully read what the most titled and exclusive journalists write. In the US, there is a very simple criterion for selecting such journalists. These are those who are "read by the president."
One of these journalists, Thomas Friedman, recently wrote an interesting piece called "Three Ways to End Putin's Operation." Friedman is truly a high-flying journalist, a long-term columnist for The New York Times, a three-time Pulitzer Prize winner, and a specialist in the Middle East. Let's see what this American political commentator writes about.
The beginning of the material is a little shocking for Russian readers. Let me remind you that the article by Thomas Friedman was published on September 20. So it's about the past week. And all this week, Friedman talked with leading European politicians.
What happened last week so terrible for President Putin? First of all, here, it seems to me, is the lack of understanding of Ukrainian realities. A sort of "war on the map" in the head of the author. The worst thing was... the loss of part of the previously liberated territories. Simply put, the same Ukrainian offensive.
But even more frightened Vladimir Putin, according to Friedman, the leaders of China and India!.. And again, attention, this is written by one of the leading journalists in the West. I am not inclined to think that a journalist of a sufficiently serious level, who has lived a long and eventful life, has sunk into primitive lies. Most likely, this is a lack of information or its one-sidedness.
I wonder how an increase in the supply of energy and food, and even with huge discounts, can increase the prices of these resources? The author is clearly distorting, transferring the situation in Western Europe to Asia.
By the way, it was in Friedman's material that I found an explanation for the actions of our former prima donna. Somehow it was not particularly believed that she was not aware of what she was doing. Realizes and does it consciously. With her statements, according to an American journalist, she really spoils the mood of President Putin:
And finally, about the most important thing. Thomas Friedman is well aware that the coming winter will be tragic for Ukraine and Europe as a whole. It will come back to haunt the US as well. The rupture of economic relations with Russia, the refusal to cooperate in many sectors are leading to a serious decline in the standard of living in the West, and it is not yet clear whether the Europeans and Americans will withstand this.
Again attention. Three options for the development of events, but not a single option that considers the possibility of Russia's victory in this confrontation.
I think now many readers have come a kind of stupor of thinking. As they said in the old days, the mind has gone beyond the mind. It seems to be logical, but ... fantastic. Yes, and the conclusions, from the point of view of the Russians, look like some kind of "hares". They have been “pulled by the ears” for a very long time.
Let's try to understand Friedman's logic. Let's analyze all three scenarios point by point. But, first of all, let me express my opinion about the changes in the essence of the military conflict in Ukraine. In my opinion, we have been at war with the West for quite some time now. Not with Ukraine, but with the West. We did not start this war, but we must end it.
That is why Western journalists actually talk about it. They, including Fridman, are talking about the victory of the global West. I fully understand the patriotism of the American journalist. I understand his faith in the victory of his country, the victory of the political system that exists in this country. But I am Russian, and I also believe in our victory.
So, the first version of the end of the war. The defeat of Russia and forcing her to make peace on the terms of the West. In my opinion, this point of view is already outdated. I wrote that the APU is running out of steam.
Those actions that the Ukrainians are positioning as an offensive look more like a PR stunt than a real military operation. The allied forces do not even allow for local victories and are engaged in the methodical destruction of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
What are the arguments of the supporters of this point of view based on? Friedman answers this quite specifically. The offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will cause panic among the allies, and they will run. Interestingly, an American journalist has seen at least once a video from the divisions of the Republicans, from the divisions of the Russian army, from the divisions of the Kadyrovites, from the Wagner PMC. Will these run? Oh well...
I don't think it's worth discussing this option any further.
So let's move on to a more realistic, but also at the moment fantastic, version of the dirty deal. A variant in which the power in Kyiv will be swept away by the Ukrainians themselves, and a split will occur in the EU and NATO. Here, even Thomas Friedman himself says that such an "outcome is unlikely, and one should not place special hopes on it."
It is clear that the problems with gas in Europe have created a lot of additional dangers for Western politicians, and it is quite possible that some of them, in an effort to maintain power, will bow to President Putin and bargain gas supplies for their countries. This is clear to the Americans as well. Words and threats will not warm people and will not launch energy-intensive industries.
The reasoning of the American about the goals of the EU and Ukraine is interesting. He practically agrees with Putin in his assessment of the situation, but draws completely different conclusions. Kyiv's goals remain as unrealizable as they were before. The capture of the republics, the expulsion of Russians from the Crimea, the annexation of some "primordially Ukrainian lands" and other nonsense. Even in the USA they laugh at this.
But the goals of the EU and NATO have changed. The Alliance continues to help Kyiv. But this help is more and more reminiscent of handouts to a beggar so that he does not die on the threshold of a European home. In fact, European politicians, I do not mean microbes from the Baltics, Poles and other Moldovans, who can hardly be classified as serious politicians, have long been looking for ways to improve relations with Russia.
Europe does not want hostilities to be transferred to its territory. There is an understanding that, with all the ambitions, the European armies will not be able to resist the Russian one. Yes, and overpopulation in Europe plays an important role. Huge loss of population, destruction of the economy and sliding back to the beginning of the last century…
Hence the behavior of European leaders. On the one hand, they succumb to US pressure, and on the other hand, they are ready to pay to maintain the status quo in their countries. It is quite a normal desire for any patriot of his country. Preserve what is inherited from the ancestors. And increase if possible.
The only country for which the continuation of the war and the deployment of hostilities in the European theater is good is the United States. The weakening of Russia and the destruction of European competitors, which is better ... Nothing new, the same option that the United States has already worked out in the First and Second World Wars.
Well, does President Putin need it? Do we need peace right now? I often ask this question to my interlocutors. And the answer is completely different. From Lenin's "peace at any cost" to Zhirinovsky's "we will wash our boots in ... the ocean." But almost every week the president answers this question in the same way. The objectives of the operation must be achieved!
Do I need to explain to someone the position of the President of Russia? I don't think it's necessary. In general, according to the second option for ending the CBO, I can conclude that politicians do not want to "separate the flies from the cutlets." They view the fighting in Ukraine as just a part of the global, that same hybrid war between the West and Russia.
Russia, of course, will not accept such a peace. This is not the world. This is another postponement of the war, which the West is using to re-pump Ukraine with weapons and troops. We've been through this several times already.
But Thomas Friedman considers this option the most probable! More precisely, this option is the only one in which, even if he loses on the whole, President Putin will “save face”, later telling his people that the West made concessions and did not have to use nuclear weapons. weapon.
Well, the third option. We will return everything to the situation that was on February 24th. And President Putin will make a new appeal to the people, where he will say that we have lost thousands of soldiers, hundreds of aircraft, tanks and other technology. Sanctions were imposed against us, and it was all a mistake... Don't smile, a serious American journalist writes about this!
And Putin's speech is more of a fiction than a possible development of events. Here events will develop in a completely different scenario. 1945 Only instead of the Germans there will be Russians. Documented, and we already know how the West does it, the crimes of the "Putin regime", the search and trial of "war criminals" and so on.
This is how the West sees the end of a special military operation. I repeat and say that Thomas Friedman is not just a journalist, but a legend of journalism. A person who personally knows many Western politicians. Therefore, what he wrote about is not so much his personal reasoning, but the opinions of current politicians. Which of these opinions will eventually win and be implemented, I do not know.
It was really interesting for me to read the materials that today form the opinion of not only the Western man in the street, but also Western politicians. But, in particular, the article under consideration completely lacks the option in which the majority of Russians are sure. Our victory option.
Is the West so confident in its strength and effectiveness of sanctions? Or is he sure that Russia will not be able to wage a serious war, and the population of our country will really overthrow the president and government? Most likely it is fear. Fear and wishful thinking. It is highly doubtful that serious politicians believe the delirium of Russian liberals who have fled Russia.
I look closely at how mobilization is going on in Russia. To be honest, I didn't see the panic. Everything goes on as usual. Yes, people are serious. Yes, anxiety for their relatives and friends is present. But there is no panic that Western media write about. And the fact that some part of “like men” is running away from the country is quite predictable. So it was, is and will be at all times. There are always people and people. The men are leaving. Leave to win.
Let me write a short continuation of the article for our readers.
“Exodus 4. This is the worst scenario ever predicted by the late Vladimir Zhirinovsky. True, it was not fully implemented. So, Russia achieves all the goals set by the president. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are laying down their arms, nationalists and fascists are being tried by a military tribunal. Zelensky is under arrest. An international tribunal is being prepared. Referendums are held in the country on the further choice of the form of government.
In Washington and Western capitals, politicians understand that the game is up. The collective West sends congratulations to the Russian President and the Russian people on historical victory over the nationalist regime. At the same time, in every possible way emphasizing the fact that in the XNUMXth century we twisted the head of German fascism together.
The leaders of Western states come to Moscow en masse for a personal meeting with the President of Russia. Everyone pretends that nothing extraordinary happened. There were no sanctions, there were no arms deliveries, there were no instructors, etc. The remnants of relations between the countries are being restored. There are prospects for the development of economic relations...”
In my opinion, this scenario will be implemented ...
It is clear that in such a situation, not only positive, but also negative qualities of people really manifest themselves. There are those who, like fishermen in Primorye and Siberia, came to the military registration and enlistment offices without a summons. And there are those who really run to escape the mobilization. So it was and always will be. People are different. We'll figure it out later, after the victory.
I was also interested in another question. How do they react to events at the very top of the Western, especially the American, political elite.
It is clear that the resources of the West are not unlimited. In addition, military operations will very soon have to be carried out in winter conditions. And this fundamentally changes the situation. The West is not ready for such a war. The situation is somewhat reminiscent of World War II. More precisely 1941 ...
It is clear that the understanding of the fact that the war must somehow be ended must somehow change the attitude of the Western political elite towards the conflict. In order to understand this, you need to carefully read what the most titled and exclusive journalists write. In the US, there is a very simple criterion for selecting such journalists. These are those who are "read by the president."
One of these journalists, Thomas Friedman, recently wrote an interesting piece called "Three Ways to End Putin's Operation." Friedman is truly a high-flying journalist, a long-term columnist for The New York Times, a three-time Pulitzer Prize winner, and a specialist in the Middle East. Let's see what this American political commentator writes about.
The war must end
The beginning of the material is a little shocking for Russian readers. Let me remind you that the article by Thomas Friedman was published on September 20. So it's about the past week. And all this week, Friedman talked with leading European politicians.
“In short, for Putin, this was the worst week since the beginning of the special operation, in which there is no wisdom, no justice, no mercy, no plan B.”
What happened last week so terrible for President Putin? First of all, here, it seems to me, is the lack of understanding of Ukrainian realities. A sort of "war on the map" in the head of the author. The worst thing was... the loss of part of the previously liberated territories. Simply put, the same Ukrainian offensive.
But even more frightened Vladimir Putin, according to Friedman, the leaders of China and India!.. And again, attention, this is written by one of the leading journalists in the West. I am not inclined to think that a journalist of a sufficiently serious level, who has lived a long and eventful life, has sunk into primitive lies. Most likely, this is a lack of information or its one-sidedness.
“And the leaders of China and India have made it pretty clear to Vladimir Putin that the rise in food and energy prices caused by his military operation is hurting their populations of 2,7 billion people.”
I wonder how an increase in the supply of energy and food, and even with huge discounts, can increase the prices of these resources? The author is clearly distorting, transferring the situation in Western Europe to Asia.
By the way, it was in Friedman's material that I found an explanation for the actions of our former prima donna. Somehow it was not particularly believed that she was not aware of what she was doing. Realizes and does it consciously. With her statements, according to an American journalist, she really spoils the mood of President Putin:
“Among other things, one of the Russian pop icons told her 3,4 million followers on Instagram (banned in Russia) that the military conflict “turns the country into a pariah and worsens the lives of citizens.”
And finally, about the most important thing. Thomas Friedman is well aware that the coming winter will be tragic for Ukraine and Europe as a whole. It will come back to haunt the US as well. The rupture of economic relations with Russia, the refusal to cooperate in many sectors are leading to a serious decline in the standard of living in the West, and it is not yet clear whether the Europeans and Americans will withstand this.
“...during the conversations, I identified three possible outcomes. Some were brand new, some familiar, but all came with complex and unpredictable side effects.”
Again attention. Three options for the development of events, but not a single option that considers the possibility of Russia's victory in this confrontation.
“Outcome 1. Total victory for Ukraine, which could cause Putin to do something crazy, facing the prospect of defeat and humiliation.
Outcome 2: A dirty deal that sees Putin achieve a ceasefire and stop his destructive activities. But it is dividing Western allies and infuriating many Ukrainians.
Outcome 3. Less dirty deal. We are returning to where everyone was before the start of Putin's operation. Ukraine can put up with it. Maybe even the Russian people will come to terms with this, but first it will be necessary to overthrow Putin, since he will by no means admit that this adventure of his was completely in vain.
Outcome 2: A dirty deal that sees Putin achieve a ceasefire and stop his destructive activities. But it is dividing Western allies and infuriating many Ukrainians.
Outcome 3. Less dirty deal. We are returning to where everyone was before the start of Putin's operation. Ukraine can put up with it. Maybe even the Russian people will come to terms with this, but first it will be necessary to overthrow Putin, since he will by no means admit that this adventure of his was completely in vain.
I think now many readers have come a kind of stupor of thinking. As they said in the old days, the mind has gone beyond the mind. It seems to be logical, but ... fantastic. Yes, and the conclusions, from the point of view of the Russians, look like some kind of "hares". They have been “pulled by the ears” for a very long time.
Russians can't think logically, but... they know how to bluff
Let's try to understand Friedman's logic. Let's analyze all three scenarios point by point. But, first of all, let me express my opinion about the changes in the essence of the military conflict in Ukraine. In my opinion, we have been at war with the West for quite some time now. Not with Ukraine, but with the West. We did not start this war, but we must end it.
That is why Western journalists actually talk about it. They, including Fridman, are talking about the victory of the global West. I fully understand the patriotism of the American journalist. I understand his faith in the victory of his country, the victory of the political system that exists in this country. But I am Russian, and I also believe in our victory.
So, the first version of the end of the war. The defeat of Russia and forcing her to make peace on the terms of the West. In my opinion, this point of view is already outdated. I wrote that the APU is running out of steam.
Those actions that the Ukrainians are positioning as an offensive look more like a PR stunt than a real military operation. The allied forces do not even allow for local victories and are engaged in the methodical destruction of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
What are the arguments of the supporters of this point of view based on? Friedman answers this quite specifically. The offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will cause panic among the allies, and they will run. Interestingly, an American journalist has seen at least once a video from the divisions of the Republicans, from the divisions of the Russian army, from the divisions of the Kadyrovites, from the Wagner PMC. Will these run? Oh well...
“People will not be silent, and every Russian soldier or Russian-speaking Ukrainian who sided with Putin is probably thinking: what to do, stay or run? Who will protect me if the front is breached? Such an alliance is not at all protected from disintegration. At first it happens slowly, and then quickly. Watch what happens."
I don't think it's worth discussing this option any further.
So let's move on to a more realistic, but also at the moment fantastic, version of the dirty deal. A variant in which the power in Kyiv will be swept away by the Ukrainians themselves, and a split will occur in the EU and NATO. Here, even Thomas Friedman himself says that such an "outcome is unlikely, and one should not place special hopes on it."
It is clear that the problems with gas in Europe have created a lot of additional dangers for Western politicians, and it is quite possible that some of them, in an effort to maintain power, will bow to President Putin and bargain gas supplies for their countries. This is clear to the Americans as well. Words and threats will not warm people and will not launch energy-intensive industries.
The reasoning of the American about the goals of the EU and Ukraine is interesting. He practically agrees with Putin in his assessment of the situation, but draws completely different conclusions. Kyiv's goals remain as unrealizable as they were before. The capture of the republics, the expulsion of Russians from the Crimea, the annexation of some "primordially Ukrainian lands" and other nonsense. Even in the USA they laugh at this.
But the goals of the EU and NATO have changed. The Alliance continues to help Kyiv. But this help is more and more reminiscent of handouts to a beggar so that he does not die on the threshold of a European home. In fact, European politicians, I do not mean microbes from the Baltics, Poles and other Moldovans, who can hardly be classified as serious politicians, have long been looking for ways to improve relations with Russia.
Europe does not want hostilities to be transferred to its territory. There is an understanding that, with all the ambitions, the European armies will not be able to resist the Russian one. Yes, and overpopulation in Europe plays an important role. Huge loss of population, destruction of the economy and sliding back to the beginning of the last century…
Hence the behavior of European leaders. On the one hand, they succumb to US pressure, and on the other hand, they are ready to pay to maintain the status quo in their countries. It is quite a normal desire for any patriot of his country. Preserve what is inherited from the ancestors. And increase if possible.
The only country for which the continuation of the war and the deployment of hostilities in the European theater is good is the United States. The weakening of Russia and the destruction of European competitors, which is better ... Nothing new, the same option that the United States has already worked out in the First and Second World Wars.
Well, does President Putin need it? Do we need peace right now? I often ask this question to my interlocutors. And the answer is completely different. From Lenin's "peace at any cost" to Zhirinovsky's "we will wash our boots in ... the ocean." But almost every week the president answers this question in the same way. The objectives of the operation must be achieved!
Do I need to explain to someone the position of the President of Russia? I don't think it's necessary. In general, according to the second option for ending the CBO, I can conclude that politicians do not want to "separate the flies from the cutlets." They view the fighting in Ukraine as just a part of the global, that same hybrid war between the West and Russia.
Russia, of course, will not accept such a peace. This is not the world. This is another postponement of the war, which the West is using to re-pump Ukraine with weapons and troops. We've been through this several times already.
But Thomas Friedman considers this option the most probable! More precisely, this option is the only one in which, even if he loses on the whole, President Putin will “save face”, later telling his people that the West made concessions and did not have to use nuclear weapons. weapon.
“Putin appears to be aiming for just such an outcome, judging by the decision announced on Wednesday to call on thousands of reservists.”
Well, the third option. We will return everything to the situation that was on February 24th. And President Putin will make a new appeal to the people, where he will say that we have lost thousands of soldiers, hundreds of aircraft, tanks and other technology. Sanctions were imposed against us, and it was all a mistake... Don't smile, a serious American journalist writes about this!
And Putin's speech is more of a fiction than a possible development of events. Here events will develop in a completely different scenario. 1945 Only instead of the Germans there will be Russians. Documented, and we already know how the West does it, the crimes of the "Putin regime", the search and trial of "war criminals" and so on.
This is how the West sees the end of a special military operation. I repeat and say that Thomas Friedman is not just a journalist, but a legend of journalism. A person who personally knows many Western politicians. Therefore, what he wrote about is not so much his personal reasoning, but the opinions of current politicians. Which of these opinions will eventually win and be implemented, I do not know.
Instead of continuing
It was really interesting for me to read the materials that today form the opinion of not only the Western man in the street, but also Western politicians. But, in particular, the article under consideration completely lacks the option in which the majority of Russians are sure. Our victory option.
Is the West so confident in its strength and effectiveness of sanctions? Or is he sure that Russia will not be able to wage a serious war, and the population of our country will really overthrow the president and government? Most likely it is fear. Fear and wishful thinking. It is highly doubtful that serious politicians believe the delirium of Russian liberals who have fled Russia.
I look closely at how mobilization is going on in Russia. To be honest, I didn't see the panic. Everything goes on as usual. Yes, people are serious. Yes, anxiety for their relatives and friends is present. But there is no panic that Western media write about. And the fact that some part of “like men” is running away from the country is quite predictable. So it was, is and will be at all times. There are always people and people. The men are leaving. Leave to win.
Let me write a short continuation of the article for our readers.
“Exodus 4. This is the worst scenario ever predicted by the late Vladimir Zhirinovsky. True, it was not fully implemented. So, Russia achieves all the goals set by the president. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are laying down their arms, nationalists and fascists are being tried by a military tribunal. Zelensky is under arrest. An international tribunal is being prepared. Referendums are held in the country on the further choice of the form of government.
In Washington and Western capitals, politicians understand that the game is up. The collective West sends congratulations to the Russian President and the Russian people on historical victory over the nationalist regime. At the same time, in every possible way emphasizing the fact that in the XNUMXth century we twisted the head of German fascism together.
The leaders of Western states come to Moscow en masse for a personal meeting with the President of Russia. Everyone pretends that nothing extraordinary happened. There were no sanctions, there were no arms deliveries, there were no instructors, etc. The remnants of relations between the countries are being restored. There are prospects for the development of economic relations...”
In my opinion, this scenario will be implemented ...
Information