I never thought I’d live to see the day when the “Too Old to Rule the World, But Too Young to Die Crowd” (apologies Ian Anderson) would meet at Davos and fight over what to do about Russia.
In a twenty-four hour period two of the most influential men on the planet came out swinging as to what course of action the Davos Crowd should take in Ukraine.
The first blows were landed by Mr. Realpolitik, Henry Kissinger, who most people were surprised to find was still alive. Kissinger true to form told everyone that it was time to begin negotiations for a settlement with Russia soon.
“Negotiations on peace need to begin in the next two months or so, [before the conflict] creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome,” the 98-year-old veteran diplomat said of the crisis. The outcome will determine the rest of Europe’s relationships with Russia and Ukraine alike, he said. “Ideally, the dividing line should return to the status quo ante,” he said.
“I believe pursuing the war beyond that point would turn it not into a war about the freedom of Ukraine, which had been undertaken with great cohesion by NATO, but into a war against Russia itself,” he added.
Kissinger is simply talking sense, knowing full well that the situation in Ukraine is getting very close to militarily unsalvageable for Ukraine. You know things are bad when the British Press is now acknowledging this, even though the Telegraph was told to change the original headline (follow link above):
Even Western reporters on the ground there are admitting the truth…
The front in the Donbass is collapsing on the heels of the surrender, sorry “evacuation,” from the Azovstal Steel Factory of the Azov Regimen’s top commanders.
The Ukrainians aren’t just running out of ammunition, the men are running out of morale. When you break the will of an army, it doesn’t matter what you try to force feed into the conflict it won’t change the outcome. If reports are true Ukraine will only see about 15% of the $40 billion the Biden Junta approved last week.
On the heels of Kissinger’s pragmatism came George Soros’ dizzying pastiche of wholly constructed western narratives about Russia and China’s goals and their respective leaders’ shortcomings. Soros stayed completely on script with the neoliberal/neoconservative warmongering that Ukraine has put itself in a position to win this war and it is our duty as defenders of his Open Society to assist them no matter the cost.
Because if we do not, “Civilization may not survive.” The particular type of solipsism and hubris that Soros exhibits doesn’t just border on the pathological, it ignores it like Soros argues we should do for all borders.
In his worldview borders should be eradicated. So why are his puppets and acolytes so obsessed with the ‘territorial integrity of Ukraine?’
Soros is an ideologue. He has defined the world in terms that are incompatible with human nature. And he is losing. This is why he wants more commitment to kill the evil Russians who refuse to eat bugs, get sterilized and be eradicated from history, which he spent billions doing in Ukraine over the past eight years.
Going through the lies of his speech are almost not worth the time. They are, ultimately, just Soros’ projections of what he believes are Putin’s and Xi’s motives and goals with their current operations — war in Ukraine / lockdowns in China.
Soros rehashes the epic victory of Ukraine in Kiev to paint the picture he needs to make his point but it’s something two months now out of date. All the defense of Kiev did was embolden US and British belligerence, it did not, however, thwart any of Putin’s ultimate goals. Nor did it move the popular sentiment.
It gave us the situation we have today and it’s one he decries as needing an immense effort to save from going completely Russia’s way.
Those projections fuel conclusions which are not based on reality but on wishful thinking. Soros, like all investors (and he has invested heavily in overthrowing Putin and Xi) will always ‘talk his book’ and make it sound like cogent and sober analysis.
Decisions on the fighting in Ukraine haven’t been made from a militarily strategic perspective for weeks now. If they were, a ceasefire would have been sought. Soros’ puppet government in the U.S. refuses to accede to reality because Soros himself refuses to engage with it.
But, since he’s the one writing the checks to help the Democrats steal win the mid-term elections in November, he gets what he wants. I know I’m being reductionist here. The forces acting within the U.S. political and military establishment are far deeper and more diverse than just Soros’ megalomania, but he makes as good a metaphor for them as anything else.
There has been a not-so-subtle shift in the news surrounding events in Ukraine over the past couple of weeks. It is now grudgingly accepted that Russia’s war of attrition against the Ukrainian Armed Forces has been brutal, costly and effective.
It is now beginning to show real dividends in terms of territory gains as the center of the front in the Donbass collapses:
The only reason why the Russians haven’t taken more territory is because brave men have stood their ground as President Zelenskyy went on tour to sell an unwinnable war to an exhausted and disinterested public in Europe and the U.S.
We’ve finally reached that point where even the Skinner Box button loses all its power. Now that the UAF’s positions have degraded beyond repair, all that’s left is retreat or surrender. We’re no more than a few weeks away from that now.
And those brave men are about to be ground into paste for their loyalty to an idea that should have died months ago.
When you decode both Kissinger’s pragmatism and Soros’ near hysteria you get one conclusion, Russia is winning the ground war in eastern Ukraine. And by winning those battles they are expending the effective fighting strength of the UAF in the process.
Ukraine has always been the Rubicon for a lot of folks. So much capital has been poured in there that everyone is pot-committed. It represented the dividing line between success and failure of generations of preparations for a global world order.
Henry Kissinger stood at the center of this for decades. He groomed Klaus Schwab to build the WEF into what it is today, the premier influence peddling dirty tricksters and promoters of the worst ideas advanced in human history.
George Soros is a nouveau riche, Nazi collaborator and opportunistic vulture with delusions of adequacy. He’s played high sakes poker with the biggest players in the world and broken entire countries multiple times. His son has his legacy now, but he’ll lose that now that his dad has gone shitbird crazy.
But he’s never beaten a country whose people stood their ground. Whether you like what Russia is doing in Ukraine or not, viewed dispassionately they are standing their ground. Whether you agree this war was the right way of doing that is irrelevant.
Kissinger would agree with me.
Those that doubted Russia’s resolve or depth of preparation across all axes of warfare — militarily, economically, socially, culturally — are about to come face to face with a shocking conclusion, you can’t take over a people from the top down who are united from the ground up.
Kissinger would agree with that as well. It’s why he advocated for finding ways to keep Russia from leaving its European character behind and not embracing its Asian. Now that the economic war has failed the only reasonable option is accepting what’s been lost before what looks like a stalemate today turns quickly into a rout.
Soros is just your typical narcissistic bully, ready to tell you why you need to do his bidding to make him powerful. This will be the last time he makes a speech anyone listens to and the last time anyone will give a shit about who wins the fight between two old cripples at a globalist chug and tug.