We had this interesting perspective posed to us by one of our particularly insightful clients. After some of our operatives researched the issue we came to the conclusion that the answer was an unequivocal YES.
But it was broader than that; the western WORLD was financing a Russian win in Ukraine.
We here at D-J have covered the situation before; while our hearts go out to the Ukrainian people (and how Russia had gotten mired trying to fight an insurgency war is a modern day validation of our constitution second Amendment), one must remember there ARE NO “GOOD GUYS” in this conflict. Putin is a KGB-bred thug; the Zelensky regime is rife with corruption of its own. ALL war is hell; insurgency wars are particularly hellish in that the so-called ‘civilian’ population MUST be targeted in that this is where the threat is coming from. One of the more prominent “great warrior leaders” in this pragmatic business was William Tecumseh Sherman; he was one of the few U.S. Generals in modern times who actually DID get the picture of the pragmatic business of war.
By today’s standards he’d be adjudicated as a psychotic terrorist.
But he did get results; the southern population (and later the indigenous Indians) were so terrorized by his ruthless actions that his troops were largely left alone and his mission accomplished. In the case of the Civil War, the people of the south were psychologically convinced that their army could no longer protect them. Likewise, in the later wars, Indian resistance was crushed (kindly note we’re not making a moral judgment of this situation in that such a judgment is impossible through the lens of 2022 eyes).
So the Russian tactics are completely understandable; not unlike LeMay’s firebombing of Tokyo and the like. It’s just (for Russia at least on a tactical level) the Russian military forces kinda suck (more so than anyone in the world imagined), and insurgency wars are VERY difficult to ‘win’ (IF Pennsylvania decided to leave the union today–and the general population really didn’t want Federal forces there, it is unlikely that (from an operational military perspective) the entire U.S. military forces–with all their advanced equipment but using modern day tactics– could hold that ground against a dedicated civilian force of indigenous citizens opposing them. The ground’s too rugged; there are too many hiding places, the citizens there are too well armed with plenty of resources, etc. But even more than that war is an exercise in crushing the opposing sides’ WILL to fight).
As the Russians found this out in Afghanistan, so has the U.S. in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. (kindly not this is NOT an indictment of the decision to fight those wars on an insurgency level; simply that insurgency wars are notoriously difficult to ‘win’ no matter WHAT equipment and training an opposing nation has; a better strategy is what was done during the FIRST gulf war; destroy the means of that nation to project power elsewhere, restore the status quo, and contain the particular nation-state such that it will not be a threat to others in the future. And if it looks like it might BE a threat destroy what might project that threat to others. In other words, establish boundaries).
For what it’s worth, British forces learned the same lesson in the birth of OUR constitutional republic.
Now to the matter at hand. As we’ve said, there really are no ‘good guys’ in the present conflict–at least as far as state entities are concerned. The Zelensky regime is rife with its own issues of corruption, as well as having ties to would-be crony capitalists in OUR own present regime (although this relationship is tenacious in that it’s only a corrupt money-laundering scheme). Russia WAS provoked on many levels (as previously delineated by D-J in our previous posted assessment). So what to do ?
IF the goal is to defeat Russia in Ukraine (which we doubt the present U.S. regime has much interest in; we believe it’s the desire of the U.S. regime to exploit the situation to crush the fossil fuels industries), one must keep in mind war is a pragmatic business. The Battle of Britain (from a German perspective) and the initial indiscriminate nighttime bombing (from a British perspective)–as well as Pearl Harbor–were HUGE strategic failures for the nations involved. They served only to strengthen the will and resolve to fight by the nations attacked. Likewise the horrific attacks of 9/11 which over time resulted in the utter destruction of Al-queda (at least under the leadership of a competent president like Trump). As such, for the present conflict–IF the goal remains to defeat Russia one must look at it from an objective strategic and pragmatic perspective.
Politicians love sanctions and tariffs; these sound good and are kinda throw-away actions which personally benefit the politicians in the nations sanctioning the sanctions (sanctions don’t work against ones’ enemies; only ones’ friends). The problem is exacerbated, the people of the country face a higher tax rate (tariffs are nothing more than an added tax which only really taxes the nation imposing them) and the problem continues. All while the propaganda media gleefully claims that we’re ‘doing something’ (yeah…..we’re helping our opponents objectives while hurting ourselves via economic harm). If there’s anything the corrupt ‘oil for food’ debacle proved is that under Saddam Hussein (another truly evil despot), Hussein had no problems laundering both oil and money and increased his profit margin. Who loses ? Why the common people of all the nations; THEY’RE the ones bearing the brunt of the sanctions and the end use payers.
So where have the embargoes and sanctions gotten us in the Western World ? Well, we’ve had fuel prices triple and effectively torpedoed our OWN economies. Putin has no problem selling oil to China (or other nations), or in laundering this oil and money through third parties. We’ve made Putin richer; his 2-dollar a gallon oil is now worth 6-bucks and his oil reserves are still there. His 2-dollar a therm NATGAS is now worth 6-bucks (or more) and the gas is still there. So in the mean time Putin–who only cares about Putin and Putin’s money–has tripled his profit margin on sold resources. And is laughing all the way to the bank. Oh, he’ll occasionally threaten to cut off oil or NATGAS (as a poker bluff) , watch the price boom, perhaps restrict supply for a little bit, cash in, and go on laughing. To be clear, the ONLY thing the sanctions and embargoes have done has been to increase Putin’s position–and make him and some other corrupt politicians richer. At our expense.
Given Biden’s obvious cognitive problems, and Putin’s crazy (and brutal) quarks, the scenario could almost be a comedy–a war between mad-as-a-hatter despots (including Putin, Biden, Markel, and Pooh Bear in starring roles) with a bunch of bumbling incompetent bureaucrats and diplomats thrown in the mix–unfortunately it’s US that are footing the bill and feeling the pain.
We at D-J like to deal in real solutions. OUR solution has been the relaxation of insane rules on drilling and other energy exploration (REAL energy exploration–not some pie in the sky ‘green’ crap). The MOST effective way to crush Putin’s agenda is to collapse the price of energy. THAT’S where he’s making his money. Between the US and Canada, WE have the very real capability to make this happen. As US becomes a net energy exporter again by opening the taps, it’ll create a series of dominoes where OPEC members — anxious to ‘sell’ while they still can at higher prices–falls apart by not wanting to be the last country holding the bag. At the same time we can use OUR dollars used by OUR energy exploration to pursue real solutions (including 4th generation nuclear reactors) to long term energy stability. This will have the very real net effect of starving Russia of capital to continue to prosecute their wars and force a decision–either stay mired in a situation they do not want or move on. Remember, war is a pragmatic business. We suspect in any case that Russia WILL achieve its goal of energy transport and a permanent area of Russian controlled commerce/transit through the Ukraine regardless–but then again this WAS the former status-quo before Zelensky began his provocation and chicanery. Such an approach will not only benefit AMERICAN citizens, but also result in the best outcome for the citizens of Ukraine.
One might call this the “Trading Places” strategy. When one wants to leverage rich people, the best way to do so is usually under threat of making them poor. NOT making them richer.
Diatomaceous-Johnson 