German tanks in the Ukraine. Again.

In commemoration of the Battle of Stalingrad, and the defeat of the German nazi beast.

Best version of “Sacred War” I’ve ever seen/heard.

https://stanislavs.org/battle-of-stalingrad-1943-2023/

Battle of Stalingrad 1943-2023
———————————————-

Lone Wolf

@ Rob D on February 05, 2023 · at 4:24 am EST/EDT

“…The switch in German attitude has nothing to do with a switch in the thinking of the German people, in fact a recent poll showed that 94% of the German population is against German tanks deliveries. But does it matter? Of course not, out in the open the German government is ‘dancing with wolves’. It is remarkable that at the right time for the Empire a spineless German government arrived. Só convenient, that it becomes suspicious…”
——————————————————————————–

Rob D, you Germans are not alone.

And my guess is that many other countries in Eurostan are facing the same conundrum.

Look at this article about a recent public opinion poll in Poland.

———————————————————————————–

https://tsargrad.tv/articles/polsha-vyjdet-iz-vojny-s-rossiej-38-millionov-agentov-putina_717576

POLAND WILL GET OUT OF THE WAR WITH RUSSIA: 38 MILLION PUTIN’S AGENTS

The Poles are coming to their senses and don’t want to believe their official propaganda. And what they believe, official Warsaw calls ” propaganda of the Kremlin.” All this can lead Poland to “another historical catastrophe”.

“Scary” survey

Probably, the official Warsaw would like to see the results of the public opinion poll, which was conducted by the Warsaw Enterprise Institute, quietly sink into the abyss of the Internet and would never have surfaced. Unfortunately for the Polish authorities, Poland, no matter how Russians feel about this country, is not a stupid people who have not lost the ability to think critically. We, in Russia, often perceive Poland as a single conglomerate of power and people and do not separate them when we hear that the Poles, driven by their long-lived imperial ambitions, make many claims to Russia. But this is far from the case. In Poland, there is an abyss between power and backgammon. If you believe the results of the survey, the Poles stopped believing the official Polish propaganda. And this thesis is replicated by the local press, which makes – note, without any “Kremlin intervention” – far-reaching conclusions.

The above quote belongs to the Polish newspaper Myśl Polska, which publishes an article under the remarkable headline – ” Poles have regained their sanity.” The newspaper writes that the survey was conducted on a sample of 1,061 Poles. Respondents need to express their attitude to eight theses that allegedly ” agree with the Kremlin’s message.” “What were those terrible ‘Moscow’ theses?” – the newspaper asks. Among these theses are the following:

“Refugees from Ukraine are actually economic migrants”;
“We should not support Ukraine until it renounces the Volyn crime, led by its authors and perpetrators.”

Russia allegedly also has the idea that the Poles “should strive for peace, even if it involves territorial concessions from Ukraine.” Or the thesis that ” it is necessary to stop the supply of weapons to Ukraine, because this ignites the conflict.”

The poll itself probably wouldn’t have been such a painful blow to the Polish establishment’s ego if it hadn’t been for the comments that accompanied it in the Polish press. Myśl Polska notes that ” the Poles answered all these questions, and none of the answers were liked by those who asked these questions.” The fact is that 63% of respondents “agree with the thesis that Poland cannot afford so-called refugees.” More than half of Poles “believe that aid to Ukraine will not end and that Poland will be involved in long-term armed conflicts.” At the same time, 40% of Poles “see the increasing Ukrainization of Poland, which is destroying Polish culture and society.”

Propaganda bullshit

After the results of the public opinion poll were published, writes Myśl Polska, “immediately there was a howl.” State functionaries from the press unanimously shouted that “the number of people who share the theses of Russian propaganda is growing!” And it is here that Myśl Polska hits the nail on the head, deducing a deep, almost philosophical maxim that “even the most courageous of the leaders of party and state propaganda and the most courageous of the luminaries of progress are well aware that you should differ in any small things and even in most minor ones. But here, on the contrary, something important happened. Poles have stopped unconsciously consuming propaganda noodles, which they are being forced to eat.”

Official Russophobic propaganda in Poland is going through the roof, looking for its basis in Polish nationalism. The country’s leadership appeals to far-gone times, which haunt the extremely nationalistic, but not the largest wing of Polish society. It is enough to read the speech of Polish President Andrzej Duda, which he pushed during a recent visit to Riga. Duda, in particular, stated:

“Once, not so long ago, I said to the President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky: ‘Volodimir, looking at our history, at how these roads once diverged, I would very much like to ask you – when you defeat Russia, when the Russians arrive on their knees to sign a peace treaty, take them to Pereyaslav, let them they will sign a peace treaty with you there, so let them erase all these years of Soviet and Russian influence.'”

That is, Duda and others like him still suffer from the fact that in 1654, at the Pereyaslavsky Rada, Zaporozhye Cossacks led by Bohdan Khmelnitsky took the oath of allegiance to the Russian tsar. Duda still sleeps restlessly from this.

Scary conclusion

Myśl Polska draws a conclusion that official Warsaw would aptly call “Kremlin-like”: “Maybe the increasingly empty pockets, maybe the increasingly annoying neighborhood of newcomers, or maybe the fear for the future of our families made us wake up from a lethargic dream? Of course, not everyone is probably awake yet, and not even most of them. But there are enough awakened people to threaten the warm, fetid stability in which political parasites and the media they feed have been basking for decades.”

Such reflections, expressed aloud in Polish society, make us, in Russia, think about how big the gap is between Polish society and those in the Polish government and Sejm who present the case as if they are speaking on behalf of the people. And to what extent this gap between the Polish “top” and “bottom” can influence Poland’s foreign policy, in particular, its participation in the anti-Russian Western coalition led by the United States, waging war against Russia in Ukraine.

Apart from the United States, which is the leader of the Western coalition, out of all this cohort of loud and aggressive countries, perhaps only Poland, through the efforts of its “political class” – and then, as we can see, not all of them – is really ready to throw itself into the maelstrom of open war with Russia. With the United States behind us, of course. The yapping of the Balts doesn’t count. The circle of politicians and tycoons belonging to the Polish establishment, passing on their “imperial genes” from one generation to another – even since the reunification of Ukraine with Russia – did not stop looking at Russia as an enemy that must be dismembered and destroyed in parts.

The Polish establishment is haunted by the once-lost “Eastern kres”, for the sake of which Warsaw is trying to do everything to prevent Russia from winning, so that Western military assistance to Kiev does not stop and so that the conflict does not subside. Only in this case, Warsaw has a chance to regain what was lost in the depths of the past centuries. And the integrity of Ukraine is not considered here at all. Moreover, in the same Riga speech, Duda called the Ukrainians ” former compatriots in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.” Is it clear where the pressure is going? This is almost an announcement of the plan for the unification of Ukraine and Poland. With the latter dominating, of course. Moreover, Warsaw dreams of European leadership, and this can only be achieved if you please Washington.

So what?

Given the public opinion poll, the majority of Poles do not share the expansionist aspirations of official Warsaw, which – and only they – are the reason for Poland’s most active participation in the Ukrainian conflict. At the same time, ordinary Poles are well aware that expansionist plans belonging only to a narrow circle of the Polish establishment are actively being warmed up by external forces, that is, the United States, which is using Poland as a battering ram in the war in Ukraine.

“If someone interrupts the obsessive mantra that has been imposed on us by external centers for years, they immediately become the object of a shameless attack. He is ridiculed, silenced, and in extreme cases even harassed. This is freedom of speech today. This is Poland today,

– writes Myśl Polska. The newspaper points out that decades of civil passivity of Poles ” led to the creation of a mediocre, parasitic political class, de facto alienated from the body of the nation,” as a result of which Poland “is waiting for another historical catastrophe.”

Painful for Poles, but very honest analysis of the situation in which Poland is located. Meanwhile, there is little chance that the voice of the people will be heard, and that anything will change over the next two years. The next presidential election in Poland is scheduled only for 2025. Before that, another historical catastrophe in Poland may already take place.
—————————————–

Lone Wolf

Germany’s Scholz-ler: “We support 404, but… we know the end result.”

https://vz.ru/world/2023/2/6/1198036.html?utm_campaign=vz&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=newsanons

Scholz foresees Ukraine’s defeat

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz made a number of statements designed to clarify the strangeness of Germany’s position on military assistance to Ukraine. In words, Berlin strongly supports the militarization of the Kiev regime, in reality, it decided to supply tanks only under the colossal pressure of Washington. If you carefully study both the words of the German leader and the German press, it becomes clear that Germany offers Zelensky to surrender.

Germany’s role in the Ukrainian conflict looks very ambiguous. On the one hand, not only the current government, but even Angela Merkel herself cheerfully report on support for Ukraine, which began long before February 24, 2022. On the other hand, Germany’s position on arms supplies to Kiev in Ukraine (and not only in Ukraine) is called “sabotage”.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz, in an interview with Bild on February 5, explains Germany’s position as follows: “Ina place with our allies, we are handing over to Ukraine the main battle tanks so that it can defend itself. We carefully weighed each arms shipment and coordinated it closely with our allies, primarily America. These joint actions prevent the escalation of the war.” At the same time, according to Scholz, “tanks, like new cars, cannot simply be ordered from a dealer, because the equipment is nowhere ready for export. The state needs to conclude long-term supply contracts with industry.”

Germany’s caution is justified by two considerations.

First, military-political. The task of the supplies is not so much the desire to prevent the defeat of Ukraine, as the desire to prevent “escalation”, which is understood, obviously, as the transfer of hostilities to the territory of Ukraine’s allies. True, this logic looks strange. The more weapons are supplied to Ukraine, the greater the scale of hostilities, the greater the likelihood of that “escalation”. But as long as the fighting covers only the territory of Ukraine, the scheme seems to work.

Secondly, military-economic. At the end of 2021, the Bundeswehr had 285 units of Leopard 2 tanks of three modifications, and only about 180 of them were in a state of combat readiness. Meanwhile, the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valery Zaluzhny, demanded 300 tanks from the Allies. He did not consider it necessary to explain where the order of a thousand tanks that were in the Armed Forces of Ukraine at the beginning of the SVO, and several hundred tanks that were received from Eastern European countries went.

However, the answer to this question is probably well known in the Ministry of Defense of Russia – according to the latest reports, 7737 Ukrainian tanks and armored vehicles have already been destroyed during the SVO. It is clear that when organizing the supply of tanks in Ukraine, they count not only on Germany (we are also talking about Spain and Poland) and not only on the relatively modern Leopard 2, but also on the leopard 1 removed from service.

By the way, Scholz rejected Vladimir Putin’s words about repeating the scenario of the Great Patriotic War (“we are again threatened with German Leopard tanks”). According to Scholz, this is “nothing more than a series of abstruse historical comparisons that he uses to justify his attack on Ukraine.” But we do not believe in the coincidence that Germany is going to supply Ukraine with 14 tanks of the new and 88 of the old modification. It is common knowledge that the combination 14/88 is a Nazi slogan (coded greeting “Heil Hitler!”).

According to Scholz, Germany is doing everything possible to “protect” Ukraine. But here’s what’s interesting is that Germany does not proceed from the needs of Ukraine, voiced by Zaluzhny, but from its own military-political and military-economic considerations. In other words, from the interests of Germany, not Ukraine. Thus acknowledging that Ukraine is not so important to the West. And it is a means rather than an end, a means to confront Russia.

It turns out that this is so, and there is even a justification that Ukraine does not need assistance in principle. For example, this is the content of an article published in the German Die Welt. The title is more than characteristic: “Why is it now almost impossible that Kiev will be able to win.”

To begin with, the editorial board states: “Kiev missed the chance to win, which it had due to Moscow’s initial miscalculations.” How they imagined the “victory of Ukraine” in principle is not explained. There was, they say, a chance, but it came out all. Now “it is almost impossible that Ukraine will emerge victorious from this fight. Especially if the victory is really seen by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “the liberation of all occupied territories, including Crimea.”

The reasons for this are as follows. First, the West, fearing escalation, “supports Ukraine only to the extent that it does not have to capitulate immediately.” Secondly, the volume of supplies of air defense systems is insufficient to prevent the destruction of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

It should be noted here that Russia did not set out to destroy the Ukrainian energy sector. The objectives were clearly military and political, and judging by the decrease in the intensity of the strikes, such a strategy was considered exhausted (it can be assumed that the goals were achieved).

Third, Russia has enough resources to suppress Ukraine’s defenses, which rely on a small number of precision-guided systems.

Fourthly, in Ukraine “at least the eighth wave of mobilization is taking place, men over 60 years old are already being sent to the front.” At the same time, “Moscow has a mobilization reserve of almost 30 million people.”

Fifth, Russia may emerge from the conflict as a political winner: “[Ukraine’s] membership in NATO after the conclusion of an armistice agreement or peace talks will be excluded in the foreseeable future, and Ukraine’s accession to the EU will last (…) much longer than Kiev wants.”

It would seem that the article looks like a criticism of the position of the West, which does not help Ukraine enough, but in fact its efforts are aimed at concluding a truce, as a result of which the territory of Ukraine will be reduced. However, on the other hand, the content of the article looks like a justification for the position of the West – Russia’s resources are too great, and “spreading the war to the territory of NATO” is not necessarily “self-intimidation”.

Scholz’s conclusions are confirmed, for example, by the report of the Swiss newspaper Neue Zurcher Zeitung, according to which US President Joe Biden in mid-January instructed the head of the CIA to appeal to Moscow and Kiev with a proposal to conclude peace on the terms of losing about 20% of Ukrainian territory. Both the United States and Russia, of course, denied this report. But the residue remained.

Germany, of course, refused any subjectivity in the Ukrainian issue. Scholz explicitly says that decisions on arms supplies are decided by “consensus”, and this “consensus” is in Washington.

But the general impression is that the German reader is told the opinion that the West will not be able to win in the Ukrainian conflict, and therefore it is better not to spend extra resources on it. Apparently, the German leadership has long known that no one particularly believes in the “victory of Ukraine”, because it stubbornly refused to supply tanks to Ukraine both last year and this year. Germany’s position changed only after France intervened in the process, and Emmanuel Macron promised to supply Ukraine with “wheeled tanks”. Deliveries of German tanks were coordinated with similar decisions of the United States and Great Britain.

By the way, the transfer of a relatively small number of tanks of four different types clearly indicates that the transfer itself is almost meaningless from a military point of view. It would be better for the Armed Forces of Ukraine to get more units of obsolete equipment (T-55 or their Chinese counterparts). A small number of high-tech tanks is a nightmare in terms of supply and maintenance, and only a tactical one can give an advantage. From a political point of view, everything is in order – the allies demonstrate unity and support Ukraine. If Ukraine loses, it is not the allies who are to blame. They supported…

Thus, the “assistance” that Germany in particular and the West in general provide to Ukraine is needed mainly to solve the political and economic problems of the West itself. Ukraine is increasingly hinted at the need to conclude peace on Russian terms.
———————————————-

“…the need to conclude peace on Russian terms.”

That was the idea then, when Lavrov presented the drafts to the US/NATO, and that’s the idea now, almost a year later, and a devastated Ukraine.

This kerfuffle can only end on Russian terms.

Full stop.

Lone Wolf