Ukraina: questions to intelligence and politicians.
While the situation in Ukraine is extremely liquid and the quantity of men and means for a real counter-offensive begins to emerge, I dream of being able to ask a couple of questions to the Intelligence and the politicians who have dealt with (and are dealing with) ) of the question.
First let's see what happens: the Ukrainians used propaganda against the Russians (who believe they are the masters, but evidently they are not) to make them concentrate their forces on Kherson, and then they launched on Kharkiv, also taking an important railway junction which allowed the Russians to move their logistics.
They have fielded many people, as they fight day and night. It is necessary to fight day and night for days
- drug soldiers. It works, but after two or three days, delirium and hallucinations arrive, so you don't send them to the cities.
- go jumping, as the English say: by day the even brigades and by night the odd ones. It is also cheaper because it requires only half of the men to be equipped with visors, but it requires twice as many men.
After cleaning up the Kherson area, they have little to do because the river becomes their enemy. But they have a possibility that would be deadly for Putin: attack Krimea. It would be deadly not because of strategic ports, but because politically it would be the end of Putin. His internal opponents would eat him.
Now let's go to the questions.
The whole world was convinced that Russia was the second strongest army in the world, after the American one. And we were not convinced by chance: we were convinced because ALL the intelligence experts agreed.
What we are seeing in this war tells us of an army that if all goes well is the fourteenth / fifteenth. They are being beaten, or at least fought on an equal footing, by a country of 40 million people with the GDP of the Veneto, "strengthened" by less than 1% of NATO military spending.
It may be true that Valerii Zaluzhnyi is a genius, but he comes after all from the same academies as the Russian generals. Where does superiority arise?
Something is wrong. Because it was not only Orsini who was convinced that Russia had "the second army in the world".
We can easily understand Putin's need for nationalist propaganda, and his need to overestimate Russia. But here we are talking about the whole world, about all the intelligence services on the planet. Even the allies believed it: India has been buying Russian weapons for 30 years now, China has used them as a base to build its own.
And today we discover that their tanks are made to amplify the effect of the mines, launching the turret in the air:
This is World War II stuff. It means that they have never tried to do design. And communications are clearly worth it. And the logistics. And the strategy that is missing. Air Force not received. Inaccurate missiles. Satellites that take a picture every 24 hours. They have occupied areas already occupied by pro-Russian guerrillas, in fact.
Who told the whole West that that pile of junk led by poorly trained soldiers was a hi-tech army?
The intelligence.
I have a question, then: how do you justify yourself? If we had known before that the Russian military was so bad, it would have changed a lot. Because you could send advisors and you could close the game much earlier. You could send Himars, Pkz2000 and everything much earlier, start a humanitarian operation, and go: with that stuff that was seen, the Russians had no hope.
And whoever says Muh Nucleare should understand that now we should ask ourselves how much of the Russian nuclear apparatus really exists.
And it would be nice to have an answer you can trust , intelligence gentlemen.
The second question I have is for politicians. Let's assume that after a heavy defeat the military will get Putin out of the way and the new Russian government will strive for democracy.
Let's say you win. And suppose there is now a "pro-Western" government in Russia and the war is over. Good.
What are you doing now? How will you manage afterwards? Shall we start buying gas again? Because the gas is still there and it is still cheap: indeed, perhaps as war damage they must also give it for free.
And so it's time for a clear answer: Do you have a plan? What if the plan includes that Putin houses, do you have a plan for later? Everything goes back to the way it used to be? Do you buy gas? Is Russia cursed forever?
It is not clear whether Putin's fall is what we want or not. We know that Zelensky wants it, that he could at least bomb Crimea if he can get far enough south, but what do we want?
If Putin falls and the Russian population rebels, which everyone seems to be hoping for, what would happen? How would we behave?
This is essentially the point: you can't win if you don't know what you want. We are currently focused on spending the winter, but what if the Ukrainians start firing neptune missiles on Crimean ports, or just besiege it by removing the water, at which point Putin falls?
What's the plan? Is there a plan?
There is a narrative going around. But deep down there are doubts about these narratives. That no secret service has ever noticed that the Russian army is a pile of garbage is already strange. That no one wonders or knows what they would do if they win, it makes things worse.
It would be better to clarify these things.