Written by – Elijah J. Magnier:
Western analysts’ dominant and overwhelming narrative claims the “failure” of Russian military plans in Ukraine. These analysts write with confidence as if they were part of President Vladimir Putin’s military aides-de-camp and have been personally present, overseeing the war plans in every detail of the attack. It is understandable that the mainstream dominates the information platform and enjoys the support of social media – media that amended their rules to accommodate violence relating to the killing of Russian soldiers and Presidents Vladimir Putin and Byelorussian Alexander Lukashenko. But is the mainstream media’s louder voice a measure of its truth? Is the war taking so long for Russia to end? Is the advantage no longer to Russia?
This is not the first time President Putin has confronted the powerful Western countries (led by the US) and joined them on the battlefield. The Russian-US indirect battle had previously taken place in Syria, where the media were active in mocking the Russian forces upon their arrival in Syria. Several journalists said that “parts of the Russian navy lost parts at sea while sailing before reaching the Syrian port of Tartous and Latakia” and that the “old Russian SU jets will not succeed in taking off.”
A few months later, Russia turned the tide of the war to the advantage of the central government in Damascus, infuriating both mainstream media and those Western leaders. They had invested dearly in promoting and creating a failed state in Syria. US and NATO training programs in Jordan and Turkey and western war rooms all engaged in planning and conducting the “war” against Russia. Western countries sent tons of arms shipments to the jihadists in Syria but failed to achieve their goals. Today’s conflict in Ukraine has similarities to yesterday’s war in Syria.
Moscow declared war on Ukraine on the 24th of February, calling it a “special operation” for legal purposes. On the first day, the Russian army destroyed 90% of Ukrainian military capabilities, and on the second day, it reached the outskirts of the capital, Kyiv, at Antonov Airport.
This did not happen in Iraq in 2003: America, Britain and the “all-powerful” western allies needed three weeks to reach the capital Baghdad. Unlike Ukraine, no country supported Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and the Iraqis were pleased to see him removed. Sanctions had weakened Saddam for over a decade: no Middle Eastern country supported him, and many Iraqis hailed the occupiers in the first months.
In Ukraine, the narrative is different. Western media “forgot” how Baghdad’s capital was bombed with dozens of Tomahawk missiles, as was every Iraqi city before the US and allied armies moved in. The capital Kabul, Afghanistan, was also heavily bombed before the US army accessed it. In the first two weeks of the Russian war, Kyiv was hit by one single-precision missile that destroyed its TV channel tower. In the third week, the Capital received several missiles, still minimal in numbers.
Except for the powerful and influential Western media, no one said that Moscow’s plan included breaking into Kyiv’s capital in one or two days or a week or two. Even after day 21 of the war, that is not the Russian plan. It should be noted that Ukraine is the most powerful country in the former Soviet Union after Russia. Its area is more significant than Syria and Iraq combined, or France, Belgium and the Netherlands. In addition, in 2015, President Barack Obama ordered US forces and NATO to begin training Ukrainian troops that participated in multiple military manoeuvres. To all intents and purposes, the Ukrainian army was equipped and trained by NATO to confront Russia.
Ukraine had 120,000 soldiers in 2014 and spent $1.9 billion on its defence budget, equivalent to 1.57% GDP. With the US financial and military plans, these figures went sky high, supporting and preparing the Ukrainian army for a US-proxy war on Russia. The Ukrainian security forces counted 363,000 in 2022, with President Volodymyr Zelensky signing a decree to add another 100,000 men to the armed forces. The US has been very generously financing the Ukrainian army, investing over $2.6 billion between 2015 and 2021, $1 billion in weapons supply during the war and billions more to come. However, in previous years, the US did not support the Ukrainian economy, which had collapsed: several Ukrainian banks had declared bankruptcy.
NATO was present in Ukraine and preparing the country to join its ranks. Russia was contesting NATO’s training of the Ukrainian army, and the US plans to challenge Moscow. However, the US was preparing for this war to happen. President Putin had two bad choices: limiting his protests vocally or having a nuclear country on his borders with US-sponsored biological military research laboratories. His second bad choice was a war on Ukraine and all the consequences and a heavy price to pay with it.
The US knows exactly the classic Russian army’s fighting style and tactics. Therefore,
subscribe or donate
Subscribe to get access
Read more of this content when you subscribe today.
Proofread by: Maurice Brasher
You must be logged in to post a comment.