The Russians lost a Beriev A-50 'early warning' airplane over the Sea of Azov. While there have been claims that they lost one not too long ago, that was not confirmed at the time, but this time video-confirmation of the burning wreckage, and an aircraft dispensing flares in flight before it was hit seems to confirm the kill. As was the loss of a similar type of aircraft, but a cargo version, carrying 65 Ukrainian Prisoners of War for an exchange, deliberately killed by whoever pulled the trigger on the Ukrainian/NATO-side that day, since the flight had been announced. Ukrainians are claiming they shot the A-50 down using a S-200, an early model anti-aircraft missile from the days when Ukraine was still part of the USSR, somehow saved for a rainy day, or perhaps delivered by one of the other former Warsaw Pact countries, since Ukraine officially retired the system in 2013, after they inadvertently shot down a passenger aircraft with it.
The S-200 is not as agile, and the launcher is not as mobile as with more modern missiles, but it has a tremendous range of 300 km, so it could be true. Other, Russian, sources suggest it was an 'own-fire' incident, which is not impossible either, but since they used that excuse too often already, I'm starting to wonder why they would prefer to write it down on 'incompetence', rather than the work of their enemy? Whatever it was, this is a serious challenge, since those aircraft are valuable. And I don't mean in terms of money, but to protect against drones, missiles, aircraft, and cover areas 'beyond the horizon'. This is not an item you can replace quickly, and they don't have an unlimited supply.
Ukraine doesn't possess aircraft like the A-50, but NATO does, and they are in the air over the Black Sea feeding the Ukrainians all the info they need, and highly likely that they assist them with targeting such a high value asset as this A-50. Which could be the reason Russia prefers to list it as an 'own goal'. Up till now Russia is doing its utmost to avoid identifying NATO as its actual adversary, sticking to the line that NATO is providing 'assistance', or people will start to ask why the Russians refuse to attack those AWACS, 'Global Hawks' and similar assets of NATO. If Russia took a NATO AWACS down, that would be World War Three, while NATO up till now is free to fire at Russian aircraft, and ships, as long as they can hide behind Ukraine.
It does sound tremendously irresponsible of NATO if they do, since they can't hide this from the Russians and they appear to rely on qualms in the Kremlin, but NATO is clearly looking for a fight, as they gave the green-light to Ukraine to use their F-16, to become operational shortly, to attack Russia itself. This may sound trivial to the casual observer, who does remember various incidents of crude drones fired at Moscow and targets as far away as St Petersburg, but that is not how it will be perceived by the Russians. As our NATO-policy-makers led Ukraine down the 'primrose path' towards self-destruction, as John Mearsheimer puts it, Europe and the US itself appear to be next. Why?
Madness.
There is no other word for it. Despair, perhaps, since nothing NATO tried as it developed into an organisation which regarded itself as the Sheriff of Globalistan failed to impress the people who were supposed to be scared, while it never came close to offering anyone, anywhere, a sense of protection. On the contrary! This little book by Major General Smedley D. Butler from before WW-II, 'War is a Racket', is beyond true today, with only those who profit from warmongering directly, or indirectly, which includes the bulk of the politicians, from either side, pushing NATO's agenda. The world did not become a safer place after the Soviet-Union dissolved, and NATO became the only major player in town. Various people accused it of inventing enemies to secure their bloated budgets, with the NATO-countries pissing away trillions on all kinds of wars. Together they represent around 75% of the global budget on military spending. Yet they got their asses whipped wherever they went. Even a relatively simple task, securing the borders, is outside the scope of their abilities, or they are under orders to 'stand down' by politicians who profit from more chaos, until the walls around them come tumbling down.
The Dutch Prime Minister, about to abandon his country and take the lead at NATO, is telling us that this time will be different. NATO is done losing. And I came across a German plan to ruin and hunt down anyone criticising the State, in the fight against 'dictator Putin', while BASF is shifting its production from Germany to China, because Germany is done. What is fascinating is that she insisted that if you criticise the State, you are 'Far Right'. Yet they love it when 'their' Ursula von der Leyen, who pissed away trillions on Climate-madness, only to reinvent herself promoting gas-guzzling tanks spraying depleted uranium to 'Save-the-Planet', shows up in Kiev to walk down the 'Primrose Path' on the second anniversary of their war in Ukraine with fascist Italian PM Meloni, Trudeau of Canada and de Croo of Belgium. I always thought that people on the right loved their State to be omnipotent, ready to ruin and hunt down individuals who spread doubt about the wisdom of those placed above the 'common man', but now they tell me I had it backwards? Personally I said goodbye to these simplistic kindergarten labels, only of any value to people who have no clue where they are coming from, and where they are going. They do not know where they belong, which values are important, or what the outcome will be of their actions. They only know, for sure, they are not to blame. 'Wir haben es nicht gewusst!'
To clamp down on possible enemies within your own ranks is fair if you are at war. The simple fact that countries in Europe are now actively advancing towards silencing everyone who criticises NATO is in fact an admission that they are not merely supporting a country in need of some assistance, backed by the will of the people, but that they are at war with Russia themselves. However, they can't openly admit it, because then the gloves would come off on the Russian side, as heralded by Putin and Medvedev on numerous occasions, since that would be an existential threat to their country. This proxy-war isn't, for as long as they are able to make it look like they are not in driver's seat, and pedal to the metal to make it go faster. So, for the moment both sides in this conflict are trying to preserve the fiction that NATO and Russia are not at war. But it isn't even a thin veil obscuring reality.
Facts are facts.
Cold, hard facts. But they are not available if you want to get a clear picture of how Russia and NATO/Ukraine are doing on the battlefield. Russia is on the move, chasing the Ukrainian troops, that much is clear, and Medvedev is openly discussing the goals of taking Kiev and Odessa before they stop. While the government of Transnistria announced it intends to formally ask to become part of the Russian Federation on short notice. Let me remind you that Ukraine is NOT a member of NATO. NATO has no formal obligations towards the country. And no excuse to step up to the plate and confront Russia. We were told that the stationary situation after Russia withdrew behind the 'Surovikin-Line' was proof that Russia was not capable of advancing and taking more territory. I insisted that Brian Berletic and Alexander Mercouris were closer to the truth if they maintained that Russia didn't want to advance. In fact, writing on my Dutch language blog in January 2022, before the Russians jumped right in, hoping to end the tense situation between the Donbas and 'Kiev', preferably with a return to 'Minsk', I predicted all of this, arguing that the obvious NATO strategy of 'Stay Behind' military and 'Sanctions from Hell' was bound to fail. That article you can find HERE, and Google Translate may offer you a rough translation if you don't master the Dutch language.
Now that the Russians won the 'war of attrition', they are advancing. Rolling forward, chasing the fleeing Ukrainian troops, which, by all accounts, are retreating in a disorderly manner. In part because they are exhausted and out of ammo and weapons they can still use, but also because this was not in the plan, and with the recently appointed general Syrsky visiting Lviv, barely able to stand on his own two feet, smiling in a way that suggested he was drunk, don't expect miracles if you are cheering for Ukraine. There was no 'what if….'. They were going to go to the Sea of Azov, take Crimea, and teach those Russians a lesson. Though that was not how NATO planned it, so they were left dangling too. I was watching an broadcast from a French television channel, which had a lady from the British war-planning organisation 'Chatham House', who reconfirmed that NATO had anticipated on a quick win for Russia. Clearly they won't tell you that it was what they wanted, but that is only too obvious. They were not surprised by Russia's move to invade Ukraine, at all. And they had plans. But this development didn't fit in those plans. So now they are improvising. I have no idea how NATO might be able to stop the Russians from taking what Medvedev said they will take, before stopping.
If killing Russian 'early warning' aircraft at huge risk to NATO itself is what they came up with, to prevent the downing of all those F-16's the moment they are deployed is part of their plan to regain momentum, 'inexplicable' things might happen to NATO-forces too, which would have to be written down on 'friendly fire' incidents, or we will be in our shelters kissing our asses goodbye, I guess. There is no way Russia is going to allow NATO to slap them around. And they will have the full support of China, Iran and North Korea, and plenty of other countries no doubt, while NATO itself is being challenged from within, despite all the rhetoric claiming otherwise. I promised my children a better world.
Not funny!