The Guardian Says Russia is Losing the War in Ukraine

A week ago…


The Ukraine people must have gained the upper hand in the last week.

I guess they’re on the verge of taking Moscow?

From The Guardian’s editorial board:

As the war in Ukraine and its consequences weaken Russia’s conventional military, Vladimir Putin’s government has resorted to nuclear threats designed to project strength. Mr Putin wants to intimidate his opponents. But his strategy is failing. Instead of Ukraine’s allies backing down, they are stepping up their support. The US Congress this week approved $11bn of arms to Ukraine, three times the total military aid Washington has so far given.

The US president, Joe Biden, was right to call out Mr Putin for making “idle comments” about nuclear weapons. It is unthinkable that blunders and miscalculations would take the world to the edge of the nuclear abyss. Yet that is where the world is heading. Whereas the Cuban missile crisis lasted 13 days, Russia’s war is already into its third month. With no clear end in sight, more deadly battles look inevitable – increasing the chances of mistakes.

Mr Putin could be using nuclear rhetoric to give the appearance of being unstable. His war is illegal and immoral. His justification for starting the invasion was macabre and ludicrous. However, this may be an act. Russia’s president could be trying to back coercive diplomacy with the “madman theory” of threatening excessive force, which includes the spectre of nuclear weapons. However disagreeable this might seem, a rational Mr Putin, with 2,000 tactical nuclear warheads, is preferable to an irrational one.

The concentration of such power in one man’s hands ought to make the world sit up. Russia has few mechanisms to prevent Mr Putin resorting to nuclear weapons if he decided he had nothing to lose. In the Guardian last month, Christopher S Chivvis at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace wrote that in war game scenarios he had taken part in, which considered what would happen if Russia hit Ukraine with nuclear weapons, the only way of de-escalation was when “clear political off-ramps and lines of communication between Moscow and Washington have remained open. In all the other games, the world is basically destroyed.”

I am not clear on why you would want to tell your population that the person you’re defending the rules-based order against by illegally stealing random people’s houses and boats is going to nuke you.

Related: Russian TV is Talking Very Frankly About Nuclear War (While America Stands with Ukranus)

By the way: “rules-based order” is yet another piece of terminology that actually just means “man-on-man anal ramming, including licking and fisting.” A more accurate term would be “anus-based penetration.”

It’s not clear why we have to have all these different terms for gay sex.

The really shocking thing about this Guardian editorial is…

…what the hell am I doing with my life? 

You know what would solve this?

Nuclear war.

I just can’t even see why people are against it.