“A COSTLY RESISTANCE”

Despite the heavy investment from Washington and NATO to arm and support the Ukrainian neo-Nazi groups, the cost does not seem to bring benefits, so who will pay for all this party?

 

By Danny Smith

Suddenly, the news and fictional chronicles of what is happening in the Ukraine have been silenced. What has happened? Has Zelenskyy and his armed forces won the war? This conflict is far from ending, but the Western media and its most famous misinformers have fallen silent. The causes for this have an explanation but it is very annoying for public opinion to know.

During the months that the coverage of Special Operation Z has lasted, the Anglo-American media have launched all kinds of reports and speculations that tended to support the position of kyiv and in particular to clean the dirty face represented by the armed resistance made up of Nazi battalions. Welcome to reality, the war is not won with good intentions or with good men, much less, without money. Those in charge of managing these resources are the intelligence agencies such as the CIA and MI6 that have been weaving networks that are interconnected with other assets at their service as dissimilar as the "ISIS jihadists" and the Albanian and Kosovar mafias.

The media, as part of the structure of disinformation and dissemination of Russophobic propaganda that already acted in a similar way against Islam and Muslims during the infamous decade of terror promoted by the American hoax of the "fight against terrorism", have tried to make up the aid of the West by pretending to do it to the poor Ukrainian people. But how much will this disinterested help cost the Ukrainians?

When British Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited kyiv, the purpose behind the photos and smiling poses was the delivery of weapons to support Zelenskyy and in return he must follow the London recommendations, which translates as NATO orders. The same with the visit of the head of the Pentagon, Lloyd Austin, and the Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, on April 25 last, where, after informing Zelenskyy of a new financing of 322 million dollars for weapons, in addition to that already granted before the invasion of 3,700 million dollars. Do you think that all that money will not have to be returned with something? Some are even wondering who would be benefiting from that money?

There is a big business behind this monetary support and also the tons of weapons that -sent from the US and the UK- arrive from Poland and Romania. Do you remember Iraq in 2003? Not only the promoter of the Raython Corporation is doing juicy business with all this movement, but also many military and intelligence intermediaries on the ground, which will cause us to end up seeing many of these weapons in other latitudes and in the hands of unfriendly types. And if you don't ask yourselves, why do only a third of the weapons stockpiled in depots in Kosovo and kyiv reach the Donbass front?

Reliable sources assure that the instigators of the war against Russia in Washington (with Victoria Nuland at the head) already have new plans for these weapons and they are not precisely to deliver them to the Ukrainians. Are these weapons and part of the money being diverted to resurrect the ISIS hoax? Nuland's visit to Morocco on May 11 last arouses many suspicions about this possibility.

The Biden administration would be in theory putting all the chips in Volodymyr Zelenskyy so that he tries to fight Russia and wear it out by extending the fight over time, but that seems very far after what happened in Azovstal where it was proven that the heroic Nazis Those who surrendered had supplies, ammunition and food for a prolonged fight. Were they not more motivated than the Russians as the Western chronicles said? This showed that the retired US military who have been commenting and predicting Russian tactical failures from coast to coast on FOXNEWS, CNN, NBC and others have had to swallow their tongues.

All of them and the media that provided them with space only ruminated and were never aware of the real Russian operational tactics, much less their strategic objectives. Its undeniable function is undoubtedly to misinform as part of psychological warfare. The great fallacy that they got tired of spreading was that Putin wanted to occupy kyiv and that he failed in his attempt. The Russian troops did not have this objective in their plans and proof of this was that they maintained a ring around it a few miles from the center of the city to later withdraw orderly to the east. The Russian purpose was amply specified by destroying the entire chain of command and control, its information centers and most importantly, its air force, all with precision missiles. When these premises were met, they withdrew to the southeast without further inconvenience.

On the ground, despite the British weapons and advisers who assist the "Azov" bandits (NATO tactical pawns), the resistance has been broken and the only thing they can do is carry out small and isolated guerrilla operations against weak points and upon detection they are usually overwhelmed by air strikes or medium-range missiles. This without taking into account the secret operations of the GRU that have cleaned several pockets that were regrouping behind the Donbass.