Only a fool seeks glory in the mercenary trade.
Only a deranged madman, a despised soul - seals their own death warrant by killing for money.
The only thing lower than the mercenary are the
lower-than-rat-shit George Soros's/Victoria Nuland's of the world who
pay the lower-than-rat-shit mercenary to kill.
Even if you are the CEO of the worlds largest
paramilitary corporation, you are not a prince, and can still be hanged
by the neck until dead for unspeakable crimes against humanity.
It could be even quicker than that.
If you are the CEO of the worlds largest death
for profit paramilitary corporation, you have already proved your worth
to Humanity, signed your own death warrant, and any breath you take at
anytime could be your last, as a trial for genocide and war crimes will
only waste time.
Live by the sword - die by the sword - your fate is sealed.
Lion
------------------------
"All Hell Was Following Them" - False Flag Blitzkrieg and Psychotic Soros Ukraine Destruction
The Vineyard of the Saker: And Hell was
following them… and it appears from this analysis that there is the
possibility of a huge number of false flag attacks! ~J
Posted on January 31, 2015 by Jean
Yes, I’ve been watching the news, and if you also have been doing so, you realize it is terrible and demoralizing.
I determined not to publish any of it — until I found this article.
It gives a explanation for the insanity going on
in Ukraine, and it poses the possibility of numerous false flags on the
Ukrainians with the blame to fall on Russia.
Realizing these possibilities, I feel like we
have to make this article go viral in an effort to unmask these
incredible lies and this terrible sickness/insanity.
I hope you will help! Perhaps they won’t be able to get away with it!
Thank you and hugs,
~Jean
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.ca/2015/01/and-hell-was-following-them.html
(Translated by Eugene)
And Hell was following them…
I don’t know who exactly (Turchinov? Poroshenko?) commanded the Ukrainian army to disrupt the truce.
But I am sure that this decision was taken in Washington.
It is not an accident that this suicidal provocation was preceded by the visit of G. Soros to Kiev.
This elderly “philanthropist” who, together with
the US Department of State, sponsored all post-soviet fascist regimes
(from Saakashvili’s Georgia to Poroshenko’s Ukraine), was most qualified
to assess the financial state of the regime in Kiev and to decide
whether it still makes sense to continue prolongation of the agony by monetary injections.
His public statement, reprinted by media on
January 14, left no doubt – the patient is dead, the corpse is stiff,
its resuscitation is meaningless.
Surely, Kiev has understood that if they scrape
the bottom of the barrel and if Europe exerts itself then it is possible
to collect money for further agony.
But Soros clearly said about the necessity to
find $50 billion just for 2015. While in 2014 (when the ignoramuses
still hoped for the stabilization of the Kiev regime) US, EU and IMF
together could scrape up only $20 billion, supposed to be stretched over
3 years.
In fact, in 2014 Kiev got only $7.5 – 8 billion
in credits. Clearly, in such conditions it is unrealistic to find $50
billion in a year. Soros himself told that he hopes only for a miracle.
Right after Soros’ unambiguous demand for the EU
to finance Ukraine, the European media coverage of the Ukrainian crisis
changed drastically, and it became clear that there will be no miracle.
The European mass media (including German TV)
and NGO’s (including Human Rights Watch) suddenly “saw the light” and
found that the Kiev regime is at war with civilians, violating the laws
and customs of war.
Just a little bit longer and Europe will
“realize” that Kiev is taken by a fascist junta that tramples its own
constitution, and introduce sanctions against Russia for Kremlin’s
economic cooperation (supply of coal and gas) with the Nazi regime.
Europe is not going to give money. USA are not
going to help either (if they wanted to do that, the IMF would not
procrastinate for six months but allocated tranche after tranche, instead).
Under these conditions, supporting Ukraine’s
mythical stability, as Washington was doing since the end of last
summer, is absolutely meaningless.
Back in August-September of 2014, Ukrainian
politicians were divided into two groups: the majority – those who were
ready to overthrow Poroshenko, expecting to receive some dividends from
the next coup, and the minority taking a neutral position. Poroshenko
himself had neither his own support group nor power prop. He is still
the president only thanks to the US, which banned the coup at the time.
Washington knew perfectly well that Poroshenko
is trying to negotiate with Moscow on the peaceful settlement (because
only peace could give Poroshenko a chance to protect not just his
presidential chair, but his life itself).
United States needed a war and, seemingly, they
did not want to keep the frightened and confused Petro Alexeyevich at
the helm. But Americans were misled by Russian diplomacy. Peace was (and
remains) beneficial for Russia, because it forces the United States and
its European allies to keep the failed Ukrainian project alive and,
therefore, to spend their scarce resources.
The Ukrainian coup, intended to make from Kiev
not only an eternal source of enmity between Russia and the EU, but also
a black hole devouring Moscow’s resources, has not fulfilled any of its
tasks — a year after the coup, Ukraine continues to devour the US
resources.
But since Ukraine is just one of many sites of
global confrontation between Moscow and Washington, the further
concentration of efforts on this site becomes unprofitable for the US.
They cannot quit, because then the site will be taken by Russia, which would be a geopolitical defeat of Washington. Therefore, the site must be destroyed.
Let the winner occupy the ruins; if they could
not entangle him by the whole Ukraine, let he be entangled by the
rotting and decaying corpse of Ukraine.
So, since for Russia it is better if Ukraine is
destroyed by the US as late as possible, the Russian diplomacy pretended
for almost a year, portraying weakness, confusion, and readiness to
surrender.
In anticipation of the fall of Russia, which would solve all their problems, the United States decided not to finish Ukraine.
Why? If, after the victory over Russia, the
problem of supporting the Kiev regime at the expense of Moscow would be
solved by itself.
But everything good comes to an end sooner or later.
By the beginning of December it became clear
that Washington can push Russia as much as it likes, but it cannot make
Russia fall, without falling itself even sooner.
Taking into account the need to reduce the
geopolitical frontline, to concentrate resources on the remaining
priority areas, to leave the lost grounds, the question resurfaced again
– what to do with Ukraine? As soon as it became clear that Soros is not
going to find the necessary finances for Kiev, the fate of the country,
politicians, the public and even the “creative class” accustomed to be
immune to problems, was sealed.
And the war reignited with renewed ferocity.
US knew perfectly well how unfit for action the
Ukrainian army was and how the armed forces of DPR/LPR have strengthened
during the peaceful respite.
You don’t have to sit at the Chiefs of Staff
Committee to estimate from open sources that with such intensive fights,
which began on January 18th and continuing across the frontline, the
Ukrainian army will run out of strength to conduct active operations in
three to four weeks, and in one to three more weeks it will begin to
fall apart.
By the way, the Ukrainian artillery will be the
first to disappear from the battlefield. Judging by the intensity and
dynamics of the artillery fire of the parties, the Ukrainian army was
behind DPR/LPR even on the volume of stored ammunition.
While the republics clearly had a constant
resupply, the Ukrainian army could not replenish consumable ammunition
just as rapidly. After the Ukrainian artillery lost the opportunity of
equal fight with the artillery of DPR/LPR, grinding of Ukrainian
reserves was a matter of short time, and after the exhaustion of
reserves the collapse of the front would became inevitable.
Making up for the losses by means of mobilization was impossible, even if they could mobilize everyone.
In the best case, the recruits would have been at the collection points, when the front already collapsed.
Americans knew all that, but still pushed the Ukrainian army into a senseless attack, which could not even start in earnest.
That is the army was doomed to destruction and the front was destined to collapse.
Why did the United States need that? Because, as
we mentioned above, the US does not need the unattainable victory in
Ukraine, they need the destruction of Ukraine, but by someone else’s
hands and with the greatest possible benefit for themselves.
Three to four weeks of intense fighting would
not only bleed the Ukrainian army, but would also inflict substantial
losses on the armed forces of DPR/LPR.
From the first days, the militia admits its own
losses of dozens if not hundreds killed and wounded, while noting that
the losses of the Ukrainian army are much higher.
Let us not forget that the armed forces of
DPR/LPR currently do not exceed 30-40 thousand soldiers, even by the
most optimistic estimates.
Taking into account that 10-15 thousand are
logistical and security units, there cannot be more than 20-25 thousand
of combat troops.
This means that even the loss of 3-5 thousand —
and this number of dead and wounded in three to four weeks of intense
fighting is quite possible — dramatically reduces the combat capability
of the militia forces.
So, by the mid-late February the Ukrainian army
would have to fall apart and start a disorganized retreat, but the
scarce militia forces, having suffered serious losses, would be unable
to take the territory left by the withdrawing Ukrainian troops.
This would create vast power-vacuum areas
between DPR/LNR and Kiev, where the militia and some residual government
troops would alternate to each other as in a layered cake.
To the extent that different streets of the same
locality could be held by different armed groups. In addition, while
the DPR/LPR armed forces are organized as more or less regular
structures with a unified chain of command, the army of Kiev keeps
sliding to irregular formations, which, with the death of the last
regular units, would finally transform to a bunch of Nazi gangs and
outright criminals partially diluted by completely kooky “veterans of
the anti-terrorist operation”.
In this situation, Nazi battalions concentrated
in the major cities of the southeast in order to maintain the power in
Kiev, will grow more irritated and the Kiev propaganda will become more
nervous.
This would increase the bitterness towards the
power that “betrayed us” as well as pro-Russian activists — “the 5th
column that stabbed us in the back”.
Any pretext will be enough to inflame the whole
country. However, in order to paralyze the world community and to
disable its instantaneous and consistent reaction, the pretext for the
repeat of the Ruanda scenario (mutual senseless massacre) must be beyond
belief and, at the same time, radically change the current political
situation.
That is, it is not enough to organize a loud act
of terror or a series of such acts on behalf of “pro-Russian partisans”
or “FSB (GRU, SVR) agents”.
This provocation must move the Nazi community
and channel its efforts in the desired direction. Besides, the Ukrainian
government must be (or look) paralyzed. Finally, this event should be
sufficiently bloody, sufficiently immoral and touch those strata of the
society, which are perceived by the Nazis as their own.
These conditions cannot be satisfied with a
single yet spectacular act of terror (such problems cannot be solved
even by an explosion at Chernobyl).
Clearly, first of all they would need death of a
major political figure or figures, so that allegedly (or really)
paralyzed Ukrainian government could not take measures to restore the
order, even if it wanted to.
Poroshenko is a perfect sacral victim
(especially because he is a traitor to the Americans), but in place of
the “young prodigy” Yatsenyuk I would have not relaxed as well.
After liquidation of Ukraine, Yatsenyuk becomes
useless and even dangerous as he can testify to some sort of
“International Tribunal for the Former Ukraine.”
For a country without economy this symbolic
economist is just as useless as the great banker Yuschenko. Credits are
not coming with or without Yatsenyuk. To die heroically is the only
benefit that he can bring to the US.
If someone blows up the parliament during a
plenary session with both Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk in attendance, could
you guess who will be declared guilty even before any investigation?
Especially if some “people’s avengers” would claim the responsibility afterwards?
Of course, the Nazis from battalions spit on
Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk, but their battalion commanders will be there
as well: Yarosh and sotnik Parasyuk and cossack Gavrylyuk – it would be
so indecent not to avenge them.
Moreover, if this seems not enough, they could
carry out a series of terrorist attacks in the hospitals where the
“heroes ATO” are treated. Imagine how barbaric killings of defenseless
“heroes” will be presented by the Ukrainian media.
They will not even need a training manual from the American Embassy; they will interpret everything correctly by themselves.
Well, and as “the cherry on the cake” one can explode the cascade of the Dnieper hydropower plants.
This would solve several US problems at once.
First, the real damage as a result of flooding will not be as great, but
cameras positioned in advance in the right places will show pictures
more terrible than during the tsunami in Thailand, and “experts”
(incidentally, also on their own initiative) will immediately proclaim
millions of potential victims.
Second, this will immediately cut off the left bank of the Dnieper River from the right one.
The dam will be blown, and bridges destroyed.
That is, the militia will not able to cross the
Dnieper without the help of the Russian Army. Third, if all this (from
the elimination of the political elite to the man-made technological
disasters) happens in three to five to ten days and if it becomes
possible (sure it does, otherwise, why are we feeding CIA?) to accuse
Russia and DPR/LPR of participation or at least of indirect sponsorship
of the terrorists, the consolidated international community will not
take quick control of Ukraine.
Any participation of Russia will be blocked by
the West accusing Moscow of complicity in the crime, but Western forces
themselves could not stabilize the situation (even if the US and the EU
decided to act without a UN resolution, they will not have the required
operational capacity and available troops).
Fourth, while the US needs that, even Turchinov
can legitimately represent Kiev and lead the remnants of the government,
which is dispensable as well.
The further course of events is also clear.
The Nazis go to avenge their “brothers in arms”.
The battalions spread out across the country,
checking addresses from databases provided be fellow Nazis from the SBU
and parts of the Ministry of Interior.
The militia will still be able to quickly lend a
helping hand to Kharkov, Left Bank districts of Dnepropetrovsk and
Zaporozhye, to punch a land corridor to the Crimea.
But without Russia’s help they cannot go further – there are no bridges.
Left bank guerrilla groups are stronger.
Of course, they will resist in Odessa, possibly even in Kiev, but the forces are not equal.
The mere fact of partisan resistance on the right bank will deprive the junta of the support of the Ukrainian “creative class”.
Nobody needs them in the US, because they cannot work, but like to eat well.
Nobody will feed them for their “Ukraineness” (who needs Ukraineness without Ukraine?).
Each of them doesn’t know much, but taken together their testimonies would allow to piece together the full picture.
And if in the course of Ukrainian excesses they will be killed in their own homes, so be it.
“Tutsi” kill “Hutu”, “Hutu” kill “Tutsi” – this is a sad feature of civil wars.
Thus, pushing Ukraine from Somalization to
Ruandization, the United States are fully capable to minimize the effect
of Russia’s victories, cover the traces of their own crimes with blood
and, most importantly, make their participation in the coming settlement
not just necessary, but inevitable, thus preserving their positions on
the European continent and their control over the frightened EU.
We considered just one scenario of the possible
provocation that would allow Washington to solve the problem of burning
down the Ukrainian stand.
In fact, there are hundreds of similar scenarios.
All of them are real, and some of them must be already developed by the Americans.
Otherwise, the security services, the military and the State Department are paid for nothing.
The number of crimes already committed by
Washington and Kiev suggests that the above scenario is not something
extraordinary, on the contrary – it is well within the logic of the
previous actions.
In February 2014, a hundred of “Maidan” victims
stimulated the coup; three hundred victims in the downed “Boeing”
allowed to deploy the summer offensive; tens of thousands of killed
Ukrainians serve as a means to pressure Russia.
Then how the tens of thousands of victims are different from the hundreds of thousands or even millions?
Only by the fact that the US did not have the need to organize a mass human sacrifice in Ukraine yet. Now there is such a need.
Two things can still save people:
Ukrainian executors’ traditional inability to implement even single American plan;
Putin’s traditional ability to come up with a decent way out of most desperate situations.
But these things are beyond the scope of rational analysis.
They are matters of luck.
Rostislav Ischenko, president of the Center for system analysis and forecasting, exclusively for the “Current Comments”.
https://jhaines6.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/the-vineyard-of-the-saker-and-hell-was-following-them-and-it-appears-to-me-that-there-is-the-possibility-of-a-huge-number-of-false-flag-attacks-suggested-here-j/
