Category: Uncategorized

Slowly, Then Suddenly

I concur with the Armchair Warlord’s take on how the Russian strategy is likely to switch to a much more aggressive mode of offense when the time is deemed right.

The Stavka has placed a heavy emphasis on efficiency in this war. Many Russian decisions at the operational-strategic level can be explained simply by their seeking the most efficient means to inflict mass casualties on the AFU with the lowest risk to themselves. Thus, any decision to transition to high-speed, mobile warfare from low-speed, positional war can be expected to follow that rubric. In other words, the Russians will launch an offensive to rout the AFU after its back is broken in positional war, rather than attack seeking to “change the game” and defeat the Ukrainians in mobile war. The “game” heavily favors the Russians and they’re not in a rush to change it!

The difference between these scenarios can be seen quite easily by comparing two very successful offensives: Operation Bagration in 1944 and the 1975 Ho Chi Minh Offensive. Bagration routed the once-mighty Army Group Center – at the cost of 180,000 killed in action, three times the total Russian death toll of this war. I’m sure the Russians would much prefer the 8,000-strong butcher’s bill of North Vietnam’s war-ending 1975 operation – and they have the strategic insight to see that modern Ukraine, as a corrupt and deeply dysfunctional garrison state propped up by endless foreign aid, is far more akin to South Vietnam than Nazi Germany.

So what does this look like in practice? The Russians are going to keep poking and prodding in their usual methodical way until part of the line collapses “in depth,” and then all hell is going to break loose.

It seems most observers have forgotten that the Russians have already shown great flexibility in their approach to the Special Military Operation in Ukraine. The initial gambit was a high-risk, low-cost decapitation strike at Kiev combined with support for very rapid advancement into the Donbass by the separatist militias backed by Russian air and artillery support. Only when the limits of that approach were reached did they switch to using Chechen and mercenary light infantry to storm fortified locations like Bahkmut, after which they switched again to the brutal, but low-risk attrition warfare we’ve been seeing over the last year.

Therefore, it is correct to anticipate another change in grand tactics, (the more proper term in this context as the strategic objectives remain unchanged) which will primarily depend upon whether a) the Ukrainian Armed Forces break under the relentless attritional pressure or b) if NATO ground forces are sent in to prevent the UFA from breaking. Remember, the Russian strategists will comprehensively plan for all possible situations, not merely the particular scenarios that the enemy media deems most likely.

DISCUSS ON SG

The History of War at Sea

Big Serge writes a very long article that chronicles the history of naval warfare:

Because the sea fundamentally acts as a medium of transportation, naval operations therefore take on a surprising simplicity. Virtually all naval combat in history can be categorized in two general groups, these being amphibious power projection and interdiction.

Amphibious power projection is fairly easy to understand, and it means simply the use of naval assets to bring armed force to bear against targets on land. The form can vary wildly, of course – ranging from Viking longships disgorging a small army of raiders, to British sailing ships bombarding enemy fortresses, to modern amphibious landings such as the 1944 assault on Normandy, all the way to the contemporary American navy operating sorties from colossal nuclear powered aircraft carriers. In truth, there is not much of a conceptual difference between any of these things – the mobility and carrying capacity of the sea in all cases allows fighting power to be rapidly shuttled to decisive points.

Interdiction is the other form of the naval operation, and it means simply area denial – hindering or preventing the enemy from utilizing seaborne lines of communication, supply, and power projection. Interdiction has both strong and weak forms. The strongest form, of course, is the blockade – which deigns to screen all (or nearly all) ocean traffic to the target country. While a true blockade requires essentially unrivaled naval supremacy, there are weaker forms of interdiction, ranging from privateering (a sort of legal form of piracy common in the early modern era) to submarine operations against merchant shipping.

In short, one can argue that despite the enormous diversity of forms that naval warfare has taken, with astonishing evolution in both the tactical and physical aspects of the warship, navies throughout history have essentially attempted to perform two basic tasks: use the sea as a medium to nimbly and effectively project fighting power towards the land, and deny the enemy the free use of the sea. The cinematic clashes between the main bodies of surface fleets of course have their own tactical logic and intriguing dimensions, but they always support one (or both) of these goals.

One other brief conceptual note worth mentioning is that, rather, obviously, naval operations are both extremely capital intensive and by extension highly fragile. We are of course perfectly used to this notion in the modern age, where shipbuilding programs cost many tens of billions of dollars – the total cost of America’s new Gerald R Ford Carrier class is well over $100 billion, for example. The cost barrier to naval power is not, however, unique to the modern world. Indeed, it seems that it has always been true that navies are far more costly than armies.

Warships are expensive and intricate engineering products, subjected by the ravages of the sea to costly maintenance, and they require specialized (and thus expensive) expertise to both build and operate. In the First Punic War, Rome and Carthage both bankrupted themselves attempting to fight what amounted to a naval war of attrition – by the end of the war, Rome had to finance shipbuilding by squeezing the aristocracy for donations.

Furthermore, the specialized nature of naval engineering often prevents a simple conversion of aggregate national wealth to combat power. For example, at the beginning of the 20th Century Imperial Germany was unable to achieve its goals of pacing British shipbuilding, despite astonishing levels of economic growth and enormous spending on the navy. Between 1889 and 1913, Germany’s GDP grew three times as quickly as Britain’s, and Germany became the 2nd largest industrial economy in the world (behind only the United States). Despite these advantages, Britain’s long-established and vast shipbuilding capacities prevented Germany from achieving its force generation goals relative to the Royal Navy.

In short, the sea is an arena of high risk and high reward; it compounds the usual frictions of war with the added complication of intricate engineering and navigational problems. The enormous expense and the vast (and often highly skilled) manpower required to compete in high intensity naval operations by extension means that navies tend to be more fragile than armies – that is to say, vulnerable to decisive defeat and less able to recuperate fighting power. But this very fact has made battle a decisive instrument in the history of the ocean. The navy that can gain supremacy by crushing the enemy in pitched battle will generally keep it, and thus hoard its privileges thereafter. War on the water can be won or lost in a day, or an afternoon, or an hour, in an undulating foam of blood and wood.

As a general rule, the side that can afford to build more ships, and has the ability to do so, wins the war at sea. This is why the dominant naval power changes less often than the dominant land power, and why the USA can no longer be considered the dominant naval power despite having a larger navy than China or Russia right now.

DISCUSS ON SG

Farage is Deep State 4

James Delingpole explains why Nigel Farage and his Reform Party are no more a genuine alternative to the Conservative Party than Labour or the Liberal Democrats:

I don’t trust Nigel Farage. But that doesn’t mean he is wrong on everything. He is not wrong, for example, when he says that the Russian incursion into Eastern Ukraine was provoked by the West. Nor is he wrong that the only acceptable solution is a negotiated peace settlement.

But that still doesn’t mean we should trust him. This is the same man who, during the fake Covid pandemic helped promote the psyop by allowing himself to be filmed banging his pots and pans for ‘Our NHS’. And the same man who urged that Tony Blair should be put in charge of the operation to roll out those safe and effective vaccines now bowling over his constituency like ninepins.

So what are we to make of it when so blatant and slippery an Establishment change agent suddenly spouts something that makes such obvious sense? Are we to go – as so many Reform voters are saying – “Well he may not be perfect. But at least he’s preferable to the Sunak/Starmer uniparty.”

No, he is not. For Farage, too, is a card-carrying member of the Sunak/Starmer uniparty. His role is merely to offer the gullible the illusion that the rigged voting system offers any alternative other than the uniparty.

Delingpole’s point is not that one should vote Tory instead of Reform. His point is that it doesn’t matter for whom an Englishman votes, because all of the Establishment parties are under the control and guidance of precisely the same global satanists.

Democracy, particularly in its limited representative form, is nothing more than a sham meant to prevent the volatile public from knowing who truly rules over them. The whole point of the political systems of the modern “democracies” is not to express the will of the people, but rather, prevent it from being realized. Yes, this is an inversion of what you were taught in school, but if you haven’t figured out by now that what you are taught in school is an inversion of the truth, you really haven’t been paying attention.

If the self-styled defenders of democracy actually believed in democracy, they would be actively seeking to remove its legal limitations such as the courts, the parliaments, the senates, and the executive agencies. We have the technology for direct democracy and we have the legal framework for referendums, which means we have the ability to directly apply the clearly-expressed will of the people to every single political issue of the day.

And yet, the will of the people is relentlessly resisted and denied.

This is why the “authoritarian” models of Russia and China is not only more effective and more popular than those of the so-called “democracies”, but they are more legitimate as well. The very high popularity ratings for both Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin are not only real, but they extend well beyond their domestic audiences. In fact, the least popular leaders in the world are all Clown Worlders, Yoon Suk-Yeol of South Korea, Emmanuel Macron of France, Rishi Sunak of the United Kingdom, Olaf Scholz of Germany, and the least popular of all, Fumio Kishida of Japan.

When the Clown World strategists plan their color revolutions aimed at regime change, they are very often engaging in the baseless projection of the unpopularity of their own “democratic” leaders onto other nations. But the nations of the world finally understand that the “freedom and democracy” banner under which the Empire of Lies has spread is now no more legitimate than the Communist promise of a Worker’s Paradise.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: The War on Knowledge

An email from a reader illustrates how even the profession of the Librarian has been inverted in order to destroy the knowledge they are charged with preserving.

My wife and I are volunteers for the Friends of the Library at the branch library in the college town where we first met, where every year we help out at the book sales. A month ago we received a peculiar donation. It turns out the new director of the library at our alma mater made the decision to liquidate the library’s special collections. Among those liquidations was a special collection library that had been initiated in the nineteenth century by a member of college founder’s immediate family.

In my years at college, I treasured this special library – it was housed in an elegant top-level room in the college’s oldest building, and required special access to visit. Nearly all the books were old, and all of them were on special subjects of great interest to me – literature, poetry, theology, the sciences. Many titles had bookplates with the names of the alumni who donated them over the years.

After some investigation I discovered that this new head of the college library pulled all of the books out of that special library, and put them in an enormous rented bin in the main lobby, with a sign suggesting that students could use them for art projects and scrapbooking, you know, to cut and paste their contents to express themselves and be “creative.” The majority of books sat there for weeks, and then she called our group to donate them to our book sale.

The last day of the book sale is bag day, where a brown grocery bag of books is only a dollar. What the library doesn’t sell at the end of sale is brought to a pulper. I pulled all of these books and placed them in private storage—if I hadn’t, they would have literally been shredded a week ago.

The process is ongoing. I’m told that the librarian is closing all of the special collections in all departments of the college, so I don’t want to share any names just yet, but before this is over, I hope I’ll have saved at least a thousand out-of-print books.

This is not new. Well over a decade ago, another university library in my state was destroyed. This library, in a literal ivory tower built exclusively for holding and preserving hundreds of thousands of books, was at one time among the top ten libraries in the nation. A new library director had not only decided to gut the
interior of the building and destroy all of the original architectural detail and period decor, but he also pulled out and destroyed a great majority of the books to make room for “computer stations.” They did not sell the books, they did not offer to donate them, and the director specifically instructed staff to discard the books in locked university dumpsters so that they couldn’t be taken by anyone.

The bad, the ugly, and the false. That is the makeup of the world these people are actively contriving and constructing. It really is time to build a consortium of knowledge, physical and digital, containing archives of the world’s books and works that are under attack and being taken away.

The Serpent promises knowledge and provides nothing but ignorance. What we have collectively taken on as a responsibility with Castalia Library and Infogalactic may eventually prove to be one of the most important things any of us have ever done. We are the only true Librarians and we stand between Man and the state of Zero History that Clown World seeks to impose on him.

The Zero Historians need to destroy all human knowledge because only in its absence can they present their lies as truth. And indeed, the better we understand their motives and methods, the more it appears this is not the first time they have attempted such a grand endeavor.

Inversion is always the key. Now it should be perfectly clear what a fundamental lie the asserted conflict between Christianity and Science, and between Faith and Knowledge, has always been.

DISCUSS ON SG

How the Hapsburgs Took Over England

Or, was Henry VIIIth actually the good guy and was the dissolution of the monasteries motivated by something more than simple royal greed?

The story of Henry VIII is the story of a conflict. The conflict that is occurring is the conflict between Habsburg and Tudor houses. The house of Habsburg is, as they had previously done in many other European countries, attempting to gain political control of England through marriage and through its influence over the Catholic Church.

Which is to say: The Habsburgs are trying to take over England during the reign of Henry VIII.
Henry’s actions – exiting a marriage to a Habsburg connected figure, and exiting the Catholic Church – are direct responses to Habsburg attacks on England’s sovereignty through those same two avenues. The Habsburg attack comes through marriage and the Catholic Church.

However I have never seen that story recounted. Instead, I have only seen bizarre retellings where half the plot is left out, the Habsburg part. Obviously, if you omit the geopolitical motivation for Henry VIII’s actions from the story then his actions seem insane. The situation reminds me a little bit of the experience of accidentally walking into a spiderweb. Have you ever done this? It is totally jarring. You flail your hands and look like an idiot trying to get the bits of spiderweb off of your face. To an outside observer who can’t see the spiderweb you just walked into, you look spastic, manic. But there is a reason you’re acting that way. The conflict with the Habsburgs is that spiderweb for Henry VIII. You need to know it is there to understand his actions.

Is there any evidence of a Habsburg coup attempt? The evidence I have that the Habsburgs are trying to take over England during this period is that the Habsburgs do take over England in this period.

What? Yes. ‘Bloody Mary’ Tudor weds Phillip II Habsburg – the son of the Habsburg Emperor – just 5 years after the death of Henry VIII.

Phillip Habsburg becomes King of England Jure Uxoris – joint sovereign with Queen Mary. England comes under Habsburg control, along with Spain, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Flanders, Bohemia, Germany, Italy, Hungary and… Did I forget any? At this point the Habsburgs are basically kings of the Universe, totally drunk with power. In England they are literally burning their enemies at the stake.

The Habsburg method for expanding their territory was fairly simple:

  1. Find a failing kingdom in need of aid or protection.
  2. Offer to use your influence in the Catholic Church to aid the Kingdom in exchange for an advantageous marriage, protection money, or both.
  3. Betray the Kingdom and use your influence instead to install your newly wed Habsburg as the sole sovereign.

Are you starting to understand why the story of a medieval Republican who miraculously defeats something that looks suspiciously like today’s democratic institutional oligarchy has never been properly told?

The Habsburg Coup in Henry VIII’s England

I’ve literally never, ever, heard this theory before, but at first glance, it sounds extremely persuasive. It also tends to raise an obvious question about the ethnicity of the Hapsburgs, who were both highly consanguineous and physically deformed. They certainly appear to have worked out their own method of “color revolutions” centuries before the neocons, although it may simply be that they were inspirations for the Rothschilds rather than predecessors of some kind.

And, of course, it would be yet another example of a “religious war” actually being about something other than the purported religious conflict, which tends to track with what we’ve learned about everything from the Crusades to the 30 Years War.

To think some people actually believe that history is boring… Definitely read the whole thing!

DISCUSS ON SG

Subscribe, Scan, and Stockpile

Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies predicts a Clown World campaign against books:

Soon, you will see a silent undertaking to destroy the last decentralized form of offline knowledge:

Books.

If the elites don’t do this, then these books will be turned into training AI about the true history of the last 2000 years.

I highly recommend a) subscribing to one of Castalia’s series, b) scanning any unique book to which you have access, and c) stockpiling both books and electronic texts. The latter should be in the simplest possible forms, either PDF or TXT format.

We are the monestaries for the 21st Century and beyond. The Zero Historians are coming to destroy all human knowledge and neither the atheists nor the agnostics are going to stop them. So it again falls to us.

DISCUSS ON SG

Judgment, Not Blessing

The Christian Zionists who are on AIPAC’s payroll are even worse theologians than Calvinists and comedians. This is what a complete rhetorical blowout looks like.

The fact that the Jewish organizations in the USA are actually suing to remove the Ten Commandments from public schools should be sufficient to convince even the most rabid Christian Zionist that modern Jewry has an inverted connection to the historical Hebrew people, religion, and culture. It won’t be, but it should be.

God’s promises of blessings to Man have always been contingent on Man’s subsequent behavior. And one need only look at the current state of Israel, or, for that matter, the current state of the USA, to know that it is not God they serve, and that it is God’s judgment, not God’s blessings, that should be anticipated.

It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

–Romans 9:6-8

DISCUSS ON SG

Diversity and Finance

Are why nothing works anymore. From /pol/:

Finance bros are ruining society. Boeing is just the start. Everything you rely on to “Just Work” in your day to day life, in a few years, will no longer be trustworthy. Regular people are soon going to need to inspect every bridge they walk on. Companies don’t give a piss about ensuring safety anymore.

Companies are now being ran by fratdouche finance bros who all feel they deserve prestigious Wall Street positions because they got a C in College Algebra. All these colleges are pushing out thousands of these retards who basically spent four years learning arts/crafts + Excel, and they all think they deserve a job. The worst are the Patagonia douches from big schools like UPenn who are just as stupid and uneducated as the rest, but still think they’re smarter than everyone else because of their school where they learned no math/science/art/history.

The corporate world loves these retards even though they’re inept across the board, and they get put in positions of power. Shareholders demand infinite growth from companies that have clearly peaked, and the finance bros deliver by cutting overhead, starting with safety, engineering, testing, & maintenance.

Corporate sees people like me as annoying chuddjaks trying to ruin their fun, and whenever shit goes belly up, these fucks just collect their bonus, update their resume, and move to the next company.

The worst part is maintenance isn’t a blue collar field of retards anymore. Aircraft maintenance especially is full of skilled, highly-trained technicians who will bounce at the first sign of corporate mistreatment. Finance fags think these guys are toothless retards who will work for anything, when they’re actually sending daily, 6-figure job offer emails straight to their spam folders. I work in energy production, and it’s no different here. I can’t hold onto talent with the way corporate shits on these men like they’re lucky to even have a job.

This is the inevitable end game of reducing everything to mere numbers. And it’s only going to keep getting worse from here, so the more you develop a community that can provide everyone with what it needs, the better off you’re going to be.

Milton Friedman and Leonard Read can stick their proverbial pencils up their deceased posteriors. Free trade, like free speech, was always a satanic trap. As I wrote years ago, we’ll be lucky if we still have indoor plumbing when things hit their nadir.

Collect old books. Preserve their knowledge. You’re going to need it, because imposing social justice limits on AI is going to break Wikipedia soon.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Sack of London

It’s more of an ongoing situation than an event, but the end result will be the same.

Crime has soared in London after more than 100 local police stations were shut down – and people living and working in the areas left without one are furious about it, a MailOnline investigation has found. It emerged this week that only 36 police stations remain open in the capital compared to the 160 that the city had in 2008 – a reduction of an astonishing 77%. The cuts have doubled the distance an average Londoner has to travel to their nearest manned police help desk to around two miles – with researchers warning criminals were specifically targeting areas the Met has abandoned.

Although, in fairness, there really isn’t any need for a police force that keeps the borders open, ignores foreign rape gangs, and primarily focuses on thought-policing the native population that doesn’t support Clown World’s intended destruction of the English people.

As the inhabitants of the Middle Kingdom very well know, civilization is racism. If you are anti-racist, you are literally anti-civilization; remember, the term racism was coined by a white man who actively sought to destroy every aspect of American Indian language and culture to describe those Indians who wished to preserve their own way of life.

DISCUSS ON SG