1. Home
  2.  » 
  3. Commentary
  4.  » Putin has lost war thanks to catastrophic misjudgments, says British armed forces chief

Jane Dalton – The Independent March 31, 2022

The head of the British armed forces has said Russian president Vladimir Putin has already lost his war in Ukraine after making “catastrophic misjudgments”.

Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the Chief of the Defence Staff, said: “The scenes coming out of Mariupol and elsewhere are horrific, and the coming weeks will continue to be very difficult.

“But in many ways, Putin has already lost. Far from being the far-sighted manipulator of events that he would have us believe, Putin has damaged himself through a series of catastrophic misjudgments.”

US and European officials said on Wednesday that Mr Putin had been misled by advisers who were too scared to tell him how poorly the conflict was going or how badly Western sanctions had hit Russia.

“Like all authoritarians, he allowed himself to be misled as to his own strength, including the effectiveness of the Russian armed forces,” the Chief of the Defence Staff said.

Continues …

Comment – April 1, 2022

Unlike Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, retired US Army Colonel MarGregor no longer has any vested interest or axe to grind. As a result his assessment (quoted below) is more balanced and it also echoes what many independent observers and eyewitnesses on the ground in Ukraine say.

The Russians have gone in and systematically contained Ukrainian forces while striving to minimise collateral damage.

If they had gone into Ukraine the way the British and Americans had gone into Iraq, bombing and strafing anything that moved they would have secured their aims much more quickly; and in the process created an economic ruin and a source of potential terror and resentment for years to come. Moreover, unlike Iraq this wouldn’t have been in another continent, as Iraq was for Britain and America, but right on Russia’s very doorstep.

So contrary to what the Western MSM says, it makes sense for Russia to act with some restraint in Ukraine.

So why does Admiral Sir Tony Radakin’s assessment ignore this obvious rationale?

We would suggest it’s because the powers that be want war with Russia and the likes of Admiral Sir Tony Radakin and his US counterparts and other Western allies are working towards that end. That’s why Admiral Radakin, who as Defence Chief of Staff is head of the UK armed forces, uses the interview above as an opportunity to demonise Putin and psych the British people up for war with Russia.

Readers will also note how the MSM has been at pains recently to stress how poorly the Russians are performing in Ukraine. That’s because they don’t want Westerners to be intimidated by Russia’s military prowess. Instead with allegations of how the Russians are targeting civilians, they want us to hate and despise them.

The objective, as far as the likes of Radakin are concerned, is to contain Russia. Just as Britain (at the height of its power) and France (not far removed) had forced Russia to scale back its ambitions in the Black Sea region during the 19th century Crimean War.

The powers that be are hoping for a repeat of that. Trouble is we don’t is going to happen. Instead we envisage a much wider war ensuing, possibly with China and Iran joining Russia in a conflict that could see hundreds of millions, even billions die.

Of course this is exactly what the elite want: massive global depopulation. To this end what Admiral Sir Tony Radakin says is essentially war propaganda and it makes McGregor’s assessment seem that much more balanced and insightful. Ed.

Retired US Army Colonel McGregor on Ukraine

“I think in a few weeks people will learn that the losses of Ukrainian forces are very great, much more than anyone admits. I think there will be a different view of Russian operations. Remember that Russians are not like us. Many of us thought when Russian troops entered Ukraine that they would pass like a sledgehammer. But nothing like that.

“The principal reason was that Putin made it very clear: “when this is over, we will live with the Ukrainians.” His goals were very simple: first, the neutrality of the Ukrainian state; second, the autonomy or independence of the Donbas republics and an agreement that Russian-speaking citizens of Ukraine would not be mistreated and that they would not be second-class citizens, as they were. And finally, the withdrawal of any claims to the Crimea.

“Crimea was never Ukrainian. Going back to Khrushchev and his drinking spree in the 1950s, when he gave Kiev, which by the way was Russian, control of Crimea. These are basic conditions that have never changed.

“But I think something has changed now – and not because of the alleged Ukrainian resistance, although they behave like ISIS and commit terrible atrocities against the Russians, and we cover it very little. I think now Putin listens to Zelensky and his negotiators, but no longer takes them seriously. And now he must reassess what he wants to do, and he may decide to leave everything east of the Dnieper to Russia.

“Much of this was not Ukraine historically, hundreds of years these lands were Mongol, then became Russian, there are Ukrainians there, but a lot of Russians too. I think he might decide he has to do it. We don’t know, but it’s not an unreasonable conclusion, especially if he decides he can’t trust anything Ukrainians do or say.

“Considering Zelensky’s behavior and resistance to any reasonable outcome, maybe he will decide: let Zelensky speak, and we will just continue to do what I just described – take the entire eastern part.

“But there is another side to the situation and it is very dangerous: this constant flow of military equipment coming mainly from Poland. And I wouldn’t be surprised if he did something to stop it. He was firing missiles at places where he knew we were training Ukrainian forces, where we could have operations that blamed Russia, as we did in Syria.

“They have made it clear that they will not tolerate these shipments to opponents in Ukraine. And it is very dangerous because it comes close to the borders of NATO, and we can see there what was not planned, some incident, and then we will see that the war has expanded. It would be a disaster.”

 

Source