In the meantime, all this hype about the Russian mercenary company Wagner as an archaic, brutal symbol of Asian despotism is getting on my nerves. It is also nonsense to say that Putin is currently  Bomber Harris. The civilian population of western Ukraine is largely spared. The next escalation stage is a war of air strikes against critical infrastructure and power plants, which is intended to indirectly break the Ukrainians‘ will to fight. Not harmless or trivial, but at the moment it’s not primarily bombing civilian centers and the population, especially since the number of dead and wounded is marginal compared to Iraq, Afghanistan and Bomber Harris. It is true that Wagner is a very brutal group, but not so lonely, unique and invincible. Neither Kadyrov. A Muslim-despotic butcher and bloodthirsty loudmouth who sees this title as an honor and now has to sacrifice his underage sons in order to be able to survive at all within this orgy of violence hierarchy. Somehow, Wagner and Kadyrov and the western, especially Russian media coverage about it is exotic and as sensational as the reports about Putin’s biker gang Nightwolves as the last symbolic refuge of angry white man, but let’s not pretend that the USA doesn’t have militarism, macho posturing, loads of guys like that in the US, as if the 2003 Iraq war wasn’t just a simikar criminal, illegal war of aggression with lots of war crimes and waves of refugees and destruction of the core part of the Middle East that Bush jr. should be charded in  Den Hagg just as much as Putin should now because of his war of aggression in Ukraine. Conversely and  especially since Ukraine is reminiscent of the Krajjna offensive led by the US security company MPRI in Croatia in the 1990s and the ethnic cleansing of the Serbs.Asreading recommendation:

Myths about War Keynesianism, mercenaries and private security companies versus jihadists

Former Russia expert and Putin supporter Rahr says the Dnieper River is a physically impassable force that Ukrainians cannot cross. That might be correct, as long as the Ukrainians didn’t fire on the opposite bank and thus the 300,000 reluctant Russian conscripts who might also desert, and the West didn’t provide pontoon bridges, armored bridge tanks and boats, which seems rather unlikely, since there aren’t any offensive weapons in the meantime to be discussed further, but above all the anti-aircraft defense. So my prognosis apart from all Loden coat squadron: Putin. will settle down on the Dnieper, insofar as he can maintain all the new troops, hope for a turnaround in the midterm elections, hope for a ceasefire proposal from the USA. Especially since it doesn’t just seem to be Trump, but the Republicans. Trench warfare, gas winters in Europe and midterm elections in the US is Putin’s goal and last hope. Maybe next year a NATO conflict between Greece and Erdogan. And then a United States that, in such a case, will not pound a US militray base  into the rest of Ukraine as an obstacle to Russian expansion, but will allow it to do so under the title of neutral Ukraine.

But it remains to be seen whether Putin’s calculations will pay off. But the question is whether the US, Ukraine and the West will only rely on arms deliveries, military matters in the narrow sense, accept the geographic lines of a river, or turn the tables and resort to other means. If Putin wants to send 300,000 mostly forcibly recruited Russians to the Donbass, especially as many from remote or minority areas, and now want to use martial law to forcibly recruit the local population of the Donbass, two questions arise. First; To what extent can the coercion be exercised physically and organizationally by increasingly thinned-out repressive personnel, especially since the „Russian world“ ideology is no longer common sense that could coerce these masses. Secondly, one should consider whether the western side should not actively organize the dismantling of armed forces, but above all the formation of Russian and East Ukrainian soldiers‘ councils, as the Reichswehr did with Lenin at the time – under today’s conditions, of course. Then the Dnieper could no longer be an insurmountable physical border – maybe with a little help from Elon Musk’s Starlink.

It would also have a different content and form of appearance, insofar as one does not look at it separately or identically, but as a dialectical contrast that conditions one another and at the same time develops on ever higher levels. Specifically: How would it be or what would it look like if the USA, the West and also Germany, as the next-to-the-last-one, would no longer deliver weapons to Ukraine or only deliver anti-aircraft systems. Not even weapon systems that shoot across the supposedly absolute border/frontier/front to the other shore of the „Russian world“ or beyond. Pontoon bridges. bridge-laying tanks, inflatable boats and combat divers maybe, but only as ring exchange. Especially since in winter everything is iced over again and the river may not be so unbridgeable and maybe a signal for a new offensive. Perhaps Putin is calculating in the shorter term. However, a new attempted synthesis between all these Loden coat squadron views might be synthesalized. As far as the formation of soldiers‘ councils in the sense of Reichswehr-Lenin or in a modernized form is concerned, the content and narrative of the Russian world would change abruptly: What if not the USA- Selensky-Ukraine start a new offensive militarily, but the conscripted Russians, who don’t want any more war without external pressure, maybe wait another 2 weeks, well, maybe shoot, which will increasingly and suddenly be oppressed from their suppression apparatus, yes, perhaps soldiers‘ councils will rebel against the political and usual leadership, in Ukraine their commanders and oppressors, not immediately, but then all the more violently and probably even more so when Russians loyal to Putin- Russia,  Henleins of Russian origin from the then annexed by referendum and the immediately pushed under martial law parts of the Donbass against forcibly recruited Russians, some Russian anti- Putin soldiers, unknown people who had already been in a Friendship Society with Ukrainians („My daughter wants to study at Harvard“), exile Donbass dissidents who said they were not about the status of a coal worker and could not become their own oligarch, but that could be changed, but at least their people seem to think so too and Russia First and Ukraine First is such a consideration, no more Russian Federation, nation state Russia and with it the birth of the US-war-born Ukrainian nation state or just vice versa. In any case, one thing to keep in mind: Before you think about an offensive from the outside and militarily, you should also think about an offensive from the inside using classic means of destroying the military strength of your opponent as the old German military used Lenin.

Well, maybe it’s also wrong in that there are no more politically disciplined organizations like the Bolsheviks and a charismatic, disciplined Lenin. Or could that be Navalny? Are there only ironclad historical tendencies and laws in which apparently interchangeable powerful people are always just executors of world-historical world spirits and their materialization, or do men make history, the individual, our life coach? As I Who has a hcell phone, has the power. aid: limited number of potential leaders and trouble makers, who prevails by exploiting the bad situation, especially whether he then has a strategy that he can be secured in terms of power politics or just something destructive  emerges as a short-term angry citizen leader, who insofar as he doesn’t want a totalitarian takeover of power, but focuses on  the principle of proportionality between ends and means. However, when organizing such uprisings, one has to take a number of factors into account and also see what one does not want to repeat. First of all: the reference to the German military-Lenin axis does not mean that one then wants to have 70 years of communism or something similar again, but the emphasis on strategy, organization and discipline is what is most lacking these days. Probably also the reason why the Arab Spring, which became an Islamist winter/hot summer as collateral damage und result of the Twitter revolutionaries- hedonistic liberatarians and egoshooters. Peter Scholl Latour once commented on the Arab Spring as follows; „Power doesn’t come from the barrel ofcellphones, but from the barrel of the guns.“ That’s not true either, since „lead from behind“master mind and Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama provided enough guns in Syria via the arms deliveries from the regional states of Turkey, Gulf States, Saudi Arabia and Qatar for the respective Islamist looting militias. With even more disastrous results.Who has a cell phone has the power. especially by social networks and Facebook-likes. And Instagramm and Tiktok won´t make it much better. In this sense, it is also justified why the mass protests in Iran are not a revolution, but more oversized  mass demonstrations. As long as the oil workers don’t call for a general strike, the bazaar traders don’t call for a bazaar strike, and the military and the clergy don’t split, it won’t be a revolution, even if it’s a bit more blatant and radical. Or as Israel’s Jerusalem Post says: Next time! From all of this one should draw consequences for an offensive from the inside.