The Complete Destruction of Ukraine is Unavoidable

by



United States and worldwide Geopolitics analysis.
Russia Ukraine conflict latest news update with Colonel Douglas Macgregor.

Interview with Andrew Napolitano, recorded the day before publishing.

The Land of the Stupids: https://youtu.be/VuF0wj_Ads8

source

48 thoughts on “The Complete Destruction of Ukraine is Unavoidable”

  4. can someone tell me why this guy is flat out lying? only watched the first 3 min:

    1: "Biden renounced the essentially the no first-use approach of his predecessor"

    thats bs:

    The number of targets in the nuclear war plans has been reduced since the mid-1990s, but the United States and Russia maintain their strategic forces on a “launch under attack” posture, and U.S. presidents have all refused to rule out the potential use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear threats.

    And then this:

    2: "In June he reiterated the policy that under no circumstances would the Russians employ nuclear weapons unless they were attacked by a power that used nuclear weapons against them"

    Also bs:

    The Russian nuclear weapons use policy is similar to the U.S. policy. It states that Russia “reserves the right to use nuclear weapons,” including when Moscow is acting “in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.” (See ACT, July/August 2020.)

    Reply

  5. 9:14. If Russia has amassed over 500 thousand troops to undergo a massive strike on Ukraine, what's being done to execute civilian evacuation? Is anything being done to this effect?

    Reply

  8. More nonsense from this guy 🤣 all his predictions have been wrong, he's been pretty much repeating what the russian propaganda has been saying. Which by the way is a big indicator of either stupidity or being on putin's hook. But whatever, let him talk, as long as the ruskies that invade Ukraine keep becoming fertilizers, all is good:)

    Reply

  9. Biden is an idiot! He has no business in this war! The globalists have hijacked the US and are trying to bully the Russians while the American people hate biden , the globalists and the democrats regime! How can a decimated military turned into woke fags with no fuel and no ammunition fight the Russian army! The US government has become the new wannabe nazi empire yet has made an enemy of its own people, the Russians and half of Europe! Biden is chasing his tail, he reacts to destructive acts of his so called administration with stupidity and malice. Biden does not know what he is doing and is too small of mind to deal with issues as president of the USA!

    Reply

  11. The destruction of Ukraine 🇺🇦 is so unavoidable that Putin called off his press conference for the 1st time time in 10 yrs to avoid questions about his Ukraine 🇺🇦 fiasco. History telks us there were revolutions in Russia 🇷🇺 after the defeat to the Japanese, the defeats and casualties in WW1 and the defeat in Afghanistan. There will be a revolution in Russia again before Ukraine 🇺🇦 is defeated.

    Reply

  13. What had turned Judge Napolitano into a ridiculous man that he's now? What turned him into like Douglas Macgregor Russian apologist? Money? Or hatred for the Dems or Joe Biden? They must have a strong reason for what they are doing.

    Reply

  14. Ukraine never can defeat Russia.Never. No matter how much weapon getting from America and West. America and EU can’t get involved directly in War with Russia. Also not possible. If that happens this Planet completely going to be destroyed. So this War is business War. Money making War . The most heaviest losses will take Ukraine.

    Reply

  22. I'm fascinated that there are a few dogged commentators who consistently suggest the war is entirely going in Russia's favour, yet ignore them having to call up convicted criminals to fight with the Wagner Group or Chechen extremists; hardly from a position of strength? Why would a Colonel (respect BTW) have greater operational insight that all the many NATO Generals who say the polar opposite (e.g. Gen David Patreaus)?

    Reply

  24. Not even one minute in, and "return to the pre-February 24th borders" is errantly conflated with "totally out of Ukraine". Crimea is Ukraine, all of Donetsk is Ukraine, and all of Luhansk is Ukraine.

    Reply

  27. It is remarkable that an American colonel of dignity celebrates the old Soviet idea of ​​the right to hegemony over parts of Europe. Very worrying. Negotiations? INDEED? with the devil!

    Reply

  29. this war has been planned for a long time. That traitor, John McCain was saying bring on the Ruskies we have weapons we have not used yet.. It's all BS. Lets hope we can get the American people wake up and stop electing jerks like Biden, Obama, Clinton and Bush…. Trump isn't much better. they all suck…. We needed Ron Paul in the worst way. I pray we have time to correct this nation before God's judgment comes.

    Reply

  31. This guy's not on board, and he's not a fan of incinerating (or freezing) all organised life on this planet so that one deeply corrupt regime can control a part of the world that I give zero (expletive deleted) about, and not that other regime that's somehow my enemy because reasons. Thus, the good colonel is an obvious transphobic racist misogynistic anti-Semite. Obviously.

    Reply

  32. Hmmm…I must admit that this is interesting, although most if not all the Colonel is saying goes against the info on most aspects that I've heard before. It definitively provides a counterbalance.
    It is hard indeed to judge where the truth really lies…even though I can't say that what he said really got me convinced. I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in 'the middle', so to speak – as it usually does. For ex.:
    I do not believe that Putin intended to 'invade the whole of Ukraine either' – BUT rather, invade Kiev to get Zelensky out of the way and install a puppet-government of his own choosing. (Which would of course get pretty much the same 'effect' – at least when concerning Russia)
    Although I heavily disagree with that that initial 'invasion-force' operated with any 'rules' of not damaging civilian infrastructure and don't go after civilians…since when the Russian armed forces was forced to withdraw there were lots of evidence to the contrary – lots of civilian houses were levelled, and lots of civilians were killed (even elderly, women and children)- and also showed that many of them had been tortured before that. (Yes – the corpses left by the Russians in Bucha [and other places] clearly showed that they had been tortured and killed several days before the Russian withdrew. Also several survivors have come forward that have said that already at the very first day – the Russian were shooting at and killing civilians trying to flee in their cars. And even though they fired at everyone, they particularly seemed to have 'enjoyed' shooting at cars with 'signs' that there were children there. And yes again – this has been confirmed by satellite-imigary as well.).
    I also have to admit that this is the very first time that I've heard anything about that it was weapons provided by NATO that struck the airfields in Russia. I was under the impression that that was the work of modified Soviet 'spy-drones'…and, I've 'even' heard that it was pretty much proven that this was the case at least at one of the sites.

    Well, when thinking of it I disagree with pretty much everything he said. EXCEPT for the numbers of troops and materiel that the Russians have amassed, and how that matches up against the current Ukrainian forces and materiel…and also the respective 'capabilities' of both of the two armies. That is indeed hard to know – especially for a civilian like myself.

    Reply

  36. Somebody really worthwhile listening to is Ben Hodges.
    What a vast difference of the state of mind.
    Yeah, i guess this channel has an audience, likely the same that was part of January 6th.
    Really sad.

    Reply

  37. Duog, wouldn't first strike straight forfeit u.s. article 5 protection thus making them a sitting duck? Also, what keeps the u.s. navy in the adriatic? Serbian air defence complexes would alert the Russian's of any attempt. Wouldn't logic dictate to get as close to the target as possible? Why is the u.s. navy not in the black sea if projection of power is the goal? Is something stopping it? And if so, how can anyone take the seriously the placement of the u.s. navy in the adriatic as power projection on Russia? Why not just put fishing boat transponders on the u.s. navy and cruse up the Volga if the confidence is so high that Russia is really a midget?

    Do you think that the Russian nuclear armed submarine the Belgrade would hide behind Cuba if it wanted to strike Washington? I would think they would roll right up to the east coast as to shorten the strikes fly time and thus reducing u.s. detection and reaction time. That why I ask, why not place the u.s. navy in the black sea if power project is the true purpose? Sounds like media optics to me.

    Lastly, if anyone is impressed with the drone strikes in Russia that landed "200 miles" from the Kremlin, which required billions of dollars of aid, bunch of spys and satellite assets to accomplish just to make little damage to some air fields we have to stop and appreciate what some guy in a cave in Afghanistan accomplish with just a walky-talky, no satellite assets, no spys, and on a shoe string buget în striking u.s. most iconic financial infrastructure located in new York and a direct strike on the pentagon, the very nervous system of u.s. military operations and not "200 miles" away from the white house but more like 2 minutes. Really made a mockery of the famed NORAD system didn't it. I wounder what the Russian's would do as they have much more than the random guy in the cave with a walky-talky. But then again, the Russian's have exposed as having a weak air defence but NORAD couldn't stop slow and cumbersome jumbo jets from smacking the world trade center.

    Reply

  38. When you said SAS responsible for the bridge in creameia, I conclude that you guys are just air talking and a Putin troll. The aggressor here is Putin and his soldiers. The Russian people are running away from this Putin nonsense just like we have seen on Russia exit boarders. Here you and your guest are calling Putin a victim of US foreign policy, very unknowledgeable, or you know what it is but talking the opposite. US foreign policy is there to deter a Putin who is killing families in Ukraine. He has been doing it all his life, and the latest was on the African continent using his Wagner group and Syria where even a Magot did not survive. Putin is the bully and he must be stopped. Tell him him to go back to his home. We, we don't want him on our African continent with his AK-47 s. The man is killing us just like in Ukraine. We don't want him here.

    Reply

  39. Totally full of shit.
    putin loves you, but no spin you give can stop what is happening. Terror and corruption cannot keep up with heart and logistics:
    1. The Ukrainians will never stop fighting
    2. The military and humanitarian aid will continue to pour in
    3. The russian economy will continue to collapse
    Slava 🇺🇦

    Reply

Leave a Comment