Sunday 24th of November 2024
Home » Blogs » Gus Leonisky's blog

Jetzt wissen wir, warum die Kanzlerin sich weigert, Taurus-Raketen zu schicken – sie werden nicht funktionieren...

On February 19, 2024, a conversation took place among Grafe (department head for operations and exercises at the Air Force Forces Command of the Bundeswehr), Gerhartz (Bundeswehr Air Force Inspector), Fenske and Frohstedte (employees of the Air Operations Command within the Space Operations Center of the Bundeswehr).

Earlier in the day, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT and Rossiya Segodnya, Sputnik's parent media group, published the text of a conversation among high-ranking Bundeswehr representatives discussing the attack on the Crimean Bridge with Taurus missiles and other issues. Full audio is here and full transcript is below.

Gerhartz: Greetings, everyone! Grafe, are you currently in Singapore?

Grafe: Yes.

Gerhartz: Good. We need to verify the information. As you've probably heard, Defense Minister Pistorius intends to carefully consider the issue of supplying Taurus missiles to Ukraine. We have a meeting scheduled with him. We need to discuss everything so that we can start working on it. So far, I don't see any indication of when these deliveries will start. The Chancellor never told him, "I want the information now, and tomorrow morning we'll make the decision." I haven't heard anything like that. On the contrary, Pistorius is evaluating all this ongoing discussion. Nobody knows why the Federal Chancellor is blocking these deliveries. Of course, the most incredible rumors are going around. For example, yesterday a journalist, who is very close to the Chancellor, called me. She heard somewhere in Munich that the Taurus missiles would not work. I asked her who told her that. She replied that someone in a military uniform did. Of course, this is a low-level source of information, but the journalist clung to these words and now wants to make it into a piece of news with a headline like: "Now we know why the Chancellor refuses to send Taurus missiles – they won't work." All this is nonsense. Such topics are only available to a limited circle of people. However, we see what kind of garbage is spreading in the meantime. I want to coordinate this issue with you so that we don't move in the wrong direction. Firstly, I have some questions for Frohstedte and Fenske. Has anyone spoken to you about this? Did Freyding approach you?

Frohstedte: No. I only spoke to Grafe.

Fenske: Same here, I only spoke to Grafe.

Gerhartz: He might reach out to you later. I might have to participate in budget committee hearings because there are issues related to the escalating costs of upgrading the F-35 in Büchel. I have already passed my recommendations through Frank that we have slides to visualize the material. We showed him a draft presentation where Taurus missiles were mounted on a Tornado carrier or other carrier required by the mission. However, I can hardly imagine that. Remember, it's a half-hour meeting, so don't prepare a 30-slide presentation. The report should be brief. We need to show what the missile can do and how it can be used. We need to consider the consequences if we make a political decision to transfer missiles as aid to Ukraine. I would appreciate it if you could inform me not only about the problems we have, but also on how we can solve them. For example, if we’re talking about delivery methods... I know how the English do it. They always transport them on Ridgback armored vehicles. They have several people on-site. The French don't do it that way. They deliver Q7s to Ukraine with Scalp missiles. Storm Shadows and Scalps have similar technical specifications for their installation. How are we going to solve this problem? Are we going to transfer MBDA missiles to them using Ridgbacks? Will one of our people be posted to MBDA? Grafe, report to us on our position on this issue. Fenske and Frohstedte, Gentlemen, report on how you see the situation.

Grafe: I'll start with the most sensitive issues, with the existing criticism regarding the deliveries. Discussions are taking place almost everywhere. There are several key aspects here. Firstly, it's about the delivery timelines. If the Chancellor decides now that we should deliver missiles, they will be transferred from the Bundeswehr. Fine, but they will only be ready for use in eight months. Secondly, we cannot shorten the time. Because if we do, there might be an error in its use, the missile might hit a kindergarten, and there will be civilian casualties again. These aspects need to be considered. It must be noted in the negotiations that without the manufacturer, we cannot do anything. They can equip, rearm, and deliver the initial missiles. We can speed up production a bit, but we shouldn't wait until 20 units have accumulated. We can deliver them in batches of five. The delivery time of these missiles directly depends on the industry. Who will pay for this? Another question to consider is which weapon systems will these missiles be mounted on? And, how should the interaction between the company and Ukraine be maintained? Is there already some form of integration established?

Gerhartz: I don't think so. Because the manufacturer, TSG, stated that, they can solve this problem within six months, whether it's a Sukhoi aircraft or an F-16.

Grafe: If the Federal Chancellor decides to go for this, there must be an understanding that it will take six months just for the production of mounts. Thirdly, theoretically, the question of training may concern us. I've already mentioned that we cooperate with the missile manufacturer. They handle the maintenance training, and we handle the tactical application. This takes about three to four months. This part of the training can take place in Germany. When delivering the initial missiles, we need to make quick decisions regarding the mounts and training. We may have to turn to the British for these matters and use their know-how. We can provide them with databases, satellite images, and planning stations. Apart from the delivery of the missiles themselves, which we have, everything else can be provided by the industry or the IABG.

Gerhartz: We need to consider that they can use aircraft with mounts for both Taurus and Storm Shadow missiles. The British have been there and outfitted aircraft. There is not much difference between the systems, they can be used for Taurus as well. I can talk about the experience of using the Patriot system. Our experts initially also tallied up long timeframes, but they managed to do it within a few weeks. They managed to get everything up and running so quickly and in so much quantity that our staff said, "Wow. We didn't expect that." We are currently fighting a war that uses much more modern technology than our good old Luftwaffe. This all suggests that when we plan deadlines, we shouldn't go overboard with them. And now, Fenske and Frohstedte, Gentlemen, I would like to hear your opinion on possible deliveries to Ukraine.

Fenske: I would like to focus on the question of training. We have already looked into this, and if we deal with personnel who already have relevant training and will undergo training concurrently, it would only take approximately three weeks for them to become familiar with the equipment and then proceed directly to Air Force training, which would last about four weeks. Thus, it is much less than 12 weeks. However, this is all under the assumption that the personnel meet the necessary qualifications, training can be conducted without the need for translators, and a few other conditions are met. We have already engaged in discussions with Mrs. Friedberger regarding this matter. If we are talking about combat deployment, then in that case, de facto, we will be advised to support at least the initial group. Planning for this undertaking has proven to be challenging; it took approximately a year to train our personnel initially, and we are now aiming to reduce this timeframe to just ten weeks. Moreover, there is the added concern of ensuring they are capable of handling off-road driving in an F1 car. One possible option is to provide scheduled technical support; theoretically, this can be done from Büchel provided secure communication with Ukraine is established. If this were available, then further planning could be carried out. This is the main scenario at least - to provide full manufacturer support, support through the user support service, which will solve software problems. Basically, it's the same as we have in Germany.

Gerhartz: Hold on a moment. I understand what you're saying. Politicians might be concerned about the direct closed connection between Büchel and Ukraine, which could imply direct involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. But in that case, we can say that information exchange is going to take place through MBDA, and we'll send one or two of our specialists to Schröbenhausen. Of course, this is cunning, but from a political standpoint, it probably looks different. If the information exchange goes through the manufacturer, then it has nothing to do with us.

Fenske: The question will arise as to where the information goes. If we're talking about information on target engagement, ideally including satellite images providing maximum accuracy of up to three meters, then we must first process them in Büchel. I think regardless of this, we can somehow organize an information exchange between Büchel and Schröbenhausen, or we can explore the possibility of transmitting information to Poland, doing it where it's accessible by car. This matter needs to be examined more closely; options will surely emerge If we are supported, in the worst case scenario we can even travel by car, which will reduce the reaction time. Of course, we won't be able to react within an hour because we'll need to give our consent. In the very best case, only six hours after receiving the information will the planes be able to execute an order. For hitting specific targets, an accuracy of more than three meters is sufficient, but if target refinement is necessary, we’ll need to work with satellite images that allow for modeling. And then the reaction time can be up to 12 hours. It all depends on the target. I haven't studied this issue in detail, but I believe such an option is possible. We just need to figure out how to organize information transmission.

Gerhartz: Do you think we can hope that Ukraine will be able to do everything on its own? After all, it's known that there are numerous people there in civilian attire who speak with an American accent. So it's quite possible that soon they'll be able to use everything themselves, right? After all, they have all the satellite images.

Fenske: Yes, they get them from us. I would also like to touch on air defense issues briefly. We need to seriously consider having equipment in Kiev to receive information from IABG and NDK. We must ensure this is provided to them, which is why I have to fly there on February 21. It is crucial that we plan everything meticulously, unlike what happened with the Storm Shadows where we failed to plan out checkpoints properly. We need to think about how to fly around or fly below the radar coverage sector. If everything is prepared, the training will be more effective. And then we can revisit the question of the number of missiles. If we give them 50, they will be used up very quickly.

Gerhartz: Exactly, it won't change the course of military actions. That's why we don't want to hand them all over. And not all at once. Perhaps 50 in the first batch, then maybe another batch of 50 missiles. It's perfectly clear, but that’s all big politics. I suppose that's what it's really about. I've learned from my French and British colleagues that in reality, with these Storm Shadow and Scalp missiles, it's the same as with the Winchester rifles—they might ask, "Why should we supply the next batch of missiles when we've already supplied them? Let Germany do it now." Perhaps, Mr. Frohstedte wants to say something on this matter?

Frohstedte: Allow me to add a bit of pragmatism. I want to share my thoughts on the Storm Shadow’s characteristics. Regarding air defense, flight time, flight altitude, and so on, I've come to the conclusion that there are two interesting targets—the bridge to the east and the ammunition depots, which are higher up. The [Crimean] bridge to the east is difficult to reach, it's a relatively small target, but the Taurus can do it, and it can also strike the ammunition depots. Considering all this and comparing it with how much the Storm Shadows and HIMARS have been used, I have a question: "Is our target the bridge or the military depots?" Is it achievable with the current shortcomings that the REDs and Patriots have? And I've come to the conclusion that the limiting factor is that they usually only have 24 shells...

Gerhartz: That's clear.

Frohstedte: It makes sense to involve Ukraine in the process. It'll take a week. I think it's advisable to consider task planning and centralized planning. Task planning in our unit takes two weeks, but if there's interest, it can be done faster. If we're considering the bridge, then I believe Taurus is insufficient, and we need to have an understanding of how it can work, and for that, we need satellite data. I don't know if we can prepare the Ukrainians for such a task in a short time, in a month, for instance. What would a Taurus attack on the bridge look like? From an operational perspective, I can't assess how quickly the Ukrainians will learn to plan such actions and how quickly integration will occur. But since we're talking about the bridge and military bases, I understand they want to seize them as soon as possible.

Fenske: I would like to add something regarding the destruction of the bridge. We've been intensely studying this issue, and unfortunately, we've come to the conclusion that due to its size, the bridge is akin to a runway. Therefore, it may require more than 10, or even 20 missiles.

Gerhartz: There's an opinion that the Taurus can achieve this if the French Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft is used.

Fenske: They would only be able to create a hole and damage the bridge. And before making important statements, we ourselves...

Frohstedte: I'm not advocating for the idea of targeting the bridge; I pragmatically want to understand what they want. And what we need to teach them, so it turns out that when planning these operations, we will need to indicate the main points on the images. They will have targets, but it's important to consider that when working on smaller targets, planning needs to be more meticulous, rather than just analyzing pictures on the computer. When targets are confirmed, it's simpler, and less time will be spent on planning.

Gerhartz: We all know they want to destroy the bridge, which ultimately signifies how it's guarded—not only because of its military-strategic importance but also its political significance. Even though they have a ground corridor now. There are certain concerns if we have direct communication with the Ukrainian armed forces. So the question arises: can we use such a ruse and assign our people to MBDA? Thus, direct communication with Ukraine will only be through MBDA, which is much better than if such communication exists with our Air Force.

Grefe: Gerhartz, it doesn't matter. We have to make sure that from the very beginning there is no language that makes us a party to the conflict. I'm exaggerating a bit, of course, but if we tell the minister now that we are going to plan meetings and travel by car from Poland so that no one notices, that's already participation, and we won't do that. If we're talking about the manufacturer, the first thing to ask is whether MBDA can do it. It doesn't matter if our people will then deal with it in Büchel or in Schröbenhausen—it still means involvement. And I don't think we should do that. From the very beginning, we defined this as a key element of the "red line," so we'll participate in the training. Let's say we'll prepare a "roadmap." The training process needs to be divided into parts. The long track will take four months, where we'll thoroughly train them, including practicing scenarios with the bridge. The short track will be two weeks so that they can use the missiles as soon as possible. If they are already trained, then we'll ask the British if they are ready to take over at this stage. I believe these actions will be the right ones—just imagine if the press finds out that our people are in Schröbenhausen or that we're driving somewhere in Poland! I find such an option to be unacceptable.

Gerhartz: If such a political decision is made, we must say that the Ukrainians should come to us. First and foremost, we need to know whether such a political decision constitutes direct involvement in task planning. In that case, the training will take a bit longer, and they will be able to tackle more complex tasks, possibly with some experience and high-tech equipment already in use. If there's a possibility to avoid direct involvement, we can't participate in task planning, do it in Büchel, and then forward it to them—that's a "red line" for Germany. We can train them for two months; they won't learn everything, but they'll learn something. We just need to ensure they can process all the information and work with all the parameters.

Grefe: Zeppel said we can create both an extended and a brief "roadmap." The goal is to get a quick result. And if the initial task is to hit ammunition depots rather than complex objects like bridges, then we can proceed with an abbreviated program and get results quickly. As for information from IABG, I don't see this as a critical issue since they are not tied down to a specific location; they must conduct reconnaissance themselves. It's clear that efficiency depends on this. This is what we discussed regarding missile delivery. It's not decided yet, but that's the plan for now.

Gerhartz: And this will be the main point. There are ammunition depots where short-term preparation won't be possible due to very active air defense. We'll need to seriously look into it. I believe that our people will find a solution. We just need to be allowed to try first so that we can provide better political advice. We need to prepare better so as not to fail because, for example, the KSA may not have an accurate idea of where the air defense systems actually are. The Ukrainians have this information, and we have data from the radars. But if we're talking about precise planning, we need to know where the radars are installed and where the stationary installations are, and how to bypass them. This will allow us to develop a more accurate plan. We have a superb means, and if we have precise coordinates, we can apply it accurately. But there's no basis to say we can't do this. There's a certain threshold where the "red line" politically passes, there's a "long" and "short" path, and there are differences in terms of utilizing the full potential, which the Ukrainians will be able to utilize better over time as they practice and continually work on it. Personally, I don't think I need to be present at the meeting. It's important for us to give a clear-headed assessment and not add fuel to the fire like others do by supplying Storm Shadow and Scalp missiles.

Grefe: The longer they take to make a decision, the longer it will take us to implement it. We need to break everything down into stages. Start with the simple first, and then move on to the complex. Or we can ask the British if they can support us at the initial stage, and have them take on the planning issues? We should facilitate whatever falls within our area of responsibility. Developing mounts for missiles is not our task; Ukraine should resolve this with the manufacturers on their own.

Gerhartz: Right now, we wouldn't want to encounter problems with the budget committee. It could make it impossible to start construction work at the airbase in Büchel in 2024. Right now, every day counts when it comes to the program.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20240301/full-transcript-of-german-top-military-officials-leaked-plot-to-attack-crimean-bridge-1117078481.html

 

GUSNOTE: GUS HAS NO WAY TO VERIFY THE CONVERSATION OR THE INFORMATION... BUT HAD THIS EXCHANGE HAPPENED IT IS LIKELY THE CONCEPT CAME FROM HIGHER UP.... 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.

leckt wie ein Sieb.....

German Chancellor Scholz stands accused of handing Russia a propaganda coup in order to smooth over his own political difficulties as he claims the presence of British and French soldiers aiding Ukrainian forces.

Scholz has been accused of abusing intelligence and being a bad ally by angry NATO politicians after his remarks about the level of involvement he claims there is of the British and French in the deployment of the Storm Shadow / SCALP cruise missiles they have given to Ukraine, and which have been deployed with devastating effect.

Ukraine continues to demand Germany hand over its stock of Taurus bunker-buster cruise missiles to help it fight Russia. Indeed, the powerful and long-range weapon which Berlin has proven resistant to supply has been the subject of debate in Germany dragging on now for several months. Chancellor Olaf Scholz insists providing the weapon, which has the endurance to strike deep into Russian areas would represent an irresponsible escalation of the war and make Germany a party to the conflict in a way its previous donations of weapon systems and ammunition had not.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2024/03/01/germany-inadvertently-reveals-the-uk-has-soldiers-in-ukraine/

 

Berlin’s first reaction to Friday’s revelations that several German generals discussed helping Ukraine attack Russia was to launch an investigation into how the recording got out.

RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan first published a transcript of the conversation between senior Luftwaffe officers discussing the matter, followed by a 38-minute audio recording.

“We are checking whether communications within the Air Force were intercepted,” a spokesperson for the German Ministry of Defense told the outlet Bild. “We cannot say anything about the content of the communications that were apparently intercepted.”

The Federal Office for Military Counterintelligence (BAMAD) has “initiated all necessary measures,” the ministry said in response to an inquiry from the state news agency DPA.

Meanwhile, the Bundeswehr has also resorted to censorship. Multiple accounts on X (formerly Twitter) that distributed the recording were blocked in Germany as of Friday evening.

READ MORE:

https://www.rt.com/news/593569-germany-crimea-leak-probe/

 

THE INFORMATION FROM RUSSIA WAS TRUE.....

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

macronichination.....

The French government is mulling sending a small military force directly into Ukraine to serve as instructors for Kiev’s Armed Forces and as a “deterrent” to Moscow, newspaper Le Monde reported on Friday, citing its sources.

The paper did not disclose the number of French military ‘instructors’ that could potentially be authorized to cross into Ukrainian territory but reported that their ranks could include some “conventional units.”

According to Le Monde, France’s Special Forces were also involved in training Ukrainian soldiers in neighboring Poland and in escorting the nation’s arms deliveries to Kiev. They have, however, always “stopped at the Ukrainian border,” the outlet added. 

The training France would like to provide to Ukrainians “on the ground” includes handling air defense systems, Friday’s report said. Kiev’s surface-to-air weapons installations are frequently targeted by Russian forces, it explained, adding that the “presence of French soldiers or [those] of other nations would potentially protect certain areas of the Ukrainian territory.”

The French government allegedly views such a troop deployment as a way of posing a “strategic dilemma” for Moscow, the paper said, adding that it could “constrain” Russia’s targeting and strike capabilities. In particular, it may prove to be “essential” ahead of the arrival of US-made F-16 fighter jets, scheduled to take place later this year, the French daily added.

 

So far, France has denied that any of its troops have been present in Ukraine during the conflict, the media outlet said. French President Emmanuel Macron sparked controversy on Monday when he told journalists that a potential NATO troop deployment to Ukraine could not be ruled out in the future.

“There’s no consensus today to send, in an official manner, troops on the ground,” he said. “In terms of dynamics, we cannot exclude anything. We will do everything necessary to prevent Russia from winning this war.”

Macron’s comments prompted other members of the US-led bloc, including the US, UK, Germany and Italy, to clarify that they had no such plans. The French president’s remarks were seemingly supported by two Baltic nations – Estonia and Lithuania – who also said that such a move could not be ruled out.

Moscow warned in response that deploying NATO forces to Ukraine would make a direct conflict between Russia and the military bloc inevitable. On Friday, French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejourne denied that Paris was planning to send any combat units to Ukraine, adding that it would do “everything” to avoid a war with Russia.

The French president himself doubled down on his comments on Thursday by saying his words had been “thought through and measured.”

https://www.rt.com/russia/593564-france-troops-ukraine-media/

 

THE FRENCH ARMY IS ALREADY IN UKRAINE AS TOLD TO US BY SARGEANT SHULTZ.... READ ABOVE.... MACRON SEES HIMSELF AS A BETTER NAPOLEON THAN NAPOLEON HIMSELF. BUT MACRON IS MORE STUPID.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

authentik.....

BERLIN (Sputnik) - The German Defense Ministry is concerned that the disclosed recording of confidential army talks on Russia and Ukraine could be part of a wider leak spanning the country's air force and other military divisions, German magazine Der Spiegel reported, citing unnamed sources.

The conversation was held on the WebEx platform which is "relatively easy" to wiretap, the magazine estimated. One of the people in the conversation reportedly dialed in via a mobile phone as they were in Singapore at the time. Both the German armed forces and the defense ministry often hold online talks on the WebEx platform, the report said.

Earlier in the day, German news agency DPA reported that the leaked conversation between German military officers was authentic.

On Friday, Margarita Simonyan, the editor-in-chief of RT and the Rossiya Segodnya media group (Sputnik's parent company), published the text of a conversation among four Bundeswehr representatives discussing a potential attack on the Crimean Bridge with Taurus missiles. The conversation, which took place on February 19, involved Inspector of the German air force Ingo Gerhartz, Brig. Gen. Frank Graefe, head of the operations and exercises department at the air force command in Berlin, and two employees of the air operations center of the Bundeswehr Space Command.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20240302/german-defense-ministry-concerned-about-possibility-of-wider-secret-talks-leak---reports-1117092148.html

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

 

 

a serious matter....

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz described it as "a very serious matter."

"It will now be investigated very carefully, very intensively, and very quickly," Scholz said on Saturday during a visit to Rome.

What else was on the audio 

As aired by Simonyan on Telegram, the audio includes a discussion about whether Taurus cruise missileswould be capable of destroying a bridge, seemingly a reference to the new bridge linking Russian-occupied Crimea to the Russian mainland over the Kerch Strait.

The recording was apparently made from a video conference between four Luftwaffe offices discussing Russia's war in Ukraine.

On the audio leak, they spoke about ways German officers could supply Ukrainians with targeting information without appearing to be directly involved in the conflict with Russia.

The clip also contains reference to the British having "a few people on the ground" in connection with the deployment of their Storm Shadow cruise missiles delivered to Ukraine. 

German outlet Der Spiegel reported that the virtual meeting did not take place via a secure line, but via the Webex platform.

German lawmakers alarmed

"If this story turns out to be true, it would be a highly problematic incident," Konstantin von Notz, the chairman of the Bundestag's parliamentary oversight committee, told broadcast network Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland.

The Green party politician said it should be determined "whether this is a one-off incident or a structural safety problem." 

Roderich Kiesewetter, of the center-right Christian Democratic Union and deputy chairman of the Bundestag's parliamentary oversight committee said it seemed that Russia had leaked the conversation to put pressure Germany not to supply Taurus missiles to Ukraine.

"A number of other conversations will certainly have been intercepted and may be leaked at a later date for Russia's benefit," he told broadcaster ZDF. 

Scholz has so far refused to send the Taurus missiles to Ukraine. 

Earlier this week, he said the missiles range and the likely need for assistance from German Bundeswehr troops was problematic and could be construed as direct or indirect participation in the war.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova demanded that Germany "promptly" provide an explanation and claimed the audio was evidence of a "hybrid war" the West was waging on Russia.  

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-confirms-bugging-of-bundeswehr-ukraine-war-talks/a-68424687

 

FOR THE GERMAN COMMANDANTUR, THE "SERIOUS MATTER" IS NOT THAT THE GERMANS WERE PLANNING CRAP AND SPILLED THE BEANS ABOUT THE ENGLISH ARMY IN UKRAINE, BUT WAS ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE RUSSIANS FOUND OUT ABOUT IT....

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW......

 

 

destabilisation....

Putin seeks to 'destabilise' Germany with wiretap leak, defence minister says
Germany on Sunday accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of trying to sow disunity with the wiretap leak of a confidential German army discussion on the Ukraine war, at a time when Berlin is under pressure to supply the Taurus missile to Kyiv.

A 38-minute recording of the talks was posted online late Friday on Russian social media, with the participants discussing the possible use of German-made Taurus missiles and their potential impact.

The discussions also covered the use of long-range missiles provided to Kyiv by France and Britain.

"It is about using this recording to destabilise and unsettle us," said German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius, adding that he "hoped that Putin will not succeed".

"It is part of an information war that Putin is carrying out," he added.

Pistorius said he was not aware of any further leaks at the army.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240303-putin-seeks-to-destablise-germany-with-wiretap-leak-defence-minister-says

 

IT'S NOT PUTIN WHO TRIES TO DESTABILISE GERMANY BUT GERMANY THAT DOES IT TO ITSELF WHILE TRYING TO DESTABILISE RUSSIA... GET REAL... AND I HAVE NEWS FOR YOU: RUSSIA HAS MORE "RECORDINGS" ABOUT GERMANY'S GOVERNMENT THAT A SEWER COULD NOT STOP TO THE BOSPHORUS...

(Gusnote: I have fixed the spelling mistakes in the French article)....

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

was-ist-los-mit-deutschland....

 

What is wrong with Germany?   by Karl-Jürgen Müller

 

In 2023, Juli Zeh published a new novel: “Zwischen Welten” (Between worlds). Juli Zeh is a German writer born in 1974. She grew up and went to school and university in the old Federal Republic of Germany, but now lives in the eastern German state of Brandenburg. She is not only a multiple award-winning author, but also holds a doctorate in law. She is an honorary judge at the Brandenburg Constitutional Court. What is very rare is that Juli Zeh wrote the novel together with another author: Simon Urban – an equally award-winning German author who is also a copywriter and journalist.
  The novel is very personal and very political. The protagonists’ language is often aggressive, confrontational, provocative – but then again thoughtful and seriously analytical. There is no happy ending, but instead escalation and corruption. Because the protagonists are up to their necks in water: real, but also emotional.

 

A novel by Juli Zeh and Simon Urban

At the centre of the novel is a woman in her mid-40ies who has moved to the countryside. Around 20 years before the novel’s plot, she had taken on a small organic agricultural co-operative in Brandenburg with 200 dairy cows and a few workers who are also permanent members of the co-operative. Her father, who had died prematurely of a heart attack, had left it to her.
  This woman, Theresa, has a counterpart, a man, Stefan, a city dweller who, at the beginning of the novel, has no sympathy at all for the decision of his former fellow student and housemate. He is the deputy editor-in-chief and head of the culture section of a large German weekly newspaper in Hamburg and represents a “woke”, but nonetheless well-behaved and opportunistic way of life – even though halfway through the novel he begins to suspect that he will not be able to get rid of the spirits that he has summoned. The revolution devours all its children.
  In terms of her background, Theresa is actually also “woke” – initially mainly “against the far right”, also against Putin (which she slightly relativises in the course of the novel) and all “populists” – but also against German arms deliveries to Ukraine and in favour of a quick end to the war.
  At the end of April 2022, Juli Zeh co-signed an appeal by 29 German “intellectuals” calling on Chancellor Olaf Scholz not to supply heavy weapons to Ukraine and – in view of the threat of a third world war – to do everything possible to end the war as soon as possible.

 

Life in the countryside

Life in the countryside has made Theresa more down-to-earth, more open and more human (Juli Zeh’s novel “Über Menschen” (On humans), published 2021, had already made this clear with a different protagonist) – even if her behaviour is often aggressive, confrontational and provocative. But her everyday actions are always based less on some ideology or guidance from the media world and more on what she has actually experienced and learnt. She even allows herself to find the political party Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany), AfD voters somehow sympathetic: because they are helpful fellow human beings, regardless of their political views.
  Juli Zeh does not act as narrator. The novel is a modern form of the epistolary novel. The two protagonists only write emails and WhatsApp messages back and forth – towards the end of the novel, the protagonists switch to Telegramand encrypted emails for security reasons.

 

A reflection of today’s Germany

While reading the novel, I kept thinking: That’s exactly how it is – even if it is a little exaggerated in places. Many manifestations of today’s Germany become very clear: messed-up interpersonal relationships and many other craziness of “modern” everyday life; but also, that life in the countryside can be more down-to-earth, more realistic and more relational, that mutual help can be better experienced. Above all, however, that life is being made increasingly difficult for the rural population, mainly the farmers there who do not practise industrial agriculture, who have to fear and struggle for their existence every day and are at the mercy of merciless politics. And that on the other side there are big city intelligentsia who – although (or because) they believe they stand for the “Good” – unscrupulously fight their power struggles in ideological clouds. The consequence in the novel: desperate, activist resistance, which defies the old left-right scheme.
  The protagonist’s impressive descriptions of the situation could be an excellent backdrop to the current farmers’ protests and the responses of the power elites to them – and the many demonstrations “against the far right” could be another coup for the “Woken” in the novel.
  However: The novel only hints at the question of “Why and wherefore all this?”, for example with references to the rotten fruits of globalisation. After all, a thorough literary investigation into causes and purposes need not be the task of literature. Perhaps it is even better this way for writers who want to survive in the literary market. But citizens who are really awake cannot be satisfied with this.
  So the question remains: What is wrong with Germany? How can we explain everything that Juli Zeh and Simon Urban’s novel describes so vividly and impressively and that we have been enduring for many years, but now at an exponential rate?

 

More questions than answers

Here more questions than answers!
  Is the decline not only of German agriculture, but also of German industry and the entire German middle class the result of failed German policies and political incompetence? Or is this decline part of a “planned” change, a planned “transformation”? And if so, who wants and who is steering this change? Who benefits from it?
  We know from the first half of the 19th century: The “social question” of the time (the impoverishment of highly indebted farmers after the so-called peasant liberation (abolition of serfdom), the pauperisation of cottage workers and the emerging industrial workforce) was closely linked to the onset of industrialisation and its dictum of liberal economic thinking. There were similar upheavals later on.

 

“Creative” destruction? …

On the German Wikipedia you can read: “Creative destruction is a term from macroeconomics whose core statement is: All economic development (in the sense of not merely quantitative development) is based on the process of inventive risp. creative destruction. Through a new combination of production factors that successfully asserts oneself, old structures are displaced and ultimately destroyed. Destruction is therefore necessary – and not only a system error – so that a new order can take place.” (author’s emphasis) The “woke” man in Juli Zeh’s novel would fully agree with this, at least in the first half of the novel – but now no longer limited to economic life, but comprehensive for all areas of life that must be destroyed from a “woke” point of view. Is this the “Zeitenwende” that the Germans should prepare for? For example, is the war in Ukraine provoked by the West also a welcome “crisis” for German politics?

 

… or the hegemon’s plan?

Or is Germany’s decline not primarily wanted from within, but from outside? Not from Putin’s Russia or Xi Jinping’s China, as our politicians and mainstream media constantly claim – in order to distract and deny their own responsibility. But rather from the transatlantic “partner”? The thesis stands that since the founding of the German Empire in the second half of the 19th century, the Anglo-Saxon maritime powers have feared one thing above all: a merger between Russia, which is rich in raw materials, and a technologically and industrially highly developed Germany. Are we witnessing the realisation of the Anglo-Saxon counter-strategy? Is German politics now becoming the willing executor (“servant leader”) of US geopolitics? Who would have thought a few years ago that a German government would take the lead in mobilising war against Russia and – isolated in the non-Western world – cover up Israel’s war crimes?

 

Do the Germans have a “brown” gene?

Do Germans have a “brown” gene in them that makes many of them – especially in the east of the country – susceptible to fascist temptations time and again? Against which the vociferous “fight against the far right” is the only effective means? Or is this “fight against the far right” an event orchestrated by the power elites and servile NGOs? For which a mixed bag of intelligence-manipulated right-wing extremist scenes and hyped-up “events” such as the one in Potsdam is being thrown around? Also, as a distraction from the power elites’ anti-civic political course? Was it a coincidence that immediately after the impressive and widely supported protests in favour of the legitimate concerns of farmers and the middle classes, a completely exaggerated public campaign “against the far right” was reheated? At the forefront were the governing parties and their heads – together with the Antifa*.

 

What and who divides?

Are the “divisions” and dialogue problems, the increasing rudeness and unforgiveness in the public debate within German society, as expressed in the novel by Juli Zeh and Simon Urban, the result of a failure on the part of German citizens, a lack of ability or even a refusal to engage in dialogue? Or is the constant talk of the division of society the result of manipulation on a grand scale, too: to distract from the real division, namely between the citizenry and the power elites? With the purpose of really dividing society: divide et impera, divide and rule! As I said, more questions than answers.

 

An open letter to the Federal Chancellor

On 29 January, 16 presidents of East German Chambers of Industry and Commerce (CCI) wrote an open letter to Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz. This letter demonstrates once again that there is a great awareness of the problem – particularly in the East of the country – and not just among writers. At the beginning it says: “At the outset of the 2024 election year, we are very concerned about the future of our business location, social cohesion and democratic culture. The federal government also has a considerable part to play in this. The regional economy, for which we as Presidents of the East German Chambers of Industry and Commerce are responsible, is in a permanent state of crisis. We attribute this above all to the fact that a tried-and-tested principle of the Federal Republic of Germany that has flanked prosperity is increasingly being lost, namely the active involvement of various interests in the political process. […] Instead, a culture of ‘decision-making without involvement’ and a glaring difference between the words and deeds of the Federal Government are spreading.”
  The letter refers to the real problems faced by many professional groups: “Farmers and parts of the middle class are rebelling against increasing burdens decided at very short notice. Cuts are being made to important key economic projects and there is no planning security for cost developments in the energy and construction sectors, neither for consumers nor for companies.” In addition, there is a questionable German energy policy, bureaucratic restrictions on companies, a high tax burden and disproportionate incentives for not working.
  All of this is leading to “Germany’s international competitiveness eroding. While leading industrialised nations are manifesting enormous investment expenditure, incentive systems and regulatory easing in order to flank transformation processes and increase competitiveness, a lack of political will is causing this to fail in Germany.”
  At the end of their letter, the East German CCI presidents demand: “We must not abandon our prosperity-orientated democracy, which is based on security and freedom, without doing anything. We expect decisions to finally be prepared sensibly again, weighed up and properly explained and justified when they are announced. Direct dialogue between politics and society must not be avoided, but proactively initiated.”

 

Making cultural substance resonate again 

The voice of the East German CCI presidents will most likely fade away if the political culture of the country does not fundamentally change. This task cannot be accomplished overnight. Too much has happened in the past decades. Development work is necessary. Every citizen bears responsibility for this. The cultural substance of the country is still alive, hardly on a large scale, but often on a small scale, even if there is little public and serious talk about it. This substance can be made to resound again. This begins with the upbringing and education of our children.
  A better culture of public life, a different political culture is possible. That is not yet a different policy, but it is probably the best prerequisite for it. It will be a long but inevitable road to get out of war mode and back to peace and a focus on the common good, away from politics as a performance and towards being factual and finding practical solutions to problems.  •

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2024/nr-4-20-februar-2024/was-ist-los-mit-deutschland

 

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

a bridge too far....

 

Germans Plotting Attack on Russian Infrastructure: A Bridge Too Far     Martin Jay

 

Three things hit you about the reported phone tap of German officials discussing destroying the Crimean Bridge. 1. How stupid the Germans are, to think that their pitiful of not plain childish attempts to distance themselves from the war itself is fooling Russia. 2. That Germany believes that isolated but significant attacks on Russian military infrastructure would be a decisive turning point in the war which not even NATO bosses can deny Ukraine is losing. 3. How western media has more or less left the whole subject alone, fearing that it doesn’t help the West’s cause which they (media) are aligned to.

But without doubt, the fact that we are now entering a new phase in the war where the West feels it has to resort to more and more desperate tactics, rather than stick to the conventions, we can see from the transcripts that a certain panic is taking hold within the German government and its military. Berlin is certainly thinking big. But it is also thinking maximum plausible deniability. It is thinking Battle of the Bulge.

The comical aspect of the entire leak though is how poor the German intelligence services are in general. It was always a joke, going back to WWII where German spooks could be spotted a mile off in London or indeed the fact that during the same period its own agencies were fooled by a handful of British double agents over the location of the landings, that Germany doesn’t really do spying very well. Like media, these are two areas which we can say are not in decline as they never advanced in the first place. The leaking, or the lack of security, over the discussions are an intelligence failure which makes the Germans look like amateurs at best and deluded half wits at worse over how they see themselves, given these past two years where they have rapidly developed their military capabilities.

When, at the beginning of the Ukraine war Scholz had his “moment” in the German parliament where he announced a new level or military spending many Germans paused and became nervous about the possibility of history repeating itself. But they were not alone. Many Europeans wondered about how wise the move was as it propelled a weak and ineffective coalition government down a dangerous and treacherous path towards exactly the same circumstances which led to the collapse of democracy in the 1930s and the rapid emergence of Hitler and his so-called “socialist” party: nationalism.

Also, comical are the number of times these officials talk about the British who they call “the English” and how they consider them to be such important partners in the war against Russia, not only from a strategic standpoint but also a financial one. Roger and Fritz are closer than they’ve ever been.

But the obsession with the Crimean bridge is interesting as the transcripts reveal that it is on the Ukrainian side where the idea to hit it comes. The German airforce senior officials are sceptical about hitting the bridge with sufficient impact to actually destroy it and even less convinced that the Ukrainians can do this on their own. The idea of a French made Rafael jet is suggested for the job, but they believe that it would require 20 Taurus missiles to destroy it to any significant level. What exactly the Russians do while a French fighter jet repeats sortie after sortie dropping its bombs is unclear.

There is also the problem of how to deflect attention or finger pointing when the job is done. It’s here where we see that the German air force commanders are woefully ignorant and misinformed about the realities on Russian intelligence. The Germans actually believe they can protect themselves with a ring of disinformation and amateur distractions – like having their own people, while in Kiev talk with strong American accents while doing the training and logistics right through to insisting that the Ukrainians make a documented approach to the Germans for the equipment and training. As though this would temper the Russians even if they believed it once the bridge is destroyed! We are really in the land of amateur spooking here which leads the reader to believe that the Germans have decades ahead of them in how be an effective fighting force on the international stage when they are so plagued by rank amateurism – the same dismal lack of planning which made them lose the battle of Barbarossa in the second world war. Planning is a word which comes up in the conversation transcripts a lot as it is an obsession of German public servants, whether they be in the military or work for Deutsche Welle news department – the latter a public funded German propaganda station which is so bad that even Germans gave up watching it years ago, forcing its executives to scrap the German language service. And yet it is the lack of planning, but merely the talk of it, which is the real heart of the problem of German thinking. A Bridge Too Far, in fact.

 

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/03/02/germans-plotting-attack-russian-infrastructure-bridge-too-far/

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

germanic dilemma....

On top of that, Ritter pointed out that the apparent operational planning detailed in the leaked conversation constitutes a grave violation of “everything” NATO “purports to stand for.”


“When NATO spoke of expanding, and I'm talking about prior to the unification of Germany, when the concept of NATO expansion arose, one of the key aspects was that any new member must adhere to the standards of democratic rule that NATO used to define itself. And one of the key aspects of this standard is civilian control over the military. Absolutely required. There is no room in NATO for a military dictatorship, for the military to be dictating outcomes, especially in times of peace, to the civilian leadership,” Ritter explained.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20240305/scott-ritter-leaked-crimea-attack-plans-begs-the-question-whos-in-charge-in-germany-1117141206.html

------------------

AS CARTOONED IN NEXT STOP, BERLIN, (more than 318,000 reads) THERE IS A SUBCONSCIOUS RESENTMENT TOWARDS THE RUSSIANS:

— A FEW GERMANS HAVE NOT LIKED THE "REUNIFICATION" AND HATE THE RUSSIANS FOR THIS...

— SOME GERMANS HATE THE RUSSIAN FOR THEIR WW2 DEFEAT IN 1945.

— MANY GERMANS BELIEVE "IN THE USA", WHICH ARE VERY DECEITFUL IN THEIR CONTROL OF GERMANY.

 

MEANWHILE:

— MOST GERMANS WANT PEACE

 

ICC issues arrest warrants for top Russian military commanders
The Hague-based institution, which is not recognized by Moscow, has targeted the two men over alleged war crimes

GUSNOTE: IN REGARD TO RUSSIA, THE ICC IS A CROCK (Putin saved 8,000 GRATEFUL children) AND REFUSES TO TARGET UKRAINIAN WAR CRIMES WHICH ARE ON A SCALE OF 10,000-TO-ONE — INCLUDING USING CHEMICAL WARFARE, TARGETING CIVILIANS AND USING ILLEGAL BOMBLETS — COMPARED TO RUSSIA'S MILITARY....

 

See ALSO: merely....

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

obsession....

 

Ukrainian diplomat hints Crimean Bridge will be no more
The structure will be destroyed by the end of the year, Kiev’s envoy to the UN has implied...

 

Ukraine’s envoy to the UN, Sergey Kislitsa, has issued a veiled threat against Russia’s Crimean Bridge, implying that the structure will not be standing by the end of the year.   

Russia completed the structure spanning the Kerch Strait in 2020, as part of Moscow’s strategy to counter a Ukrainian land blockade of Crimea. The peninsula voted to break away from Ukraine and join Russia in 2014 following the US-backed coup in Kiev earlier the same year.   

Ukrainian special services have staged two major bombing attacks on the bridge since Moscow launched its military campaign against Kiev in 2022.   

Kislitsa issued his threat in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Wednesday, sharing a picture of a “2024 list of 6 Main Types of Bridges.” The example labelled “Kerch” showed an empty space.   

Senior Ukrainian officials have declared the destruction of the Crimean Bridge as a priority, claiming it is a legitimate military target. President Vladimir Zelensky told German media earlier this month that destroying the link is something that “we want… very much.”  

ussian civilians were killed in Ukrainian attacks on the bridge in October 2022 and July 2023. Moscow responded to the first incident, which involved an explosives-laden truck driven by an unwitting hauler, by adding the Ukrainian power grid to its list of legitimate military targets.  

A number of of Kiev’s foreign backers share its attitude to strikes on Russian infrastructure. Last week, Lithuania’s ambassador to Sweden, Linas Linkevicius, suggested on social media that the US supply of ATACMS missiles would result in the destruction of the Crimean Bridge. The diplomat urged people to take selfies with the structure while they still can.  

Moscow considers Ukrainian threats and tactics as confirmation that using military force against its neighbor was the correct decision. Russian officials have also suggested that Kiev has escalated its sabotage and bombing campaigns due to battlefield failures.  

Amid frontline setbacks, Kiev is resorting to “attempts to incur and seize border territories, strikes against peaceful areas, including with multiple-launch rocket systems, attacks on energy infrastructure, attempted missile strikes at the Crimean bridge and the peninsula itself,” Russian President Vladimir Putin stated last month.

 

https://www.rt.com/russia/596859-kislitsa-crimean-bridge-threat/

 

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....