Here is what I see happening in the coming days. I am mostly just going off of vibes and not serious analysis, although I follow the Ukraine news very closely. These are random predictions that came to me that I just wanted to post in case they came to pass. Feel free to ignore this, there is likely not important information here and there are better things to read. I’m basically running off the same inspiration that the Qanon guy did, but I’m not going to pretend I have some secret knowledge.
My prediction
Sometime this summer, I have plans to go offline for a while. While I am away, Russia and NATO will go to war. This was my vision. Ukraine will collapse in a matter of weeks and will be unable to resist full occupation. Russian troops race westward. Meanwhile, Poland, Slovakia, and Hungary use this collapse as an excuse to protect Western Ukraine from Russian occupation. That is their justification, and the area around Lviv and Lutsk is occupied by these countries. They are motivated by historical interest and also wanting a buffer with Russia.
The problem is, with an indefinite border between these two occupied zones, there is bound to be trouble. Initially, an unoccupied area existed between both lines. In the chaos, either an accident or some kind of false flag occurs which allows the NATO bloc to declare war on Russia.
These events happen very quickly, but Russia decides to wage a scorched earth war with no respect to international agreements. To them, this war is existential for the survival of there country and NATO are seen as invaders, so expect all type of carnage. In my vision, Russia had the most success in the Baltic theater. I don’t know why this is without looking at what kind of fleet they have there. But quickly they move through the open terrain of Poland and into eastern Germany. This coincided with a powerful advance in Scandinavia, Russia might have occupied most of Sweden.
In the southern front, around Romania, Moldova, the Black Sea, most things seemed to be at a standstill. Russia does not make significant gains here for some reason.
Another interesting development is that North Korea and South Korea are at war in this timeline. Perhaps South Korea and Japan join against Russia in the pacific, and North Korea uses this as an opportunity for reunification with help from Russia. They are largely successful and capture towns all the way at the southern tip of the peninsula.
China looks like it is still neutral for now, although not much time has passed.
The speed of all these events will come as a shock because it goes beyond what anyone was expecting.
What does my critical mind think of this?
A week ago, I would have thought this was ridiculous, but since the Zolotoe encirclement and the Kaliningrad blockade, now I am not so sure.
My thought was that the defense of Lisichansk would last into September, meaning the Ukraine war could go on into the winter. What has just happened in the Zolotoe area makes me reevaluate. Russia has clearly picked up the pace without risking casualties. Lisichansk may already be effectively encircled where there are UA 8,000 soldiers and an embarassing amount of western equipment. This may be the beginning of a phase 3 of the war.
And yet it seems like Ukraine cannot negotiate or surrender everything. The government makes it clear they will fight to the end, but troops are of low morale. In addition, Zelensky is fighting with the head of the SBU. There is some kind of internal power struggle to the government and the state could see a transition of power or a collapse, which complicates the defense.
So #1 I am now of the mind that this vision is not so extreme with regards to Ukraine. It could all be over by the end of the summer at the earliest. I don’t know if that is most likely, but it is a possibility that this week has revealed itself.
I think the ruling class of the NATO countries don’t really appreciate this. They are high on their own supply of propaganda. So these leaders will be very shocked if a quick collapse of Ukraine’s defense occurs, especially because many of these people think Ukraine is still going to win.
By this time, winter will be around the corner, and Russia will have projected control of Ukraine’s agriculture and natural gas resources and infrastructure, exacerbating these shortages on the globe. Many EU countries are already cut off from Russian gas. Every crisis that has been foreshadowed will then come to a head; the recession, shortages, inflation. Leaders will find a real dilemma where they face removal in some form. This has already happened in some countries.
So #2 I don’t think an erratic response from NATO would be too crazy either. Post war Russia will truly be a beast. Russia will have Europe by the balls with a battle hardened army to flex. The world now knows Russia does not make empty threats. Europe is in dire need of resources from Russia with only two options: get Russia to submit or strike a deal on mutually beneficial terms. By failing the first option, they have closed off the second option. So they can only double down on trying to get Russia under the boot.
I think some already recognize that Ukraine is no longer a security threat to Russia, and does not work as a form of coercion. This is why the Kaliningrad blockade is happening. There must always be a front to prevent Russia’s rise whether economic or military with a proxy war through Ukraine. In the event that these problems for Russia are solved, what will Europe do? Do they have any other option besides a hot war with Russia?
My mind is now changed. I considered a broader war against Russia of low probability, but that low probability still being far too high. Like a car crash, it seems like it should happen constantly, but there are traffic rules and every driver has an interest to avoid accident even when one has to swerve erratically. Similarly, there are international laws, and every country wants to avoid world war despite conflicting concerns. But because of Russia’s success of backing Europe and the imperial core into a corner, I now believe the possibility of all out war to be more likely than not. NATO also underestimates Russia militarily which increases this probability.
So #3, what would happen next? I suspect in the event that this war begins, the structural integrity of NATO as a military block will be revealed, and I believe it will not completely hold fast. Would a country like Hungary or Turkey really risk the destruction of their country to fight an expensive war against Russia over some bullshit? I think not. I think NATO nations that are uncompromised will do what ever is in their national interest, and a handful of countries will break away in this event, choosing to stay neutral.
War games in the past have revealed NATO would lose decisively to Russia in Europe. But now we have seen Russia’s military in action. It is hard to know how that data qualifies that assessment because there are so many contradictory opinions about what Ukraine says about Russia’s military. The chaotic nature of the necessary pre-predictions make the act of predicting the outcome of such a war pointless in my opinion. The conditions of that hypothetical war are downstream from too many undecided and unknowable events. I am agnostic about this, so for now, I will say the early outcome of my vision is possible, although Russia quickly succeeding against Finland seems implausible at the moment.
What is missing from my vision is a new Cuba crisis, which I think would have to occur.
I think this is a bit unrealistic and alarmist to be honest. Also, what even is a “NATO-Russia” conflict? NATO is not one unified entity, as much as it pretends or wants to be. Even if the US did decide to actually go to war with Russia, a lot of NATO could decide to sit it out out of self-preservation. Turkey first and foremost, but even France, Germany, Italy, Spain would likely not be very enthusiastic and would prefer to sit on the sidelines and offer material support if they haven’t by then exhausted it all on Ukraine.
But even the US i frankly don’t see entering into a war in Europe with Russia, it’s just not something that the Pentagon wants to do, they realize it would be a disaster, and so do large parts of the political establishment. So what you’re left with are essentially Poland, Britain and the Baltic states, and maybe Romania if their government is weak enough to be pushed into such a blunder by Washington (who are more than happy to push others into a war that they won’t enter themselves).
But with the economic crisis that is building up right now in the west there will be very little appetite for war anywhere else, and in fact even Britain will abandon ship at the earliest opportunity once the full extent of the economic catastrophe begins to set in. By mid-winter Europe will be in severe trouble. The only ones fanatical enough to still want to pick a fight with Russia are Poland and the Baltics and they would simply be crushed, IF Russia decides to devote a good chunk of their forces and not just the little expeditionary force they have in Ukraine right now.
The good news is that i don’t see even this scenario playing out. The economic crisis will bring the West to its knees well before Russia takes all of Ukraine. At the current pace, even with occasional breakthroughs like the one in the Lugansk pocket that has just happened, i don’t foresee the Donbass being fully cleared before mid autumn, and Kharkov and Odessa, IF the Russians decide they still want to continue and take them, not before next year. Russia is taking this very slowly to keep casualties extremely low and to maximize not just Ukraine’s casualties but the depletion of the weapons stocks of the West.
My suspicion is that they expect the Western support for Ukraine to collapse some time this winter, and only then can they either enforce the peace terms that they want, or if rejected to really start collapsing Ukraine and pushing deep toward Kiev and toppling the regime there. Until then i think Ukraine will keep fighting and the regime will remain somewhat stable, because money and weapons/ammunition are still being pumped in from the west, not enough to not lose but just enough to lose slowly and not collapse all at once. That is my prediction unless something changes dramatically.
The business with Kaliningrad is interesting, and i have said before that i think Russia could and should just go in with essentially an armed guard for their trains and ignore the embargo, and if Lithuania attacks them they will have a casus belli to go in and de-nazify them. I think they could do this without too much international condemnation apart from the West because it is Lithuania that broke the treaties, and i don’t think NATO would protect Lithuania, though Poland and the UK might try to intervene and it would end badly for them. However that is not Russia’s style. I think they will take non-invasive action, maybe a counter-blockade or something.
Holy shit whole Baltic needs de-nazifycation, even more than Ukraine.
NATO is not one unified entity, as much as it pretends or wants to be. Even if the US did decide to actually go to war with Russia, a lot of NATO could decide to sit it out out of self-preservation.
I literally said this in my post. I get that it’s long, but you wrote quite a long response. So I’d appreciate it if you read it before criticizing.
That strategy for Kaliningrad is interesting. My one question is I think it must be possible to block trains at the border without violence. I have actually crossed the border between the Baltic countries and Russia many times and I believe we had to stop for passport checks although it was a long time ago. Either way, I think it is possible for Lithuania to block Russian trains on their own rails physically without committing an act of war. Now, Russia may just go to war with Lithuania anyways, a Russian general just said this on TV.
I don’t think this will happen, Russia has better options, but if it did, would NATO really stand by and let it happen? Any nations that do so will be in violation of NATO article 5. NATO is really not an organization but a treaty. Refusing to come to Lithuania’s aid would be a violation of said treaty, and if you are saying only Poland and the UK will help, then all other NATO countries violate the treaty so NATO no longer formally exists. Also, the UK has nukes. So western countries will risk the nuking of the UK and the dissolution of NATO but will refuse to go to war as a bloc? I think this is unlikely.
About your forecast on the economic situation and Ukraine, I disagree. But it will be interesting to look back as these events unfold. I have an experience that comes from observing hours and hours of news about this, and trying to condense all of that into an argument when I will be proven correct or incorrect in a few months is a waste of time I think.
I wrote a long response precisely because your post was long, so i figured it deserves an appropriate response with a similar amount of effort put into it. I apologize if i overlooked or misunderstood parts of what you originally said.
The point i was making is that in my opinion NATO’s article 5 is a bluff and one that needs to be called because at the moment it just emboldens small insignificant nations like Lithuania to act very recklessly because they think they are immune from consequences.
In a confrontation with a near-peer power that can inflict significant losses and destruction on their home soil, and where due to the location of the conflict not being in their favor victory is not assured, i believe there are few NATO members who would be willing to actually intervene on behalf of a peripheral member like Lithuania.
The Baltic states add little to the overall security of the alliance, they barely have an army, and their location is more a liability than anything else. They talk a big game but especially the western Europeans and the Americans are extremely politically sensitive to taking real losses and being seen to actually experience defeats in battle.
I also don’t think that even intervention by the UK, which also has a pitiful army that is weaker than Poland’s and could realistically only try to use its navy in the Baltic, would result in use of nuclear weapons. It would be one thing if Russia was pushing into Germany, but to start a nuclear war over Lithuania? No.
It would be a bold gambit, and as i said i am convinced that this is not Russia’s way of doing things, not under Putin who is extremely cautious and reluctant to escalate unless he literally has no other choice, but it would be a way to fulfill Russia’s goal of removing the NATO threat once and for all by showing the alliance to be unreliable and a paper tiger.
Or maybe i’m wrong and this would lead to nuclear WW3, in which case i sure am glad i am in no position to be making decisions like this 😂
deleted by creator
Since we’re opening up with idealist metaphysics and hearsay there’s supposedly some astrology stuff in the upcoming few months that could be good for war (or bad).
Nah.
No one wants to logically push straight into a WW3 scenario because of how fast it’ll turn nuclear and therefore uncontrollable. For NATO, now is a game of racing a train with a car (or chicken, whichever is more familiar and dangerous) because of the great economic benefits for their floundering economies, especially in the case of the US and UK. Keeping the fiasco in Ukraine taking as long as possible, slower the better, keeps the overall risk lower as well.
RU wants a buffer, going full scorched earth all of a sudden goes against what they’ve currently been doing which is more methodical. There are really old historical interests as well, but that doesn’t lend itself to scorched earth, still falls under the methodical since its capturing territory Then there’s BRICS strengthening their influence globally, making themselves slowly a viable alternative to the western-led econ game, so that also is another check against this scenario. The ruble is doing well despite all the sanctions, so it overall has a feel of not wanting to rock the boat too hard, but I’m not an expert armchair general.
The Kaliningrad blockade could go south, but then again going to second I’m not sure how serious the whole of NATO would be on throwing its weight behind LI with conditions as they are. The US for example has economic downturn and growing internal unrest which may lead it to become more isolationist. Then again, that could lead to an inclination to be more risk-seeking as a potential amelioration to at home woes, which may lead to a general worsening situation. For either side an expansion of the conflict does have potential benefits, leaning much more for NATO and friends than RU at this point in time.
deleted by creator
Counterpoint: a creature in its death thrashes is not known to act rationally. NATO could well start nuking everything out of panic or blind rage as reality catches up with them.
Could be, and there’s the case of greed so strong it blinds one to all survival instincts, which we’ve seen in the world quite a few times.
I don’t really believe in that as a possibility.
Recently on Multipolarista, Benjamin Norton mentioned that British Head of Army, Patrick Sanders predicts WW3, Biden (statements later officially taken back) said that he wants to support Taiwan and remove Putin. I always believe that cooler heads will prevail not just out of hope for communism, but out of fear for life itself. I hope the West understands what escalation will lead to.
