Wednesday, September 27, 2017

ZAPAD Scenario leaked

With much wild speculation about our Zapad 17 exercise, your Prez decided to ease tension and reveal the scenario in truth so you'd know, firstly that Kremlin isn't going to use it as a cover to invade you and, secondly (although in truth this probably shouldn't ease tension) the thinking that goes on in the Kremlin

Over arching scenario

Faced with rising social discontent caused by decades of economic misery in the country since the collapse of the USSR and fearing the prospect of a colorless revolution as citizens demand the prosperity enjoyed by Russian citizens and their mighty Rouble (by 2019 the reserve currency of the global economy), the leaders of a fictional country that just happens to exist where the Baltic countries currently do, form a Russophobic fascist junta.

This junta passes a series of laws which cause social panic.  Children under the age of 9 are forced to be gay, people are allowed to marry pets and, most controversially of all, minority Russian children are forcibly removed from their parents to be sold to gay couples in San Francisco who wish to adopt them into their sodomite lifestyle.  Reports of genocide soon follow and evidence of child crucifixion is reported by the ever-releable "news" outlet, RT.

despite these draconian measures, Baltic citizens of all types continue to protest to join Russia leading the government stage a series of armed false-flag provocations on the soil of their entirely peaceful, massively prosperous, heavily armed nuclear neighbour - Russia.  The intelligence services of Russia, despite being aware of this threat to both the state and our "compatriots abroad", are too incompetent to prevent these attacks and are unable to provide any proof, especially that which implicates the USA in its never-ending plot to break Russia and make our children gay.

Battle Commences

Russian "defence" forces, alongside their "willing Belarusian comrades", begin to engage in vicious fire fights on Russian territory with unmarked soldiers who speak with American accents whom the Pentagon insists are "volunteers" or who, in the case of death or capture, "resigned from the US Army yesterday".

Seeing an opportunity caused by the instability, a fictional country that just happens to exist where Poland currently is, sees a chance to re-create its medieval empire by conquering the rich economic gold mine that is 21st century Belarus.  The US sees a chance to profit from making Russian kids gay so covertly assist with provocations which our intelligence services are again too stupid to find any proof we could ask an anti-imperialist paper like the Guardian or Le Mond to publish.

The US enters

Staging a color revolution (ironically like the Red Revolution of 1917) in Minsk, these paid protesters of the CIA (again, proof not offered) cause the Polish military alongside their US colleagues, to invade Belarus to assist them.  This leads to heavy conventional fighting and the legitimate government of Belarus, confident that when the fighting is done Russian troops will peacefully withdraw back to Russia immediately, appeals to the Kremlin for help.

Heavy conventional fighting follows but is indecisive.  Seeking a quick way to end the conflict with minimal loss of life and confident the rest of the world will fully understand and support our reasons, the Kremlin de-escalates the situation with a nuclear strike on Warsaw (yes, we view a nuclear weapon exchange as potentially de-escalatory).

Russia calms things down

This leads to the fall of the fascist junta, transparent elections in Baltic region with pro-Kremlin parties victorious, the end of NATO as we supply undeniable proof of US complicity in trying to break Russia with staged revolutions, world approval at our actions and all the post Soviet states seeing the error of the ways and asking to re-join Russia.

The exercise concludes with vodka and medals.

See. We didn't use it as a cover to invade and there is no reason to stress that we've lost our fucking minds either.


Friday, September 22, 2017

Facebook - We fear it so we did it to the USA.

It will come as no surprise to learn, for those that somehow do not already know, that Kremlin controls Russian social media very tightly.  You can be sent to jail for liking a social media post.  If you have a blog that gets more then 3,000 readers per day, you need to register with Big Brother.  The government can shut down any website, for any reason, at any time.  We also run a large, complex and expensive troll operation designed to ensure conversation on the internet in Russia match's the Kremlin's views and those who we fear in the west are harassed.

It therefore stands to reason that we see social media as an important tool for influencing public opinion and for shaping the way people act.  Either that or we have nothing better to spend our money on when oil is $50 and our economy is a disaster.

Not one self-described Russia expert who claims that if the Kremlin did anything on Facebook it had no effect on the US elections (although sadly for this argument the Kremlin has now denied doing anything)  can explain why the Kremlin fears it so much being done to them.

If it would have no effect in the USA, why work so hard on preventing it from happening in Russia? Why have a huge troll farm shaping internet discussion if it's not important? Are Russian security services idiots who have given no thought to preventing regime change?  These questions answer themselves.

Taking our obsessive control of Russian social media another very small, yet logical step further, it stands to reason we view the US Government’s complete lack of control over what is posted on Facebook & Twitter with some surprise.  Given also our public statements that US wishes to overthrow the Russian government, it also presents us with an opportunity.  An opportunity, I have explained, we would never give to the USA because we understand and fear the consequences.

Now consider the expense from a historical perspective.  While it's not intended to be a direct comparison* to today's events, in the 80s we paid Aldrich Ames $4.6 million (in 1980s dollars) for what was then the most serious breach in US intelligence history.  A breach that allowed us to roll up and kill a large number of US spies operating in Russia.  At around the same time and into the 90s we paid Robert Hanssen $1.4 million and more in diamonds for information that cost the US billions to fix.  Both of these took years and the monies mentioned do not involve our own costs behind the scenes.  The idea of someone in the KGB saying to Andropov "for a fraction of this amount we will one day be able to potentially reach millions of US voters and cause them to act in ways against their interest".  He'd have told them not to turn up to work drunk again. 

Flash forward to today and picture us being told we could do precisely what was beyond our dreams back then. Being told we could influence 10s of millions of US voters for $100,000 over two years. That’s $4,166 a month.  It’s peanuts.

The decision, when compared to how much thought went into the above operations, was surely quick. Basically you can easily picture after at most a few moments thought the decision being, "do it. it's cheap, deniable, disproportionately effective and the sort of thing we fear being done to us"*.

Clearly, it is needed to be stated that this didn't give you Trump all by itself. (why oh why is that necessary?) but as wise Russia watchers have commented, we only need to shift opinion 1% to have a major effect. 

In short, we had:

Motive – Our clear and publicly stated hatred of Hillary
Means – It was, in geopolitical terms, incredibly cheap
Opportunity – We do our best to prevent it in Russia yet it’s easy to do in the USA.

It’s not complicated and, sadly for a few sensitive academic egos, you don’t need to be a Russia expert to understand it nor understand it.

*Presidential note. After some interesting feedback, these two points were clarified after the original post.