The British long proxy war of attrition against Russia

Editor's note: It wasn't the proxies in Kiev who planned this incursion into Kursk where it is being reported there are now over 7,000 dead Ukrainian soldiers and foreign mercenaries decomposing in open fields and in tree lines. As we can read also from Andrei Martyanov's blog, the incursion into Kursk was planned in the pirate City of London. We didn't realize General MacArthur at one point told the British to "fucking fade away from the arena." The actual circumstances aren't exactly known but Ukraine lost a NATO-donated F-16 (update: the F16 was shot down in a friendly fire incident) along with its pilot. Does anyone think these F-16s are going to change the circumstances in a favorable way for Ukraine? As has been stated repeatedly this is a commercial proxy war on Russia and if it takes killing every Ukrainian down to the last man that is what the British will do. There is just too much money involved for weapon manufacturers having bumper crop profit years to end this. The Russians are prepared for whatever the British throw at them including Russia moving 30,000 soldiers into Kursk. Unlike the Ukrainians, the Russians are not throwing in new recruits only to get killed. The Russians are being directed by experienced soldiers waging war along with Chechen fighters from the Akhmat battalion and Wagner PMCs. As we have seen over and over again from the Russian-hating British it is always "Russia's fault."

________  

Britain's Kursk Invasion Backfires?

By Kit Klarenberg | August 21, 2024

British Challenger 2 tanks reached Ukraine with enormous fanfare, ahead of Kiev's long-delayed, ultimately catastrophic 2023 "counteroffensive". On top of encouraging other proxy war sponsors to provide Ukraine with armoured fighting vehicles, Western audiences were widely told the tank - hitherto marketed to international buyers as "indestructible" - made Kiev's ultimate victory a fait accompli. As it was, Challenger 2 tanks deployed to Robotnye in September were almost instantly incinerated by Russian fire, then very quietly withdrawn from combat altogether.

 

Hence, many online commentators were surprised when footage of the Challenger 2 in action in Kursk began to circulate widely on August 13th. Furthermore, numerous mainstream outlets dramatically drew attention to the tank's deployment. Several were explicitly briefed by British military sources that it marked the first time in history London's tanks "have been used in combat on Russian territory." Disquietingly, The Times now reveals this was a deliberate propaganda and lobbying strategy, spearheaded by Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Prior to the Challenger 2's presence in Kursk breaking, Starmer and Defence Secretary John Healey had reportedly "been in talks about how far to go to confirm growing British involvement in the incursion towards Kursk." Ultimately, they decided "to be more open about Britain's role in a bid to persuade key allies to do more to help - and convince the public that Britain's security and economic prosperity is affected by events on the fields of Ukraine." A "senior Whitehall source" added:

"There won't be shying away from the idea of British weapons being used in Russia as part of Ukraine’s defence. We don't want any uncertainty or nervousness over Britain's support at this critical moment and a half-hearted or uncertain response might have indicated that."

In other words, London is taking the lead in marking itself out as a formal belligerent in the proxy war, in the hope other Western countries - particularly the US - will follow suit. What's more, The Times strongly hints that Kursk is to all intents and purposes a British invasion. The outlet records:

"Unseen by the world, British equipment, including drones, have played a central role in Ukraine’s new offensive and British personnel have been closely advising the Ukrainian military…on a scale matched by no other country."

Britain's grand plans don't stop there. Healey and Foreign Secretary David Lammy "have set up a joint Ukraine unit," divided between the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence. The pair "held a joint briefing, with officials, for a cross-party group of 60 MPs on Ukraine," while “Starmer has also asked the National Security Council to draw up plans to provide Ukraine with a broader range of support.” On top of military assistance, "industrial, economic, and diplomatic support" are also being explored.

The Times adds that in coming weeks, "Healey will attend a new meeting of the Ukraine Defence Coordination Group," an international alliance of 57 countries overseeing the Western weaponry flooding into Kiev. There, "Britain will press European allies to send more equipment and give Kyiv more leeway to use them in Russia." The British Defence Ministry also reportedly "spoke last week to Lloyd Austin, the US defence secretary, and has been wooing Boris Pistorius, his German opposite number."

Evidently, the new Labour government has an ambitious vision for the proxy war’s continuation. Yet, if the "counter invasion" is anything to go by, it's already dead in the water. As The Times notes, the imbroglio is primarily "designed to boost morale at home and shore up Zelensky's position," while relieving pressure on the collapsing Donbass frontline by forcing Russia to redirect forces to Kursk. Instead, Moscow "has capitalised on the absence of four crack Ukrainian regiments to press their attacks around Pokrovsk and Chasiv Yar."

Please go to Global Delinquents to continue reading.

________

Nothing surprising here is there?

Britain Backs Ukraine's Use Of Long-Range Missiles To Strike Inside Russia