Washington Generously Guaranteed Moscow’s Safe Retreat From Kherson!

 Tue 5:11 pm +00:00, 14 Jan 2025  

posted by pete fairhurst 2

Source: https://slavlandchronicles.substack.com/p/revelation-washington-generously

The relationship between Moscow and Washington is as heartwarming as it is wholesome

Some interesting assertions about the the US Russia relationship, as he sees it

Bob Woodward’s book “War” has revelations as he points out

Caution is is advisable, I certainly don’t trust this guy, as has been pointed out here before

And Woodward is highly suspect given his starring role in the Watergate psyop, see this:

https://mileswmathis.com/watergate.pdf

And this:

https://mileswmathis.com/nixon.pdf

Even more here: 

https://search.freefind.com/find.html?id=11624224&pageid=r&_charset_=UTF-8&bcd=%C3%B7&scs=1&query=watergate&Find=Search&mode=ALL

BUT, I’ve got an open mind and I’d be interested if anyone can debunk this?

There have been suspicions all along that Putin’s position is not exactly as it seems

Remember the Wagner group and it’s very suspicious narrative that indicated things were not exactly as assumed in the “Alternative” media

Sections in bold towards the end are my emphasis, very interesting, if true:

“Moscow’s junior position relative to Washington in the globalist pecking order”

==============================================================

In October of this year, we had an insider expose published in the form of a book — War — about the secret backdoor deals that created this Not-War in Ukraine. The ethnic journalist in question is Bob Woodward:

Here are the key highlights from the book:

• The Armed Forces of Ukraine allowed a 30,000-strong group of the Russian Federation to quietly withdraw from Kherson due to US pressure on Kiev, – Bob Woodward after a conversation with US officials in the book “War”.
• When the Ukrainian army liberated Kherson, American intelligence warned that the risk of a nuclear attack would increase if the Russians lost their main forces while retreating from the city.
• According to the plan, the armed forces were to pursue the retreating Russians and carry out massive attacks, but this did not happen – the Russians retreated without significant losses.
• Before the withdrawal of the Russians, the Americans warned Biden that shelling the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation could lead to a nuclear attack by Putin with a 50% probability.
• The Americans called Gerasimov, who says that in case of heavy losses they will use nuclear weapons when retreating from Kherson.
• After that, the Russians had a kind of security guarantee and went to the left bank, having moved all their equipment and personnel.
• The American fear of nuclear weapons forced the Ukrainian armed forces to refrain from attacks, after which the Russians quietly retreated, keeping 30 thousand soldiers and equipment.

Related to this he also makes this claim:

• Woodward also writes that the United States Intelligence Community had uncovered Russia’s plans to invade Ukraine months in advance, but Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy refused to accept the accurate intelligence, even when Kamala Harris made the case to him in person at a conference in Munich.

Interesting stuff. Haven’t read the book yet

But this latter bit has been known for awhile now. The reason why Zelensky didn’t believe the warnings is because he had been put in power with the support of the Kremlin.

And the reason why the US knew that Putin was planning an invasion three months out is because they know everything that happens at the very highest levels of the Kremlin. This is either because a) Putin reports directly to them and asks permission for everything that he does before he does it like Saddam Hussein before him or b) because his hand-picked government is full of moles.

Also: the reason why Putin invaded was because his buddy the oligarch Medvedchuk was arrested and the SMO was probably an attempt to reinstall the Donbass mafia back into power in Kiev by ousting the Dniepro mafia which had taken its place.

But this is all familiar ground for the Stalkers.

My blog has also doubled since those early days when I reported on Kherson and its implications. If you are new and interested in what I wrote about the surrender then, check this out. I reported on the preparations to hand over the territory a month out:

And then I wrote a “sit-rep” about the fallout from the surrender:

Oh and read this one too, it’s the most fun one:

Since then, we’ve come a long way in our understanding of how this war works and Moscow’s junior position relative to Washington in the globalist pecking order. Now the fact that Moscow and Washington are making secret deals and arranging troop movements and territory swaps between themselves should be common knowledge. They also decide beforehand what targets the MoD is allowed to bomb in Ukraine and what Kiev gets to hit and where and with what happens.

The great revelation from Woodward’s book is that Washington had demonstrated to Moscow that they could in fact guarantee good behavior on the part of Kiev, at least back then. They held Kiev’s leash and allowed the Kremlin to surrender Kherson without a rout like had previously occurred around Lugansk. At that time in the war, Moscow had no troops because Putin had thrown away the lives of thousands of professionals and then signed a treasonous peace deal that Kiev threw in the trash. Russia had no army to speak of and was about to get steamrolled by the UAF, which had conducted a rapid and effective general mobilization. I also suspect that Washington intervened on the side of Russia to guarantee that the war would continue for awhile longer, not because they honestly believed that Moscow would use nukes.

Anyway, this is probably why the Kremlin trusted some of the later promises of Washington to rein in and not let Kiev bomb Russia with NATO weapons, for example. It seems strange to us that Moscow keeps getting “tricked” by Washington, but perhaps Washington did in fact help the Kremlin out a few times before that to establish trust.

The military really does seem secondary in this conflict.

It is there as a kind of plausible fig-leaf to justify political deals that are made in the backrooms. This is a managed theater production, not a war. Yes, hundreds of thousands are dying, but that doesn’t mean that there is an actual war going on. In the end, I believe that Putin and his close friends (excepting the ones that will eventually betray him) will be eaten by the West as well. Also, I believe that the animosity of NATO towards him is real as well. He was supposed to be replaced a long time ago by an ethnic Liberal like Medvedev, but he stubbornly clung on far past the expiry date on his contract. Putin thinks that he can still cut a deal with his friends in Langley by making himself useful to them. That has been his entire survival strategy for decades now — to prove himself equally annoying (not worth the cost of removing) and also useful enough to keep around.

And as best we can tell, here is how these pushes and takeovers of Russia territory go down.

1. The UAF masses troops and concentrates them for an attack
2. They poke and prod to ascertain how serious the defense are

Consider: with Kherson, the Russians troops demonstrated stubbornness initially. There was a serious bridgehead attack that was repulsed. Just like how there was a recent probe deeper into Kursk that was repulsed. But then the negotiations begin. Deals are cut. And retreats are arranged.

Thus, we’re not out of the woods yet.