Yes, we always have that, one more question, one question to start with, the list goes on. I am no different, but I tend to base it on facts that I am exposed to. And the Guardian gave me (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/jan/01/russia-ukraine-war-live-zelenskiy-vows-to-keep-up-fight-amid-new-wave-of-russian-missile-attacks) ‘Russian claims its missile attacks are targeting drone production while Zelenskiy vows to keep up fight’. And here I merely saw this as another article. But after a few moments a few thoughts came up in my mind and they led to questions. So lets take you through these motions.
Russia claimed its strikes against Ukraine on New Year’s Eve, including the launch of more than 20 cruise missiles, killing at least three people, were targeting its neighbour’s drone production.
So lets just say (a far stretch) that this is what they are trying to do. Consider that more than 20 missiles is at a price of $1.5 million dollars, making this a $30 million dollar strike. They got nothing, merely the death of 3 people (not saying that is a good thing), but the math then gets us that Ukrainians die at $10 million per casualty, implying that with a population of around 44 million, the cost of killing the Ukrainian population will set the Russians back by about 440,000,000,000,000. Which amounts to 440,000 billion dollar, which is about 150 times more than the Russian state can cough up. So they will be broke long before they made a dent in their ‘Wishlist’.
If we reject that (fair enough) the fact that over 20 missiles did not do the job, implies two possibilities.
- In the first, the missiles are so inaccurate, they will hit everything except for what they aim for, a laughable situation.
- In the second, it is not an accuracy issue, it implies that the GRU and/or FSB cannot correctly verify and correctly capture intelligence.
Either is reason for the Ukrainian Paddington bear (Zelenskyy) to slap the Russian bear silly (again and again).
And there is cause for wondering why the media is not seeing that bigger picture. But I am all about humour and there is a lot to be gotten here. You see, a year ago (December 14th 2021) I wrote a solution to meltdown Iranian nuclear reactors. I gave it to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (via email) as I felt it was important for someone to stand by them and let Iran know that they have a bigger problem than they think they have. And as their reactors are based on Russian design, the idea came that if it works on one (there are a few little issues with my solution) it will also work on the other. And as Russia is about to recruit even more people, they might be better off sending them to guard the 38 reactors they have (just a thought). They have been making threats about using nuclear power. My solution is less complex. I just put the solution online and let anyone hating the Russians enough to take a stab at it, solves everything (as I personally see it).
That would of course invite one more question and that is fine. But the inactions of certain governments are no longer acceptable to me and these pro-Russian wankers in the Netherlands (Thierry baudet), the UK (Tommy Robinson) and a few more are getting under my skin too, I reckon one massive setback for Russia will set these roaches back to wherever they usually hide.
So what is easier than to hand a solution to the internet and let the Russians go nuts trying to monitor Georgians, Chechnya’s and a few more Russian speaking people who have had enough and see this as a solution and there are a fair amount of Russians there as well, the moment they get to even one reactor Russia will have no other option but to pull back or hand a nuclear offensive and with their current hardware settings, there is a chance over 30% will not function, as such whatever hits Russia will end Russia. A simple solution, not?
Lets be clear, this is not a good solution, I know this, but at some point people have had enough of the lies and acts of terror that come FROM Russia. And Russia needs to wake up to the consideration that people have had enough of them and that TV show on ‘expansionism’ will have far reaching issues. Is my solution good? Of course it is not, but there are too many flaccid politicians not doing enough to stop Russia, so I decided as a near retirement citizen to up the game a little. Or as the Cheshire Cat stated “When is a croquet mallet like a billy club? I’ll tell you: Whenever you want it to be!” A more academic version is “If the results do not match the hypothesis, change the question to make it match”, a favourite stage in Market Research storytellers. And there we have the setting and it will lead to more questions. Hopefully in Russia someone will ask “Is the mess President Putin hands to us worth the mess we are about to receive?”, well that is up to them, we can only show them where that window is and let them decide to use it as a point of entry towards another solutions.
If that one question got them there, I actually end up doing more than a dozen flaccid politicians, not bad for a storyteller and inventor on minimum wage. How much do each of these flaccid politicians get?