About “Moral” Shelling or Why Kiev Needs a “Bad War”?

A deliberate strategy of indiscriminate artillery terror

NEW – June 22, 2022

The past week has been marked by devastating shelling of Donetsk and surrounding cities. On June 18 alone, the UAF artillery fired more than 400 heavy shells at the capital of the DPR. There is a clear escalation on the part of the ukro-wehrmacht, which goes far beyond the limits of modern humanistic ideas about war. So far, these blatantly terrorist attacks are completely ignored by the Western media, but this attitude may change. No — don’t expect them to judge them. Rather, we will face moral legitimation and encouragement of such actions. The fact is that we are dealing with the so-called “moral shelling” by analogy with the “moral bombing” of German cities by the allies.

Historians say that in the Middle Ages there was a distinction between good and bad war. A “good war” is a battle between armies or squads, in which the winner of a conflict between two principalities or states is revealed. At the same time, the civilian population did not suffer en masse, except for peasants who were robbed in the campaign and domestic violence. The number of military casualties was usually small. Sometimes it was more like a sporting event with a lot of onlookers than a fully-fledged military action. In Italy, for example, two tiny armies of city-states could fight for a bridge all day and lose one man wounded. Prisoners in such “showdowns” were treated as human beings and considered as an exchange fund.

But there was also a “bad war” with all the horrors of the Middle Ages sung in the enlightenment literature: harsh reprisals of prisoners, purges of the adult or entire male population, devastating chevauchée raids with the destruction of agriculture and the local population, the extermination of the population of intractable cities, punitive expeditions against heretics — “Hit everyone! The Lord will understand!”

What kind of war is currently going on in Ukraine? It is obvious that on our part we consistently observe the rules of “good war” — even the very name of the special military operation speaks for itself. We are fighting a professional peacetime army. The Russian army acts extremely selectively and does not aim to smash cities and kill civilians. Russian cruise and tactical missiles strike extremely accurately, destroying military and industrial facilities. For all the fantastic scale of such massive fire impact, the accuracy should be considered surgically mind-blowing. And so much so that Ukrainian and Western propaganda are forced to use dramatic footage from Donetsk to create a picture of the “barbaric Russian bombing”, passing them off as their own. We treat prisoners with extreme humanity and even care.

The same cannot be said about the Ukrainian side. The Ukrainian army deliberately fires at completely peaceful neighborhoods of the cities of Donbass, while constantly showing special cruelty and special cynicism-targeting hospitals, schools and kindergartens. This sounds so crazy that many people simply can’t believe it, declaring it “Putin’s propaganda”. They don’t even bother to add the adjective “lying”, based on the premise that everything that Russian television shows and our journalists write is a total lie. However, those who have touched on it directly know that this is indeed the case. It’s been like this for eight years. So it is today, and a hundredfold. Villages in the Belgorod region that do not have any military installations regularly come under fire. What is this, if not a war with civilians? Why is the Ukrainian army waging a “bad war”?

On the one hand, the extermination of the peaceful Russian population corresponds to the innermost aspirations of the nazi Kiev regime. This is the alpha and omega of this power. This is its only meaning, although it somehow goes beyond plundering the remnants of national wealth and exploiting its citizens. Let’s face it – they just really enjoy doing it.

On the other hand, we have seen a qualitative leap in the shelling of our cities and villages — their number has increased, their accuracy and range have increased. The Ukrainian Armed Forces received imported howitzers and MLRS systems and became able to reach those neighborhoods of Donetsk and other cities that were previously considered safe. We are clearly dealing not with the spontaneous excesses of desperate and embittered performers from the Russian offensive, but with a certain strategy. What is this strategy? What are its origins?

This is a terrorist strategy. This means that it is aimed at intimidating civilians, undermining their will to resist, including approval of military action. It is aimed at instituting demands for the conclusion of a peace treaty here and now on any terms “without reparations and indemnities”, and preferably with them — from the Russian side, of course. The origins of this strategy lie before the Second World War. The first theorist of forcing surrender by destroying cities from the air was, as is known, the Italian General Douai. Goering liked the strategy, and the Luftwaffe bombed the Basque city of Guernica to assess its capabilities. The effect was very impressive — this air raid went down in the history of war crimes and became almost a meme that is still used today. With the outbreak of the great war, the Luftwaffe raided London and other cities. During the raids on Coventry, 1,236 people were killed. Then there was the story of V-1 cruise missiles and V-2 ballistic missiles. These products, in principle, then could only hit the cities and quite hit. Sometimes such visits were devilishly effective. On December 16, 1944, a V-2 hit the Rex Movie Theatre in Antwerp, killing 567 people, including 296 British and American soldiers and officers, 64 women, and 74 children. In total, about 60,000 Britons were killed by Hitler’s air strikes.

READ:  "Spark" of Life & Hope: How the Blockade of Leningrad was Broken

However, Goering’s air operations were nothing compared to what the British and Americans did. Back in 1932, Conservative leader Stanley Baldwin in parliament said: “I think it is well also for the man in the street to realise that there is no power on earth that can protect him from being bombed. Whatever people may tell him, the bomber will always get through. The only defence is in offence, which means that you have to kill more women and children more quickly than the enemy if you want to save yourselves… If the conscience of the young men should ever come to feel, with regard to this one instrument [bombing] that it is evil and should go, the thing will be done; but if they do not feel like that – well, as I say, the future is in their hands. But when the next war comes, and European civilisation is wiped out, as it will be, and by no force more than that force, then do not let them lay blame on the old men. Let them remember that they, principally, or they alone, are responsible for the terrors that have fallen upon the earth,” and added: “The bomber will always get through”. Now this speech is known by this very name. Baldwin did not call for such actions at all, he even had a plan to make aviation international in order to avoid the outbreak of war due to fear of air war, but many people remembered his train of thought and adopted it.

By 1942, the British realized that bombing targets smaller than a city made no sense and issued directive S.46368/DCAS., in which the goal of bombing was declared to be “breaking the spirit of the enemy population”. A week later, Sir Arthur Harris became head of Bomber Command. This man organised the famous “thousand bomber raids” on Cologne and Hamburg. Then the British were joined by the Americans with their “Air Fortresses” and “Liberators” and the matter went on! A three-wave tactic was devised: the first wave throws land mines, destroying the roofs of buildings and exposing wooden structures; the second wave throws tens of thousands of incendiary bombs; the third wave hurls high-explosive bombs again, causing roadblocks, hindering the work of fire brigades and ambulances. One day, a photo scout discovered that there was an area around Cologne Cathedral that was not covered by fires. It was in a city park on the banks of the Rhine and in the river itself that civilians were fleeing from a monstrous vortex fire that engulfed the entire city. In the epicentre of such fires, the temperature reached thousands of degrees — metal melted, oxygen burned out, and hundreds of people died even in bomb shelters. Kurt Vonnegut’s autobiographical novel Slaughterhouse 5 contains harrowing descriptions of how he and other prisoners of war retrieved thousands of such corpses. The British sent “for checks” 12 “liberators”, who easily threw high-explosive bombs at a dense crowd of unfortunate citizens. The remains of hundreds of human bodies then floated for a long time on the Rhine. Losses from such cannibalistic raids reached tens of thousands of people only killed. Then there were Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and then just a mind-boggling number of victims raid “super fortresses” in Tokyo. The wooden city was burned with hundreds of thousands of incendiary bombs. According to some estimates, up to a million people were burned alive, but certainly not less than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Speaking of carpet bombing, the well-known British expert on international law J. Spaight acknowledged: “We started it – it’s a historical fact.” British historians James Corum and Horst Boog claim that the Germans bombed mainly factories and port facilities. There is evidence, as Arthur Harris cynically said, that the Germans constantly miss their chance to destroy English cities. The British and Americans, on the contrary, did not miss this chance.

It is worth paying attention to the official position of Germany on this issue. I once had a live conversation with Viktor Richter, Consul General of Germany in Novosibirsk. I asked the diplomat, who speaks excellent Russian, if there are any memorial events in German cities for the victims of the terrible allied air raids. He answered in the affirmative. Radio listeners called, sympathised with the Germans and said that the same “allies” were continuing in the same spirit during the assault on Mosul. I asked what the attitude of the German authorities was to these raids. He replied that it was Germany’s well-deserved reward for the Heinkel raids on London and Coventry and the V missile strikes. I must say that his eyes said otherwise. Moreover, apparently the consul was slightly shocked that our radio listeners on the eve of Victory Day massively assessed these air raids as morally unacceptable. He went on the air as a ritual and necessary act of repentance, and found an interesting conversation and even sympathy for the abuse of peaceful citizens and national consciousness.

This attitude is very clearly reflected in an article with a telling title “The Destruction of Morality: Carpet Bombing of Germany by Western Powers during World War II.” The authors of the article are Professor J. Rau from the Academy of Defence of the Motherland (Vienna), Professor R. Abstattarov and Zh. Kosherbaev from Kazakhstan. Here are a few fragments:

“Today, it is difficult to find people who would doubt that terrible crimes were committed by the Germans during the Second World War. But only experts know exactly what war crimes were committed by the Western powers of the anti-Hitler coalition (Britain, the United States) and what was the ideology and background of these crimes. One of these crimes was the carpet bombing of German cities, which led to the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians (children, women, the elderly, the disabled, etc.). More than 1.4 million tons of bombs were then dropped by the British and Americans outside the front line. More than 1000 cities (Hamburg, Dresden, etc.) were completely or significantly destroyed with the main non-military goal – depriving the Germans of housing and the military-ideological one – awakening the hatred of the population for the Nazi leaders. Today, when it is clear that there was no immediate military need for carpet bombing, they have to be seen as bloody revenge. Not to the Nazi leaders, but to ordinary Germans.

Only since the late 1990s has the German public (not politicians!) began to talk not only about the collective guilt of the Germans, but also about the crimes of foreigners against the Germans during and after the Second World War. A number of well-known writers (Günter Grass and others) began to write about war crimes on the part of the anti-Hitler coalition. So, a large television series was created about 13 million Germans illegally expelled from their traditional places of residence. After that, it became clear that the carpet bombing should also be described more objectively. Too many Germans still remembered this, witnessed it. However, the media did not talk about these war crimes for long: the current German political elite considers it not politically correct to remind its current allies of the abominations and crimes they have committed.

A broad discussion about carpet bombing was opened by Joerg Friedrich’s book ‘Fire’ – an interesting study based on reliable facts. However, since the author allowed the comparison of Germans suffocated by smoke or burned by a bomb war with the extermination of Jews in the furnaces or gas chambers of Nazi Germany, it caused unprecedented indignation. German intellectuals pointed out that memories, historical memory, should not be so emotional that such emotions can provoke revanchist moods and moods of revenge.

Meanwhile, according to the scale of cold calculation, carpet bombing is one of the biggest war crimes committed by the allies on the territory of the European theatre of World War II. More than two million people were killed, wounded and permanently disabled in these bombings. Apartments and houses of 7 million people were completely destroyed. In cities with a population of more than 100,000 people, more than 50% of residential buildings were destroyed. In some cities, these losses were even larger (in Cologne – 70 %).

British analysts have found that killing unarmed people with bombs is ‘terribly inefficient’. To kill one resident of the city, in those days it was required to drop an average of 3 tons (!) of bombs. In the last year of the war, more than 1.7 million people participated in the creation of British military aircraft, more than in the creation of other weapons. More than 40% of the Western powers’ military resources were used for carpet bombing. Not least because of these considerations, they actively worked to develop bombs of mass destruction. So, March 8, 1944 Churchill ordered, as his first delivery, half a million anthrax bombs. In order not to damage their own soldiers when they landed on the continent, these bombs were never used. The question remains – where did these half a million bombs go?”

The success of aerial terror was carefully studied by the allies. For this purpose, the United States created a sub-unit for the study of strategic bombing in Germany. This structure included the Moral Division). If the reader thinks that the moral department dealt with the question of the ethics of conducting air warfare, then they would be mistaken. This department evaluated the effectiveness of the impact on the morale of the enemy from the mass murder of civilians and developed recommendations for its strengthening, including by means of special propaganda. By the way, Nikolay Nabokov, a cousin of the famous writer, worked in this department. In particular, the department monitored reports of radio sets seized by the Gestapo and BBC listeners arrested, as well as information on treason trials in specific cities. A correlation was found between the confident reception of the BBC and the effectiveness of allied air force strikes. It was an explosive cocktail of propaganda and bombing. By the way, in the first years of the war, the BBC won its listeners with objectivity — they reported on the defeats of their troops earlier than the Germans reported on their victories over these troops. Thus, if it was found that dissidents and traitors to the Nazi regime were found in the bombed city, then instead of moral support, to this city, on the contrary, heat was added for an even greater “moral effect”!

READ:  Ruble Transfer: Russia Is Changing the Order of Payments for Strategic Raw Materials

It is curious that later Nabokov headed a certain CIA foundation on countering Soviet cultural influence: “Congress for Cultural Freedom”. This foundation handed out grants and commissions to artists and artists, philosophers and publicists, financing the most extravagant areas of Soviet art. All this was done for the sake of total bribery of the creative intelligentsia of Europe, corrupting it with easy money, depriving its own thinking and free will. In fact, Nabokov created European bohemia as a kind of dependent social stratum, incapable of rebellion and true freedom of thought.

Was the Douai doctrine and Harris strategy forgotten in the days of precision weapons, when they confidently stopped missing not only cities, but also free-standing buildings? Nothing like that. You get used to the “good” quickly, and vicious personalities get used even forever. The Russian and Syrian armies managed to take the ancient city of Aleppo, saving it from destruction. The American and Iraqi armies wiped out another ancient city – Mosul. In Mosul, 90% of buildings were destroyed. This is a complete ruin, this is an area of broken rubble. Compared to the ruins of Mosul, Mariupol is a whole city taken by storm. At first, Iraqi special forces and Hezbollah fighters actually stormed the city, but then American artillery and aircraft joined in and began to erase it block by block. According to a UNICEF report, half of all those killed were civilians. In March 2017, the commander of the coalition, Lieutenant General Stephen Townsend, described storming the city as “the most significant urban combat to take place since World War II”. Interestingly, on the advice of the Americans, the Iraqi authorities advised residents of the city not to leave it before the assault, claiming that the mass movement of hundreds of thousands of people is dangerous. Some say they simply didn’t want to deal with the refugees, including thousands of hostile and unreliable ones. They clearly saw civilians in terms of the concept of “collateral damage” and as some kind of burden to ISIS. For sure, ISIS considered civilians as human shields, but they were mistaken — the Americans did not think so at all. It was also interesting for the American generals to assess the “moral consequences” of the destruction of a million-strong city with a population trapped in it by heavy weapons. Obviously, they were able to cope with this task.

READ:  "Putin Sent" to Donbass a New Secret Weapon Against the UAF - It Works at Night, Silently, and Without a Flash

The Pentagon pays considerable attention to so-called “civil” issues. There is even a separate doctrine called “Civil-military operations”. This doctrine describes how to use civilians to achieve military objectives in offensive and defensive operations, counter-insurgency operations, intelligence, psychological operations, and hybrid warfare. This is a very important guiding document in the context of hybrid wars and proxy wars. In the planning section, one of the prescribed goals is: “forecast the movement of civilians, establish procedures and processes that regulate at least their intervention in friendly operations.” Managing the movement of civilians is considered a very important element of military planning. American advisers are supposed to follow it in Ukraine, as well as the doctrine of psychological operations: PSYOP. This is one of the answers to the question of why Mosul residents were urged to stay at home. This is the answer to the question of why the Ukrainian Armed Forces do not declare humanitarian corridors and actually take civilians with them as hostages, leaving for the blind defence of industrial facilities.

We are aware of the power we are facing in Ukraine. On the one hand, they are direct descendants of the ideology of racism and Hitlerism, on the other hand, they are true students of the Anglo-American carpet bombing theorists. Double evil. In the light of this, it becomes clear why the Ukro-Atlantic regime needs a “bad war” — it believes in its effectiveness. It is obvious that the shelling of the cities of Donbass with artillery and operational-tactical missiles is not at all the result of banal bitterness and front-line arbitrariness. This is a deliberate strategy of indiscriminate artillery terror. If we didn’t have an effective air defence system, it would be an even more terrifying aerial terror. Of course, there are also tactical goals to divert our counter-battery forces from Severodonetsk and Lisichansk, but it is naive to assume that when these cities are taken by our troops, the shelling will stop. This is one of the ways to influence the “morale” of civilians in order to force them to negotiate and stop the fighting.

We firmly know that our enemies will achieve nothing in this way. Even the allies did not achieve the planned result during World War II with their destruction of cities, although many of them firmly believe that they did and that death from heaven is a great thing. For example, in the article “The sword and the word: How Allied bombing and propaganda undermined German morale during WWII” the authors write“Our research suggests that strategic bombing was not ‘the greatest mistake’ of the war. While no wave of popular unrest swept the Nazi government from power, the basic mechanism – the destruction of cities demonstrating that Germany could not win, thus sapping morale – worked as intended”. The authors also claim that they studied reports on the actions of 352 German aces that deflected bomber attacks and found that reporting the bombing of their hometown reduced their effectiveness by 4 times (from 4 aircraft per month to 0.5)! Moreover, it grows over time and remains significant for 20 months. This sounds so strange that it is better to leave it to the conscience of researchers.

We cannot tolerate with impunity the horrific cruelty and cynicism of the “moral” shelling of the cities of Donbass. The answer is symmetrical – that is, we cannot arrange a war of cities in the style of the Germans and the British. This is against our beliefs and the goals of our special operation. We have a normal attitude towards moral issues – unlike the British and Americans, we do not create Jesuit moral departments. In the end, our victory will atone for all sacrifice and suffering. But an answer is needed, and the answer is precisely for these senseless bloodthirsty actions. Perhaps, for starters, it’s worth just destroying a couple of buildings in the government quarter of Kiev?

Dmitriy Vinnik

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.