The Ukrainian Army is slowly but surely being crushed by Russia.
Failed Counteroffensive
The counteroffensive has produced no meaningful territorial gains and has wiped out a large percentage of Ukrainian offensive potential including most of the 12 NATO trained and armed brigades that were supposed to sweep the field.
Instead Western heavy equipment is left as smoking ruins across the fields.
Latest figures are that Ukraine lost over 300 tanks, 800 armoured fighting vehicles and 300 artillery pieces in June alone - more than the West provided in all of 2023.
Ukraine running out of options
What is Ukraine to do? It cannot win this fight no matter how much Western arms it is provided. It is running out of men and there is little equipment or ammunition left in NATO inventories. Russia is massively out producing NATO in all forms of military equipment.
The solution for Ukraine is to engineer direct NATO intervention with massive numbers of US troops and equipment being shipped to Europe for WWIII.
Only with the entire forces of NATO, including call up of US reserves does Ukraine stand any chance of even retaining land on the eastern banks of the now mostly dry Dniper river.
Direct NATO involvement
How can Ukraine do this?
By engineering a nuclear false flag at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) and get a NATO Article 5 declaration. You can read more details of Ukraine's plan here.
It is quite a good plan and maybe NATO will indeed be drawn into direct involvement, either by this nuclear false flag or just because escalation is all NATO seems to know how to do.
Consequences
I'm more interested in examining what the ultimate result of direct NATO and US intervention will be.
It is trite to say that trying to invade Russia is a bad idea. Napoleon and Hitler both tried, almost succeeded in taking Moscow and were ultimately completely crushed with their own capitals hosting Russian troops.
It happened in 1814 at Paris and 1945 at Berlin and if NATO becomes directly involved it will happen again.
However things will be even worse for NATO for three main reasons:
The French and Germans were led by brilliant Generals (Napoleon, Von Manstein, Rommel) with a stunning record of success before attacking Russia - NATO and the US are led by utter incompetents that have lost every war they have been involved in, even been routed by lightly armed insurgents in Kabul.
The French and Germans had huge well equipped armies before attacking Russia, by far the best troops and weapons that existed at the time - the US and NATO have historically very small armies with weapons that are clearly being massively outclassed by Russian weapons and troops that have no experience fighting high intensity combined arms warfare against a peer adversary.
Napoleon and Hitler were extremely popular leaders in their prime and galvanised their whole nations behind them to a total war effort - The political leaders of almost all NATO countries (excluding Turkey which will not fight Russia) are very unpopular and could not organise a piss up in a bar, let alone getting their over-pampered, woke, unhealthy and cowardly supporters to fight for them. The only strong, martial, traditional people left in Europe will quickly support Russia to rid themselves of suicidal woke, green leftist and globalist policies.
Thus any direct NATO involvement will lead to massive defeat of NATO and Russian troops in European capitals and horrendous casualties of US and European troops.
And if, in the unlikely event I am wrong and NATO is able to defeat Russia by conventional means, its will lead to nuclear war, as Russia will not allow its 1000 year Empire and culture to be erased.
I return to my initial observation - attacking Russia is a really bad idea.
Source: Wikipedia public domain image.
Please vote for my Hive witness. (KeyChain or HiveSigner)