Neocon cowards are criticizing Ukraine for being risk-averse

© 2023 Peter Free


20 August 2023



Who's calling who, "risk averse"?


The proxy-maker is calling its selected proxy — cowardly.


From RT:



US officials are growing increasingly disappointed with the way Ukraine is conducting its counteroffensive and are skeptical about whether Kiev will be able to achieve any significant gains this year, the Financial Times has reported.


The British daily claimed that the US has been urging Ukraine to double down on its push in the Zaporozhye region instead of spreading its forces too thin along a lengthy frontline.


A major bone of contention between the two countries is reportedly the way Kiev has deployed its military.


“US officials have encouraged Ukraine to be less risk-averse and fully commit its forces to the main axis of the counteroffensive in the south,” the paper wrote.


The Americans see this as the only viable option that could potentially bring Kiev a major breakthrough, by severing Moscow’s land bridge to Crimea, the media outlet claimed.


Kiev, however, is keeping nearly half of its forces in the East in a bid to recapture the strategic city of Artyomovsk (known in Ukraine as Bakhmut) that was seized by the PMC Wagner Group in May, following months of grueling battles.


© 2023 RT, US demands Ukraine be ‘less risk-averse’ – FT, (20 August 2023)



Three points for these spineless American neocons


First, Ukraine has fought the war (which the US instigated and has proxied hundreds of thousand of Ukrainians to die in) with admirable courage.


Second, I have not seen even one of these US-based neocon critics on Ukraine's battle line, trying to help.


Third, attacking toward Crimea and leaving one's rear and flanks open is not going to gain Ukraine anything other than a foreseeably encircled (land, sea and air) defeat.


Given Russia's obvious military and armaments superiority, only a four-star American strategy-imbecile — a mental (and arguably moral) condition that appears to be required in the United States to achieve that dazzling military rank — would think that this proposed Crimean focus is a workable idea.



The moral? — If it is prominent, American and talking . . .


. . . Satan (figurative or not) is moving its avariciously enslaving and certain-to-be cowardly lips.