0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
100 $
JULY 2022

Did the West Just Lose World War III by Forfeit?

Support SouthFront

Did the West Just Lose World War III by Forfeit?

Written by James George Jatras; Originally appeared at strategic-culture.org

In the fall of the year 1480, at a point not far from Moscow, two armies faced each other on the opposite banks of the Ugra River.

On the one side were the forces of the Grand Duchy of Moscow, whose ruler, Grand Prince Ivan III (known as “the Great” and the “gatherer of the Russian lands”), had recently rejected further payment of tribute to the Great Horde.

On the other were the forces of Grand Khan Ahmed bin Küchük, who had come to lay waste to Moscow and instruct the impudent Prince Ivan to mend his ways.

For weeks the two assembled hosts glared at one another, each wary of crossing the water and becoming vulnerable to attack by the other. In the end, as though heeding the same inaudible signal, both withdrew and hastily returned home.

Thus ended more than two centuries of the Tatar-Mongol yoke upon the land of the Rus’.

Was this event, which came to be known as “the great standing on the Ugra River,” a model of what happened in Syria last week?

Almost immediately upon reports of the staged chemical attack in Douma on April 7, speculation began as to the likely response from the west – which in reality meant from the United States, in turn meaning from President Donald J. Trump. Would Trump, who had repeatedly spoken harshly of his predecessors’ destructive and pointless misadventures in the Middle East, and who just days earlier had signaled his determination to withdraw the several thousand Americans (illegally) stationed in Syria, see through the obvious deception?

Or, whether or not he really believed the patently untrue accusations of Syrian (and Russian) culpability, would Trump take punitive action against Syria? And if so, would it be a demonstrative pinprick of the sort inflicted almost exactly a year earlier in punishment for an obvious false flag chemical attack in Idlib? Or would we see something more “robust” (a word much beloved of laptop bombardiers in Washington) aimed at teaching a lesson to both Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his ally, Prince Ivan III’s obstreperous heir Russian President Vladimir Putin?

The answer soon came on Twitter. Assad was an “animal.” Putin, Russia, and Iran were “responsible” for “many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack” – “Big price to pay.”

Around the world, people mentally braced for the worst. Would a global conflagration start in Syria with an American attack on Russian forces? A grim trepidation reminiscent of the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis gripped the hearts of those old enough to remember those thirteen days when the fate of all life on our planet was in doubt.

Certainly there were enough voices in the US establishment egging Trump on. Besides, at home he still had the relentless pressure of the Mueller investigation, intensified by the FBI’s April 9 raid on his lawyer Michael Cohen. Trump’s only respite from the incessant hammering was his strike on Syria last year.

During the first Cold War both American and Soviet forces took great care to avoid direct conflict, rightly afraid it could lead to uncontrolled escalation. But now, in this second Cold War, western commentators were positively giddy at the thought of killing Russians in Syria…

…or rather killing more Russians, citing the slaughter of a disputed number of contractors (or “mercenaries” as western media and officials consistently called them, implying they deserved to have been exterminated). That’ll teach ‘em not to tangle with us! It was unclear whether the warning from Russian Chief of Staff General Valery Gerasimov that Russia would respond against an attack by striking both incoming weapons as well as the platforms that launched would be taken seriously.

After a slight softening of tone by both Trump and Defense Secretary General James “Mad Dog” Mattis on April 12, during which a team from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was approaching Douma to conduct an on-site examination, there emerged a slim ray of hope that Trump would step back from acting on the transparently false provocation. (The slimness of any such hope was illustrated by the fact seemingly the most restrained of Trump’s advisers was somebody nicknamed “Mad Dog.”)

When on the evening of Friday the Thirteenth (Washington time) news came that the US had initiated military action, together with France and (the country Russia had accused of staging the Douma fraud) the United Kingdom, many feared the worst. The hasty timing was clearly aimed at preempting the arrival of the OPCW inspectors.

Of greater concern was the extent of the assault? If Russians were killed, Gerasimov was serious.

As it turned out, the worst didn’t come. World War III didn’t happen. Or hasn’t – yet.

In fact nothing much happened at all. According to the official US reports, something over a hundred missiles were launched at three targets. All missiles reached their targets – “Mission Accomplished!” The other side, however, claimed to have shot down roughly 75 percent of the incoming Tomahawks.

In the end, the damage was even less than from the follow-up to Idlib last year. No one was reported killed, neither Syrian nor Russian nor Iranian. Western governments claimed to have struck a serious blow at Syria’s chemical weapons capability. Syrians and Russians scoffed that the missiles had hit empty buildings and that Syria had no CW to hit since 2014, as certified by the OPCW.

In the aftermath of the missile show, media carried unverified reports that Trump had wanted a stronger campaign but deferred to Mattis’s caution, no doubt reflecting the views of professional military men who didn’t want to find out whether Gerasimov was bluffing. Mattis also reportedly wanted Congress to vote on any action before it was taken but was overruled by Trump.

There was even some speculation that the whole thing was a charade worked out in cooperation with the Russians. Even if true (and it’s unlikely) the mere fact that Trump would have to engage in such a ruse speaks volumes about the weakness of his position. “Whatever Trump says, America is not coming out of Syria,” writes Patrick Buchanan. “We are going deeper in. Trump’s commitment to extricate us from these bankrupting and blood-soaked Middle East wars and to seek a new rapprochement with Russia is ‘inoperative’.”

That’s clear from the comments of US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley. She states that America won’t disengage until three objectives have been met: that ISIS has been defeated (a pretext, since ISIS is on the ropes and remains alive only because of hostile actions taken by the US and others against Syria); Damascus is finally deterred from using chemical weapons (a falsehood, since they don’t have any); and Iran’s regional influence is blocked (which means we’re staying in effect permanently in preparation for a larger war against Iran and perhaps eventually Russia).

The last point is unfortunately true, as plans are underway to beef up a Sunni anti-Iran bulwark in eastern Syria to cut off Tehran’s so-called “land bridge” the Mediterranean. Most Americans in Syria are to be replaced with a so-called Arab force – the “Arab NATO” touted last year in connection with Trump’s maiden foreign trip as president. (As though the one NATO we already have weren’t bad enough!)

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir has suggested troops from his country would participate. Aside from whether Riyadh can spare them from their ongoing task of wrecking Yemen, Saudi personnel are likely to become a prime target for Syrians itching to get a crack at their chief tormenters over the past seven years.

So was anything really settled on April 13? On this occasion the West chose not to “cross the river,” much as Khan Ahmed’s force declined to do in 1480. For their part, the Russians in Syria, like their ancestors on the Ugra, were on defense and had no need to risk offensive action.

Unfortunately, unlike the “the great standing on the Ugra River,” which resolved the question of Russian independence and sovereignty in that era, nothing has been resolved now. The question remains: will the US peacefully relinquish its position as the sole arbiter of authority, legality, and morality in a unipolar world in favor of a multipolar order where Russia’s and China’s legitimate interests and spheres of influence are respected? Or will we continue to risk plunging mankind into a global conflict?

Syria remains a key arena where one path or the other will be taken to finally wrap up what US Army Major Danny Sjursen calls “Operation Flailing Empire.” The irony is that peacefully “losing” our pointless and dangerous attempt to rule the world would only be to Americans’ benefit. That’s what Trump promised in 2016. He hasn’t delivered and it’s increasingly doubtful he can.

In the end, the threat of World War III hasn’t vanished. It has just been postponed.

Support SouthFront


Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The west cannot fight with their current quality of troops. Sensitivity training? Bundeswehr underfunding? French stereotypical incompetence? They even plan to disregard entirely the Vistula-Carpathian line, which is completely defensible as shown in 1920 in the defense Warsaw, retreating instead to the Oder-Niesse border of Germany, thus having the entirety of central europe exist merely as “buffer space” for NATO in the case of Russian invasion rather than proper partners. It’s like they’re not even serious with military hardware and tactics anymore. The 2002 exercises and the F-35 are the most glaring examples of this. I believe that if WW3 were to happen, and magically without MAD or nukes, Russia would steamroll Eastern Europe, and have the potential to blitzkreig all the way to Paris, although the Rhine river and the Argonne would be the largest obstacles to a repeat of 1940, except with Russia at the helm. I haven’t done enough research on the French forces, but I’d think that should Italy decide to defect to Russia (It’s a meme, but they also do have a pro-Russian faction), I would suspect that NATO would have to then fight a war on two fronts in Europe, which I doubt it is equipped to do currently. Its current battleplans assume that all countries remain faithful, but Turkey, Hungary, Montenegro, and perhaps Italy and Bulgaria may not. Their larges bulwark in the east is Romania, controlling the entrances to the Carpathian plains, and I believe that in the event of a war, Romania will be the site of decisive battles.


I would say Hungary, Austria and Italy would be pro Russian bottling up any NATO reinforcements to reach Romania in significant numbers, the Russian forces do not have to deal with the Carpathian mountainous territory, they can move northward on terrain that is compatible for large armored deployment and attack.

The Latin Mass

The Hungarian PM is notoriously zionist, a best friend of Netanyahu. Hungary is far right in the sense they want to take head shots at Palestinian protesters like the jews. That is the new far right in Europe. Those that hate Muslims and want them dead for the jew. The old far right is found in the Golden Dawn Political Party in Greece.

Italy has a mix of the old and new far right in the 5 Star.

Austria is much like Hungary, the new jewish far right: “we hate Muslims and would like them all dead.” “Cheer when Muslims get shot at in Palestine”

The Latin Mass

The far left political parties save Corbyn and a few others, are like Tony Blair and Schultz, there are there only to serve the jew. These are neo-liberals. The neo-conservatives are the anti-Muslim movement without being aware of being jew-allowed neo-conservative.


notice the demoralization posts


Most of the romanians will not fight for those who have stolen their resources. Maybe corporations and traitors, but they are too few. Do not take the media, the Romanian media is totally sold to the cows and the west. So the decisive battle on the Romanian plains is a wet dream that the West will not have. :))))))


When the Shit Ever Hits the Fan in Europe… I will See the Arrival of the Russians as a Liberation….to get Rid of the Evil Bastards that form the Establishment…If Europeans think that Way, then the so called Establishment has got a REAL BIG Problem I think… Because I won’t be Fighting on the French Side..the Son of the Devil is their President….and I hate Traitors which the European Parliament is…they Sold Out the People for U.S. Dollar$$$




ok, it is proven now, you lost your mind


Goed hè? Beter dan dat ik een Vuile Vieze Leugenachtige Rat als rechtgeaard Nederlander zou zijn…ze hadden niet voor niets zoveel NSBers.. na de Oorlog was ineens iedereen een Verzetsheld…. de Schijtlijsters


I’m cool with it, it’s just what happens during war.


Fighting WW3 with nuclear weapons will end with the destruction of Western Europe and US. Russia has very promising ABM weapons in the works that would blunt the NATO nuclear strike along with vast territory that would allow good dispersal of the population and some industrial assets. Fighting WW3 with conventional weapons and staying within the conventional treshold, NATO would loose badly, given the fact most of their weaponry would be unable to respond to the new generation of weapons Russia is developing and producing.

Western moral decay in values affects the inner well being of its population and intelligentsia, their thought and creative process being based on lies and self gratification, unable to compete with Russian brain power in regards to weapons development.

klove and light

in ww3 all sides loose……the most destruction will be in europe, around germany


Basically the whole Western Lifestyle will be destroyed…back to the Dark Ages….After the Big Blast…the surviving Western Youth does not even know how to stay alive in a Survival situation and simply go extinct

John Whitehot

destruction around all Europe and Germany, while the area east of it, Baltics to Black Sea, would be literally leveled into flatlands.


Yeah The West Knew That they were going to get Nuked Big Time in the Early Start of WWIII…. Obviously they did not like that idea…Super Powers Go Nuclear…. or Retreat….that’s the Stand Off….Putin Won…playin’ Hardball

Shylo Duffy

I’m hoping Russia has the type of weaponry that can hit the US underground manisons the elite have..


I wish the Elite a Shitload of Fun in their Radio-Active Paradise after 30 years when they come out of the ground again…?

John Whitehot

“ATO would loose badly, given the fact most of their weaponry would be unable to respond to the new generation of weapons Russia is developing and producing”

The new Russian weapons have been made to keep deterrence, thus PEACE, intact – not to “win WW3”, which is a flawed concept.


Yes, nuclear weapons are meant to deter other nuclear weapons, however, when unstable minds think they can cross the nuclear threshold based on their whims, superior nuclear weapons would prevail and win the war.


Nobody wins that war, Jesus


What I saw your definition of winning?


All ABM systems can be saturated with MIRVs and decoys. So everybody loses. :(


The idea is to intercept the bus before the MiRVS are unloaded, therefore a naval and ground based S500 is a reality.


As of 2017 the US strategic nuclear forces consisted of the following:

200 Minuteman 3 with one warhead 200 Minuteman 3 with 1-3 warheads

248 Trident 2 D5 SLBM with multiple warheads.

100 B2 and B52 bombers equipped with gravity bombs and ALCM.

It is not inconceivable for Russia to deploy the S500 system which is a truly anti ballistic system in large numbers (maybe 1000 missiles) on ships and land, primarily to engage and neutralize SLBMS launches shortly after they are launched considering the limited window opportunity. The S500 can handle the Minuteman ICBM as well, even though it does not carry many MIRVS. Of course there is the Nudol anti satellite and anti ballistic missile system than can supplement the S500, as well as thousands of S300 and S400 missiles that have a more limited anti ballistic capability, however they would provide strong air defenses against B2 and ALCM fire by the B52 form stand off positions.

The idea is for Russia to develop a defensive system that renders NATO’s nuclear posture obsolete and incapable of any credible attack, synonymous to carrier task forces that are obsolete and incapable of of defending themselves against superior weaponry.

John Whitehot

there is no winning nuclear wars.

the result of the explosions and nuclear fallout will destroy the planet anyway.

if either Russia or the US would detonate half their warheads in ANY part of the world it would be already much more than life on earth is able to take.


I am not advocating nuclear war, however, western conventional weapons ineptitude can be a reflection of their nuclear weapons ineptitude as well. The bottom line is, there will be no nuclear war on the planet. The financial squeeze resulting from the dollar’s diminishing status as reserve currency would cause US to falter economically and militarily, unable to deal with its funded and unfunded liabilities.

Shylo Duffy

I believe these insane elites think their underground hideouts will keep them safe. However weaponry today one never knows. Forgive me for saying but I hope that those who demand this ww3 while believing they will be safe are the 1st to be hit.


This is a very well written article that describes the current situation very accurately in my opinion.

Manuel Flores Escobar

Western only have the stealth aircraft card to play in a war scenario….aircrafts of USA and Israel are away from Syrian air space when they have attacked Damascus protected by strong air defense…they have to launch cruise missile from long distance…I have seen Ivan Sidorenko channel in you tube..a video of 1 hour 9 minutes..in which only 4 cruise missiles hit Barzah complex ( 5,23)…AAA artillery can hear( surely from Pantsir) before impacts!….


All of us here are already aware of the stand off between Russia and the Yanki Zionist West. And, this is what is articulated above. Worth reading for the historical stand off between Ivan the Great and the Tartars otherwise it really does not put anything new into our knowledge bank. However, I’m sure it will be useful for people who have until now been fed by msm. Since Bob Fisk has taken the lid off msm’s reporting in Syria. Suddenly, there are lots of cracks appearing in the Yanki Zionist 7 year old narrative, which has been predicated upon Lies and the suppression of truth.

John Whitehot

“Worth reading for the historical stand off between Ivan the Great and the Tartars otherwise it really does not put anything new into our knowledge bank”

I concur, although i find the similitudes in the two events to be much fewer than the article is suggesting. The way the “airstrikes” went suggest that only one side has “left the area”, and that is not the side of the Syrian legitimate government and its allies.

nonetheless, the zionist side remains deeply planted into Syrian territory, and we will have to wait to see Syria liberated from all the scum israel and its wahabist and western allies have forced into the country.

The Latin Mass

If a Mayor comes to office and says he will clean up the gangs in the city. Then proceeds to steal people’s homes via eminent domain. When asked why is the Mayor stealing people’s homes. The Mayor responds, the gangs made me do it. Is the mayor insane. There is a photo of a foreign policy meeting with Trump in the photo, half of those in the meeting are zionist jews. Trump is the violent gang, Trump is the Deep State. Trump chooses warmongering devils nearly every single time.


It is assuming world war 3 will be confined in Europe. If world war 3 broke out in Europe, there would be world war 3 in Asia also.


It is assuming that world war 3 will be confined in Europe, which is unrealistic. If world war 3 broke out in Europe, there would be world war 3 in Asia as well.

Gregory Gregory

It’s a bit of a stretch to compare the great standing on the Ugra river to the Yanks having thousands of troops in Syria illegally, aiding and abetting the terrorists seeking the overthrow of Russia’s ally.


I thought it was a good analogy. The river represents the line of direct conflict. Which was not crossed.


The rules of engagement in a battle in 1480 are quite different than today. In 1480 as during previous multiple occasions, armies met on a battlefield and the winner enjoyed the spoils of war. Today the rules of engagement are quite different since the art of making war has multi facets and applications, given the types of weapons available.


It Was the Honourable Brave against the Treacherous Coward….the Coward pissed His Pants and left to change his Dipers…

Dušan Mirić

No, the West didn’t lost the war. The West just won the peace.


That’s another way to put it….


the right way..

John Whitehot

they lost the war, the peace, and even the fifa world cup.

not to mention the face.

Monte George Jr

As Master said to Grasshopper: ” He who attacks, must vanquish. He who defends, must only survive.” Game, set , and match.


Wow. This website is surprisingly so anti-west I wonder how it’s still running and functioning. I don’t understand how anybody didn’t take it down


Yeah it became pretty Anti Western Empire… because they are Lying Bastards… that only want War, Killing Millions of innocent People, Steal Gold & Resources.. and when they are offered War they turn out to be nothing but Chickenshit…it is good to see the Empire Crumbling away…in a pathetic way..Good Folks always Welcome though…

The Latin Mass

Pat Buchanan is insane. Trumpstein is not a prisoner of the War Party, but is the War Party. Did Bolton force Trump to promote Bolton to the War Cabinet.

Casual Observer

Why is that Israel is never mentioned whenever a nuclear conflict between between Russia and the west is discussed? Why should we assume that Israel would be ignored when it is one of, if not the major antagonist in the region. With energy self sufficiency now secure and the abandonment of fossil fuels inevitable what interest does the US have in the middle east other than Israel? Surely the Russians realize that and have Israel near the top of their target list. Surely the Americans realize that too and that, perhaps more than any other factor, restrains the US in its confrontation with Russia.


The Problem is that America is IsraHell’s Lapdog… America will send it’s Sons & Daughters to Die & Slaughter for IsraHell…if the U.S. quits with that…Nothing will be left of IsraHell…and the only Ones Dying will be The ZioNazis and their Psychopathic Partners in Crime…which will be a very good thing.. You can’t Blame the Jews for Everything… American Pilots Drop the Bombs that Kill the Kids

Denis Griesmar

“Ich hab es nicht gewollt” (I did not want this) was the phrase used by Wilhelm II).


The English Started World War One because Germany became a Great Economic Power… England did not like that and took away many German Allies with Treasonous Behaviour… England….they should have hung Their Whole Government back then for High Treason and the Death of Millions….


Same point, everyday without all out warfare brings us closer to Empire Death. F.uk.us are fighting to continue an immoral domination and those in opposition are fighting to not be destroyed. The obvious decline in the West is clearly the symptoms of a deeply flawed and dysfunctional culture with nothing but animosity between should be partners. The rise of the opposition is highlighted by a multicultural unity rarely witnessed in previous history. Peoples pulling together for their very survival with one main thing in common, they all hate tyranny, no matter the source. Keep feeding the psychopaths into the meat grinder.

John Brown

Russia won again against the ineffectual Zio strike.

HighLord Gaz

The US Permanent State is clearly not interested in peace. The only solution is their utter extermination.

Joe Dirt

I never hear anyone on here shit talking Iran, China, Russia, Pakistan who sends as much money, weapons, and soldiers all over the world to kill kill kill.

SF is a one sided propaganda machine to blame Europe, US, and Israel.


“..Saudi personnel are likely to become a prime target for Syrians itching to get a crack at their chief tormenters over the past seven years.” The whole sane humans of this world ache to foot slam the slimeful creatures of wahabbi beliefs.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x