The -Other- RAND Corporation Plot

RAND is a famous think-tank corporation for the US government. A leaked paper supposedly written by them is being circulated by Swedish media that claims Germany’s self-imposed economic destruction is a GAE attempt at backfilling the American economy. That would be nice if it was true. At long last, I, an American nobody, would finally get my first benefit from being an unwilling inhabitant of one of the most diabolic empires in human history.

Alas.

I’ll hit the paper briefly, then have some REAL fun. Maybe a rant or two.

h ttps://nyadagbladet.se/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/rand-corporation-ukraina-energikris.pdf

The present state of the U.S. economy does not suggest that it can function without financial and material support from external sources. The quantitative easing policy, which the Fed has resorted to regularly in recent years, as well as the uncontrolled issue of cash during the 2020 and 2021 Covid lockdowns, have led to a sharp increase in the external debt and an increase in the dollar supply.

This first paragraph is my first clue that the document is fake. There is not enough wealth in Europe to stop America’s collapse. Furthermore, the Bidenreich does not want to stop America’s collapse; it wants to hasten it and trigger its economic demolition for maximum yield. The proof is Biden’s first act was ending the Keystone Pipeline, followed by as total a gutting of American energy production as he dared to inflict. If his goal was to prop up the petrodollar by forcing Russia out of Europe then he would have maximized American energy production in preparation for blocking Russian energy.

The continuing deterioration of the economic situation is highly likely to lead to a loss in the position of the Democratic Party in Congress and the Senate in the forthcoming elections to be held in November 2022.

A gentle reminder that you have only about 50 shopping days left before SHTF. Whatever the outcome is of that election, half of America will not accept it.

The impeachment of the President cannot be ruled out under these circumstances, which must be avoided at all costs.

Hah! Getting rid of an American President is a two-step process. First the House of Congress impeaches, then the Senate of Congress convicts. And the Senate will never convict Biden because if they did, Kamala “Veep Throat” Harris would ascend. Biden could be impeached 100 times and still be POTUS. He could be impeached 200 times and still not notice. He could be straight-up assassinated without the powers behind the diaper-throne bearing the slightest inconvenience. I wonder if the Secret Service would even bother to evict his corpse, or if they’d just glue a pen in his severed hand for signing Executive Orders and compost the rest of him in situ.

Biden would die as he lived, a shit stain in the halls of power.

Skipping ahead.

Due to coalition constraints, the German leadership is not in full control of the situation in the country… however, the dramatic deterioration of the living standards may encourage the leadership to reconsider its policy and return to the idea of European sovereignty and strategic autonomy.

I wrote better fiction in grade school. The German leadership IS in total control of Germany; it’s the German people who aren’t, to the extent that they’re reportedly hoarding sticks and dry grass hoping to not freeze to death this winter after martial law gets imposed next month. Strategic autonomy? In the European Union? Whatever, dude.

And here’s the probable motive for this hack job:

The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of green parties and ideology in Europe. The German Greems are a strongly dogmatic, if not zealous, movement, which makes it quite easy to make them ignore economic arguments… Personal features and the lack of professionalism of their leaders – primarily Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck – permit to assume that it is next to impossible for them to admit their own mistakes in a timely manner.

Heehee, yes, let’s talk “lack of professionalism”. RAND Corp doesn’t write analysis of the “Mizz Baerbock is too stupid to realize she’s a tool” quality.

Elite US think tank dismisses EU plot report as ‘fake’

h ttps://www.rt.com/news/562911-rand-corp-ukraine-plot/

A top US think tank has slammed a Swedish news report which claimed that it plotted to weaken Germany and the EU by provoking Russia into attacking Ukraine.

RAND corporation has asserted that the claim is “fake.”

I agree. The war in U-Crime has been coming for much longer, and more serious reasons, than that.

The story of an alleged US plan to drain EU resources to prop up its economy was reported on Tuesday by Nya Dagbladet, a Swedish news outlet, which describes itself as anti-globalist, humanist, pro-freedom, and independent. An English-language version was released later in the week.

The newspaper claimed that it obtained a classified document signed by the RAND Corporation, titled ‘Weakening Germany, strengthening the US’. The paper, which was allegedly produced in January, outlined a scenario for how the US could help its struggling economy by draining resources from its European allies.

The purported plot involved goading Russia into attacking Ukraine, which would force the EU to impose sanctions on Russia and decouple their economies from Russian energy.

The think tank has been one of the most influential players in the realm of US foreign and military policy for decades. Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, who in 1971 leaked to the media classified documents detailing the scope of US involvement in the Vietnam War, gained access to the papers because he was working for the RAND Corporation as a strategic analyst.

It is painfully obvious by now, that the reasons for those energy sanctions have nothing to do with Russia.

Okay, RAND Corp. You’re innocent on this one.

But… but, but, but… GAE truly is in the business of destabilizing and overthrowing sovereign governments without just cause. And GAE, like most bureaucracies, loves to pay organizations such as RAND, and RAND specifically, to manufacture proof that what GAE wants to do, is a good idea.

I perused RAND Corp’s publicly available downloads and guess what I found?

Overextending and Unbalancing Russia: Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options

h ttps://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_briefs/RB10000/RB10014/RAND_RB10014.pdf

by James Dobbins, Raphael S. Cohen, Nathan Chandler, Bryan Frederick, Edward Geist, Paul DeLuca, Forrest E. Morgan, Howard J. Shatz, Brent Williams, 2019

It would be a Cohencidence if Raphael has any relatives in Congress.

This brief summarizes a report that comprehensively examines nonviolent, cost-imposing options that the United States and its allies could pursue across economic, political, and military areas to stress—overextend and unbalance—Russia’s economy and armed forces and the regime’s political standing at home and abroad. Some of the options examined are clearly more promising than others, but any would need to be evaluated in terms of the overall U.S. strategy for dealing with Russia, which neither the report nor this brief has attempted to do.

“How to destabilize and destroy Russia without technically getting into a war.” 

Today’s Russia suffers from many vulnerabilities—oil and gas prices well below peak that have caused a drop in living standards, economic sanctions that have furthered that decline, an aging and soon-to-be-declining population, and increasing authoritarianism under Vladimir Putin’s now-continued rule. Such vulnerabilities are coupled with deep-seated (if exaggerated) anxieties about the possibility of Western-inspired regime change, loss of great power status, and even military attack.

Remember this was published 2019.

Recognizing that some level of competition with Russia is inevitable, RAND researchers conducted a qualitative assessment of “cost-imposing options” that could unbalance and overextend Russia.

Russian anxieties about the possibility of Western-inspired regime change & proxy war are clearly NOT exaggerated. 

Economic Cost-Imposing Measures

Expanding U.S. energy production would stress Russia’s economy, potentially constraining its government budget and, by extension, its defense spending. By adopting policies that expand world supply and depress global prices, the United States can limit Russian revenue. Doing so entails little cost or risk, produces second-order benefits for the U.S. economy, and does not need multilateral endorsement.

Ironic, that GAE’s rejecting this suggestion is why I concluded the 2022 report is fake.

Imposing deeper trade and financial sanctions would also likely degrade the Russian economy, especially if such sanctions are comprehensive and multilateral. Thus, their effectiveness will depend on the willingness of other countries to join in such a process. But sanctions come with costs and, depending on their severity, considerable risks.

OUCH! was that one a bad idea!

Increasing Europe’s ability to import gas from suppliers other than Russia could economically extend Russia and buffer Europe against Russian energy coercion. Europe is slowly moving in this direction by building regasification plants for liquefied natural gas (LNG). But to be truly effective, this option would need global LNG markets to become more flexible than they already are and would need LNG to become more price-competitive with Russian gas.

Encouraging the emigration from Russia of skilled labor and well-educated youth has few costs or risks and could help the United States and other receiving countries and hurt Russia, but any effects—both positive for receiving countries and negative for Russia—would be difficult to notice except over a very long period. This option also has a low likelihood of extending Russia.

RAND wouldn’t be able to find a Chicomm spy if it used both slant-eyes. “Let our enemies in, what could go wrong? We have magic dirt!” No surprise that AIPAC rejected the idea of importing a mostly-white, Orthodox Christian workforce to undo 70 years of importing a vibrant, parasitic workforce.

Geopolitical Cost-Imposing Measures

Providing lethal aid to Ukraine would exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability. But any increase in U.S. military arms and advice to Ukraine would need to be carefully calibrated to increase the costs to Russia of sustaining its existing commitment without provoking a much wider conflict in which Russia, by reason of proximity, would have significant advantages.

RAND Corp was rather dense about GAE not lusting for exactly that proximity and provocation.

Increasing support to the Syrian rebels could jeopardize other U.S. policy priorities, such as combating radical Islamic terrorism, and could risk further destabilizing the entire region. Furthermore, this option might not even be feasible, given the radicalization, fragmentation, and decline of the Syrian opposition.

RAND Corp admits that USA is actively engaged in Syrian regime change. In ways that could promote international terrorist activity.

It’s all fun and games to debate politics, but ultimately it’s a game of using innocent people as pawns for self-interest. There must be limits to that. Some ideas should not even be talked about.

Promoting liberalization in Belarus likely would not succeed and could provoke a strong Russian response, one that would result in a general deterioration of the security environment in Europe and a setback for U.S. policy.

QED. “Should we destabilize Belarus’ government instead? Eh, might backfire.” Yeah, ya think so?

Expanding ties in the South Caucasus—competing economically with Russia—would be difficult because of geography and history.

Reducing Russian influence in Central Asia would be very difficult and could prove costly. Increased engagement is unlikely to extend Russia much economically and likely to be disproportionately costly for the United States.

Of course honest economic competition won’t work, when the supply line is “opposite side of the planet” long.

Flip Transnistria and expel the Russian troops from the region would be a blow to Russian prestige, but it would also save Moscow money and quite possibly impose additional costs on the United States and its allies.

A disputed territory in northeastern Romania.

Let’s see, what else…

Diminishing faith in the Russian electoral system would be difficult because of state control over most media sources. Doing so could increase discontent with the regime, but there are serious risks that the Kremlin could increase repression or lash out and pursue a diversionary conflict abroad that might run counter to Western interests.

State control of media is an effective deterrent to color revolutions.

Encouraging domestic protests and other nonviolent resistance would focus on distracting or destabilizing the Russian regime and reducing the likelihood that it would pursue aggressive actions abroad, but the risks are high and it would be difficult for Western governments to directly increase the incidence or intensity of anti-regime activities in Russia.

Make that MOSTLY nonviolent protests and resistance.

RAND considers secretly violating a treaty restricting nuclear missile development. That is also the kind of idea that should not be allowed on the table. It was rated “moderate chance to harm Russia, low chance of being beneficial, moderate risk to USA”. It should have rated “high risk to USA” because the deceit would eventually be discovered, but perhaps USA’s international reputation was not deemed important.

Aaaand I’m leaving out several pages of Military-Industrial Complex shopping priorities. A whisper in the wind speaks: “product placement”.

Conclusions
…Russia’s greatest vulnerability, in any competition with the United States, is its economy, which is comparatively small and highly dependent on energy exports.

Ahh, the infamous “Russia is nothing but a gas station run by peasants” conceit. RAND Corp should have told GAE that the best way to prevent Russia becoming a threat to it, is to leave Russia the F alone.

But then the check would have bounced.

RAND, the reason people thought the 2022 file was legit, is because you do similar evils like this 2019 file. Grow a conscience already. These are not innocent thought experiments that you’re indulging, and reputation IS important in the long run. One way or the other.