By Brandon Smith - October 15, 2022

There comes a point in the lifespan of any economic or political analysis when most of your observations or predictions either become mostly wrong, or mostly right. If you have done your job properly through due diligence, research and applied practical insight, then you will be in a position to point out why the dominoes are falling. People have to understand how these events were predictable so that the can prepare better in the future.

The mainstream media, politicians and global banks will tell the public that “no one could have seen these events coming.” This is a lie. Some of us in the alternative fields did see them coming and with considerable clarity. The establishment and their defenders don’t want you to know that. They will deny up and down that we predicted anything; they’ll claim that we don’t exist, that our analysis never happened, or as a last ditch effort they’ll claim that they saw it all coming before we did.

The mainstream officials and analysts have to maintain their image of public authority, and they can’t do that if “upstarts” in the alternative arena are constantly right while they are constantly wrong. They have all the fancy Ivy League degrees, after all.

In my article ‘The Globalist Reset Agenda Has Failed – Is Ukraine Plan B?’, published in January of this year, I outlined why I believed that a war between Ukraine and Russia was the most likely crisis to follow after the hype of the covid pandemic faded away.

In my article ‘Ukraine Learns The Value Of An Armed Citizenry, But Far Too Late’ I argued the high probability that NATO troops were already on the ground in the region and not just as advisors. According to mounting evidence it is clear that western troops are active in Ukraine and that US and European intel are essentially running the war. In some cases this has been openly admitted. And why wouldn’t they be running the war? It’s being fought entirely with NATO money and NATO weapons.

Then, recently I predicted that the Kremlin was poised to shift strategies, rather than trying to hold larger swaths of territory I believed they would instead seek to use a “tenderizing” strategy and destroy the bulk of Ukrainian infrastructure, specifically electricity and water grids. In my article ‘Escalation: Recent Events Suggest Mounting Economic Danger’ published a month ago I stated that:

“With the amount of propaganda coming from Ukrainian Intelligence and NATO, it’s hard to say what is actually happening, but I suspect Russia is changing strategies and repositioning to deploy missile and artillery bombardment of infrastructure, including power grids and water.”

“This is a tactic that Russia has avoided for months, which is surprising because one of the first measures usually taken by the US during an invasion is to eliminate most key infrastructure (as we did in Iraq). You would think Russia would have done the same, but perhaps they were saving that scenario for winter when it is harder for Ukraine to cope…This would make Ukraine essentially unlivable in the coming winter for most of the population.”

This past week my latest prediction came true, with Russia now striking multiple infrastructure targets using cruise missiles and drones and taking down at least 60% of Ukraine’s electrical grids. These grids are now rerouted to provide SOME power to the affected regions, but in the best case scenario they are only able to be active for 5 hours a day. Kyiv city authorities called on residents and businesses to limit electricity consumption from 5 pm until 10 pm and urged owners of advertising signs to turn off their lights during this time.

Ukraine has halted all energy exports to Europe in response to the grid damage. Meaning, the EU just lost even more of their primary energy resources on top of the loss of Russian gas and oil.

Some people might claim that the missile attacks were impromptu and were only triggered by the bombing of the destruction of the Kerch Bridge by a Ukrainian truck bomb. This is false. According to Ben Hodges, a retired U.S. general, the intensity and volume of the attacks indicated they were planned well in advance of the weekend’s explosion on a bridge linking Russia and annexed Crimea. Meaning, Russia was going to strike Ukraine infrastructure regardless.

But what does all this mean, and what happens next? . . .

[SNIP]