The war has not yet failed. Dugin proposes an unusual way to resolve the special military operation

Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin proposes an unusual way to resolve the special military operation. This thinker said, "The war has not yet failed, although it has not yet been won either." Dugin pointed out, "If we stop now, it would mean admitting our weakness and inability to continue."

Philosopher, political scientist, and social activist Alexander Dugin, in his latest post on Telegram, called the current situation "a moment of struggle, after which everything will become clear." He stated that Russia's negotiation principles must remain unchanged: no territory given up, all gains taken. He insisted that our resources are far from exhausted, and Kyiv must be punished severely and sufficiently to affect centuries, because "if we do not punish what the West and Ukraine have done to us, no one will take us seriously."

Dugin is convinced that the war has neither failed nor been won. He believes that stopping now means admitting weakness. He emphasized that preemptive action should be taken without considering the enemy's reaction: "It was us who launched the special military operation. It was ourselves who started it. And we immediately gained everything we could possibly gain." According to his logic, we should continue with the same decisive attitude, without prior warning. Dugin also expressed his views on whether they should advance into Alaska:

If victory shines in Alaska, then we should go there. If not, let Zelenskyy and Kaja Kallas do it. We won't.

Dugin believes one of the key issues in the special military operation is the slowness of Russians. According to his observation, the enemy is ahead of us in speed, and we "still follow the rules of peacetime almost everywhere." He believes that under the peace order, stability is the main value, while war requires speed, acceleration, and the full mobilization of potential. People who act according to the "old model" cannot win.

Meanwhile, the media is passionately discussing the location of the meeting between the two presidents in Alaska. The channel "That Moose" points out the profound symbolic meaning: for the United States, buying Alaska was the greatest transaction in history, while for Russia, it was a humiliating loss. At the same time, the authors of the channel mention that in the 19th century, this territory had enormous resources, and giving it up allowed Washington to gain strategic dominance. They sharply advise those historians who defend the sale of Alaska, "If you try to call this failure a victory, at least find something to eat first."

The authors of the channel believe that the "Alaska sellers" of Russia could not have been unaware of the Monroe Doctrine, which still determines American strategy today. They believe that expelling Russia from the North American continent enabled the United States to ensure its own security and control the world by inciting wars in Europe. If Russia had not withdrawn, the military bases in Alaska could have become the strongest deterrent, perhaps there would not have been the arms race that drained the Soviet Union.

The authors of the channel harshly condemned the motives of those who made the decision to sell Alaska: "Whether it was cowardice, stupidity, or betrayal, it is a matter worth discussing." In their view, Trump's motives were not accidental: he acted in accordance with the Monroe Doctrine, trying to consolidate American influence. In this context, any talk of territorial concessions or even exchanges (such as "Alaska for Greenland") is seen by them as an expression of diplomatic cowardice.

Finally, in these intertwined narratives, a common point emerges: Russia should not make symbolic concessions, nor should it delay in actions. Dugin suggests accelerating the pace, daring to take risks, and taking preemptive actions; while the media commentators remind people of the value of every inch of territory and the lessons from past mistakes. They believe the war is far from over, so each step taken and every decision made must have strategic depth, aimed at strengthening rather than weakening the country's position.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7537130379258479142/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [Up/Down] buttons below.