# Russia-Ukraine



## yaxomoxay

Just opening a thread since I’ve not seen anything related to the current foreign policy issue at hand.

My quick points:

I am still observing the situation, not much of an opinion formed yet
I think that Putin will proceed with the invasion
The US position seems to lean towards “economic sanctions”, and no mention of possible military intervention. This would be a green light to an invasion. Now, I also do realize that what is said in public doesn’t necessarily reflect what is said in private. Corollary: if Biden hints to Putin that the US won’t engage militarily, the invasion is sure.
Noticing that the European Union is quieter than it should be at this point. Concerning.
Noticing that China is very quiet.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

Yaxo, you remember Kissingers' theory: history repeats itself, but on a different level.

1938-1939....


----------



## yaxomoxay

Ulenspiegel said:


> Yaxo, you remember Kissingers' theory: history repeats itself, but on a different level.
> 
> 1938-1939....



Yes, yes I do. Hence my concern.


----------



## NT1440

Gladio 2.0

Why are we supporting literal nazis like the Azov battalion? This is all the knock effects of the 2014 coup we performed on Russia’s border (then framed their *response* as aggression).

I’m tired of seeing the same bullshit from the US blatantly lying to our citizens about international aggression we take and framing the response to it as the original aggression.


----------



## SuperMatt

NT1440 said:


> Gladio 2.0
> 
> Why are we supporting literal nazis like the Azov battalion? This is all the knock effects of the 2014 coup we performed on Russia’s border (then framed their *response* as aggression).
> 
> I’m tired of seeing the same bullshit from the US blatantly lying to our citizens about international aggression we take and framing the response to it as the original aggression.



That is quite an interesting spin of a protest movement and unanimous parliamentary vote to remove Yanukovych. He was basically a puppet of Putin’s regime, and the people rebelled. Of course America and the EU would side with such a rebellion - Europe and America do NOT want Russia to re-form the Soviet Union again.

There are very questionable people on both sides of the conflict, but handing Russia _de facto_ control of Ukraine is not in the interests of most of the international community.


----------



## Herdfan

yaxomoxay said:


> The US position seems to lean towards “economic sanctions”, and no mention of possible military intervention. This would be a green light to an invasion. Now, I also do realize that what is said in public doesn’t necessarily reflect what is said in private. Corollary: if Biden hints to Putin that the US won’t engage militarily, the invasion is sure.




What choices do we have?  We sure don't want to engage in actual war with Russia.  But it does seem the other option, economic sanctions, won't stop him.  

So basically a mess.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Herdfan said:


> What choices do we have?  We sure don't want to engage in actual war with Russia.  But it does seem the other option, economic sanctions, won't stop him.
> 
> So basically a mess.



Definitely a mess. I am increasingly worried about this. Actual war with Russia is probably out of question, but the lack of mention of military options (“defensive aid” or some bs of the kind) is troubling and might be seen as a green light from the US. I want to hope that today’s meeting is not about post-invasion plans between the two countries.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Mea culpa.

I have been following this with - yes - increasing concern and should have started a thread.

Thanks, @yaxomoxay, for attending to this, and doing the needful; much appreciated.

Actually, the "vibe" I am getting from reading what I can lay hands on, is horribly and ominously reminiscent of August 2008, when that conflict with Georgia took almost everyone by surprise.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Mea culpa.
> 
> I have been following this with - yes - increasing concern and should have started a thread.
> 
> Thanks, @yaxomoxay, for attending to this, and doing the needful; much appreciated.
> 
> Actually, the "vibe" I am getting from reading what I can lay hands on, is horribly and ominously reminiscent of August 2008, when that conflict with Georgia took almost everyone by surprise.



You know that region much better than I do; I guess it’s ominous that we share the same feeling about what might happen. 

Good point about Georgia, however Ukraine has been on the Russian radar for quite a while. A successful Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a massive, historic failure of Europe and the U.S.. 

Just thinking out loud: 

if the west can’t defend Ukraine in any way, say goodbye to Taiwan. 
I wonder if Putin studied the timing to match a very contentious US mid-term election in which the branches might be split again.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

As with Georgia, or Moldova, or the constantly unsettling situation in Armenia and Azerbaijan, if there is an invasion of Ukraine, I do not expect it to lead to an occupation of all of the country.

This is because west Ukraine would never accept any sort of Russian rule, - they see themselves as "western", and look to - and identify with - a different history, language, religion and political culture than the eastern part of the country, just as some of the eastern regions look to (and identify with) Russia culturally, theologically, linguistically, socially, politically and historically.

Yes, we can (and should) blame Stalin for this, given how he shifted the borders of what was then Ukraine several hundreds of miles (kms) further west in 1945, creating a fundamentally divided country, one with an enormous - and unbridgeable - cultural and political cleavage running right through the middle of it, - though this division and cultural conflict didn't really matter until the collapse of the USSR, - while, Khrushchev's decision to cede Crimea to Ukraine, (albeit while Ukraine was still within the USSR), also served to give a hostage to fortune (a hostage which was duly claimed by fortune in the form of a resurgent Russia).

However, - and this is insufficiently appreciated in the west - it is my opinion (and I have held this view for over a decade) that for cultural-socio-historical-theological reasons, - and it doesn't matter that they may not be logical, or rational, or that most people are secular, issues of identity still move and motivate them - I believe that Russia will go to the wire on Ukraine in a way that it will never do for any place else in the post Soviet space.  This - Ukraine - matters viscerally to Russia in a way that nowhere else does.

Thus, this is not just about politics, or pure power (although, naturally, it also includes both of these); nor is it solely about restoring a core and key Slavic component of the old Soviet "Near Abroad" to Russian (neo-imperial) control.

Rather, above all, it is about laying permanent claim to what - and where - is viewed as the locus of Russian identity, to the cradle of Russian culture and civilisation.

To Russians, the cradle of their culture and civilisation comes from Ukraine (the old Kievan Rus), their sense of national identity (and that of the Orthodox Church) derive their legitimacy from this link with Kievan Rus, and thus, we cannot assume that rational considerations will be the only elements in play, here, if, and when, an invasion does take place.

For what it is worth, I cannot ever - though "ever" is a long time - see a single, unitary Ukraine emerging from this, though many in the 'west' will find this difficult to accept, wedded as they are to concepts of current boundaries and borders.

Rather, I would expect to see the emergence of two Ukraines, an eastern version and something that might be called west Ukraine; I would imagine that the existence of a "west" Ukraine will be contingent on (a reluctant) recognition of the Russian right to (extensive) influence - a resurrection of the old 19th century idea of respective "spheres of influence" and "great power" (not super power) politics - on and in and over - the 'eastern' part of Ukraine.

Whether it will be possible to construct or design some form of political architecture that will accommodate both entities (countries) under one (even nebulous) political umbrella (a confederation? a federal solution?) remains to be seen, but is something that I, personally, would doubt could come into being, not given the deep (and deepening) divisions that currently exist between both Ukraines and their respective backers.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Biden and the U.S. government seem to think there's a strong possibility:









						Biden predicts Russia 'will move in' to Ukraine, but says 'minor incursion' may prompt discussion over consequences
					

President Joe Biden on Wednesday predicted Russia "will move in" to Ukraine, citing existential concerns by the country's president, Vladimir Putin, even as he acknowledged disunity within NATO over how to respond to a "minor incursion."




					www.cnn.com
				




How likely do you think it is that Russia sends its forces into eastern Ukraine? Will their goal be to annex only the Donetsk region or perhaps the entire nation? How will the U.S. and the West respond? They managed to get Crimea in 2014 without any military response from the West. How _should_ we respond, if indeed this happens?


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> Biden and the U.S. government seem to think there's a strong possibility:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden predicts Russia 'will move in' to Ukraine, but says 'minor incursion' may prompt discussion over consequences
> 
> 
> President Joe Biden on Wednesday predicted Russia "will move in" to Ukraine, citing existential concerns by the country's president, Vladimir Putin, even as he acknowledged disunity within NATO over how to respond to a "minor incursion."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How likely do you think it is that Russia sends its forces into eastern Ukraine? Will their goal be to annex only the Donetsk region or perhaps the entire nation? How will the U.S. and the West respond? They managed to get Crimea in 2014 without any military response from the West. How _should_ we respond, if indeed this happens?



Looks like they're going in but to what degree nobody knows. Biden was back pedaling a bit from his strong stance today, indicating our response will be based on how bad the invasion is so in other words we're going to slap their wrists while they take over the region.

As far as how should we respond I'm split, I never like to see the slaughter of innocent people and that will likely happen here. I also think we don't need to be sticking our nose into every war out there and need to stop playing world police. In the end we have no real interests there and humans aren't as important as oil or we would've had troops en masse there months ago.


----------



## Deleted member 215

> In the end we have no real interests there and humans aren't as important as oil or we would've had troops en masse there months ago.




Truth. No nation enters another nation's conflict for purely humanitarian reasons and if an area is of no strategic value, the chances of us intervening are slim to nil (not that I necessarily think we should be intervening, though I do think it's a good idea to prevent genocide if at all possible).


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Looks like they're going in but to what degree nobody knows. Biden was back pedaling a bit from his strong stance today, indicating our response will be based on how bad the invasion is so in other words we're going to slap their wrists while they take over the region.
> 
> As far as how should we respond I'm split, I never like to see the slaughter of innocent people and that will likely happen here. I also think we don't need to be sticking our nose into every war out there and need to stop playing world police. In the end we have no real interests there and humans aren't as important as oil or we would've had troops en masse there months ago.



We have no real interest in Ukraine? We are a part of NATO, and the European members of NATO have huge concerns about Russia annexing Ukraine.

We know how the policy of appeasement went in the 1930s. Just letting Russia take over Ukraine means Poland and other eastern bloc nations could be next. Putin wants to re-create the Soviet Union. He is testing the resolve of NATO at this moment to see how far he can push.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Looks like they're going in but to what degree nobody knows. Biden was back pedaling a bit from his strong stance today, indicating our response will be based on how bad the invasion is so in other words we're going to slap their wrists while they take over the region.
> 
> As far as how should we respond I'm split, I never like to see the slaughter of innocent people and that will likely happen here. I also think we don't need to be sticking our nose into every war out there and need to stop playing world police. In the end we have no real interests there and humans aren't as important as oil or we would've had troops en masse there months ago.



NATO’s backyard, the question becomes how many countries does Putin get to subvert in his quest to rebuild the USSR?


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> *We have no real interest in Ukraine? We are a part of NATO, and the European members of NATO have huge concerns about Russia annexing Ukraine.*
> 
> We know how the policy of appeasement went in the 1930s. Just letting Russia take over Ukraine means Poland and other eastern bloc nations could be next. Putin wants to re-create the Soviet Union. He is testing the resolve of NATO at this moment to see how far he can push.



Great talking points for the assembly floor but do they have any unobtainium? Because without that America really couldn't give a shit and that's what you'll see with minor hand slapping and _strong words of condemnation_ by the president as Russia takes them over.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Great talking points for the assembly floor but do they have any unobtainium? Because without that America really couldn't give a shit and that's what you'll see with minor hand slapping and _strong words of condemnation_ by the president as Russia takes them over.



I‘m not disagreeing with you outright, but this type of action by Russia is threatening to Europe. But since this is in NATO’s backyard and we are part of NATO, I’d let our European neighbors take the lead on this. And maybe we have? All I’ve heard of is stepped up sanctions.


----------



## Eric

Huntn said:


> I‘m not disagreeing with you outright, but this type of action by Russia is threatening to Europe. But since this is in NATO’s backyard and we are part of NATO, I’d let our European neighbors take the lead on this. And maybe we have? All I’ve heard of is stepped up sanctions.



IMO this is the type of engagement we should be active in, especially when it comes to the humanitarian side of it and it's sad that we don't. Unfortunately, America is driven by Capitalism and power and that means protecting the assets that keep our economy moving in a way we're most comfortable with by bombing little brown countries who control our interests. Preserving the peace just to keep the world a sovereign place is a nice thought but nothing we'll go to war over.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> IMO this is the type of engagement we should be active in, especially when it comes to the humanitarian side of it and it's sad that we don't. Unfortunately, America is driven by Capitalism and power and that means protecting the assets that keep our economy moving in a way we're most comfortable with by bombing little brown countries who control our interests. Preserving the peace just to keep the world a sovereign place is a nice thought but nothing we'll go to war over.



My impression is that Biden is engaged with both NATO and Russia, yes?


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> I‘m not disagreeing with you outright, but this type of action by Russia is threatening to Europe. But since this is in NATO’s backyard and we are part of NATO, I’d let our European neighbors take the lead on this. And maybe we have? All I’ve heard of is stepped up sanctions.



Europe is reluctant to get involved too. It feels like NATO leaders completely forgot the lessons of WWII. Sure, let Putin have Ukraine… oh he wants Romania and Poland too? Well, we don’t want a war, so let’s appease him.

Did Russia pay a price for annexing Crimea? Not really. So they will keep pushing. They know America (temporarily anyway) lost its appetite for war after Afghanistan and Iraq. They are taking full advantage of the situation, IMO.


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> My impression is that Biden is engaged with both NATO and Russia, yes?



Very much so…


----------



## Eric

Huntn said:


> My impression is that Biden is engaged with both NATO and Russia, yes?



Yes, I think that will happen as well. The question is will we do anything more than slap Putin with meaningless sanctions and empty warnings and I think the clear answer is no.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Yes, I think that will happen as well. The question is will we do anything more than slap Putin with meaningless sanctions and empty warnings and I think the clear answer is no.



I’ve heard as a theory that sanctions hurt the people which ultimately undermines Putin’s grasp of power, now how long does it take? The USSR did crumble eventually…


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> Truth. No nation enters another nation's conflict for purely humanitarian reasons and if an area is of no strategic value, the chances of us intervening are slim to nil (not that I necessarily think we should be intervening, though I do think it's a good idea to prevent genocide if at all possible).





We tend to only go where we can definitively crush the enemy.  And then we still fuck that up.  Well, unless you're a war profiteer.  By that metric it's an overwhelming almost inexplicable success.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Yes, I think that will happen as well. The question is will we do anything more than slap Putin with meaningless sanctions and empty warnings and I think the clear answer is no.



Putin knows it too. Europe is pulling the covers over their proverbial heads and hoping the monster goes away. America isn’t going to act unilaterally. So yeah, Putin probably gets to annex at least part of Ukraine. I believe Trump’s anti-NATO talk and behavior helped get us to this point. Is Trump just a xenophobe who thinks European NATO countries should take care of themselves? Or was he working with Putin? We will probably never know.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> We tend to only go where we can definitively crush the enemy.  And then we still fuck that up.  Well, unless you're a war profiteer.  By that metric it's an overwhelming almost inexplicable success.



Eisenhower warned of the Military Industrial Complex that has come to be.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Putin knows it too. Europe is pulling the covers over their proverbial heads and hoping the monster goes away. America isn’t going to act unilaterally. So yeah, Putin probably gets to annex at least part of Ukraine. I believe Trump’s anti-NATO talk and behavior helped get us to this point. Is Trump just a xenophobe who thinks European NATO countries should take care of themselves? Or was he working with Putin? We will probably never know.




Trump was Putin's bitch.  To say he was "working with" you'd really have to push the definition of "manipulated by".  Trump is a strong man's weak man.  He's a clown in every peer group he's ever tried to insert himself in.  Businessman, ladies man, entertainer, politician... a running joke across the board to everybody except the bottom feeders with similar aspirations and an overinflated sense of importance.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Putin went for Crimea and now likely Luhansk and Donetsk because these regions are majority-Russian speaking and about 40% ethnically Russian. I hate to say it, but a lot of people in these regions would be happy to join Russia. The same can’t be said for the rest of Ukraine, but I think Putin could absolutely win over these border provinces (which have already declared themselves to be unrecognized separatist states).


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Deleted member 215

At least for Donetsk, I read that around 27% of the population favored joining Russia in 2014 and around 40% favored maintaining a separatist state. It’s not a majority, but there is a separatist/annexing movement in the Donbas that at least a quarter of the population there has supported. I don’t think the same can be said for Texas and New Mexico. 

Apparently the current president of Ukraine is open to another referendum in the region.









						Ukrainian president does not exclude referendum on Crimea and Donbass
					

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Friday said he did not exclude holding a referendum on the future status of war-torn eastern Ukraine and the Crimea peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Europe is reluctant to get involved too. It feels like NATO leaders completely forgot the lessons of WWII. Sure, let Putin have Ukraine… oh he wants Romania and Poland too? Well, we don’t want a war, so let’s appease him.



Romania and Poland are protected by treaties under international law in a way that Ukraine is not.

For one thing, both countries are members of the EU; Ukraine is not.

For another, and of equal relevance in this context - or discussion - is the fact that both Poland and Romania are members of NATO; again, Ukraine is not.

While the rhetoric (and tone and temperature) of the current discourse does bear an unsettling resemblance to the political (and military) noise that preceded the conflict between Russia and Georgia in 2008, I do not think that it is possible for Russia to win a war in Ukraine.

Or, rather, to be more precise, I do not believe that it will not be possible for Russia to hold the western half of the country, where they are loathed.  In the east - the regions they currently control or influence - matters are different.

And Crimea is a place apart, and is culturally dramatically different from both east and west Ukraine.

In any case, there, (in Crimea), Russia's interest is, I believe, strategic, namely, it is the current expression of the old desire - a desire dating from the time Catherine the Great was on the throne in the late 18th century, - to have access to a (permanent) warm water port.

However, in the current situation, I think that Russia hopes to exert sufficient pressure (political and military) to (permanently) divide, or split, Ukraine, (which is, bear in mind, a profoundly unstable political entity, and has been, ever since Stalin changed the shape and location - the very geography - of the country at the end of WW2, by absorbing part of what used to be east Ukraine into Russia proper, and compensating for this by shifting the borders of what we call Ukraine several hundred kms west).

This has left Ukraine with (at least) two separate and quite distinct cultures, which are now reflected in their political preferences and wider socio-economic cultures: The one lying in the east of the country speaks Russian, uses the Cyrillic alphabet, identifies as "Slavic", and considers itself part of the Orthodox (Christian) community, (and was heavily industrialised in Soviet times), whereas the part of Ukraine that lies to the west, (some of which once used to be part of the Habsburg Empire - one of the elections I observed in the country took me - quite literally - right up to the Hungarian border), speaks Ukrainian, (even the alphabet differs from the Cyrillic used to write Russian), has a Catholic (along with a version of Orthodox Christianity close to Catholicism) culture, and identifies (strongly) with central and eastern Europe, viewing itself (with some justification) as "European".  Even their respective histories and heroes differ, and their respective narratives of what happened in the country called "Ukraine" during WW2 differ dramatically.

Therefore, the eventual outcome I envisage, is that of two Ukraines, where the western part will not be able to proceed with any sort of integration into the 'western' world, or western political and economic (EU), and military (NATO) alliances, unless they accept (and recognise) the (permanent) division of the country, which is something that they will deem unpalatable.

This tactic has already been applied - very successfully - in both Georgia and Moldova.  For, this is what Russia has already achieved with both Georgia and Moldova, as both countries are now permanently divided, in de facto terms, if not (yet) de jure.

And, politically, both countries are in a state of stasis, stuck in a kind of political amber, resulting in something akin to a 'congealed', rather than a 'frozen' conflict, because the price of change (recognise the 'new' boundaries) is unacceptable and unpalatable domestically.

In other words, Russia is engineering an appalling dilemma: Territorial integrity (which is not possible with part of your population profoundly alienated) or national sovereignty (with the pro-Russian section of your population - and the territories that come with them, permanently hived off).  Because to have both will not be possible under current conditions.  Not if you hope to achieve political stability.

And, for local political elites to openly accept these divisions would amount to political suicide, (for reasons of national pride, political optics - who wants to be the premier who is seen, historically, to have "sacrificed" some of the sacred national territories?), never mind that the recognition of such divisions would serve to stabilise the country, - as unsettled groups with conflicted and divided loyalties are no longer a part of the state - but at an unacceptable political cost.

In any case, - and this is key - the EU (and NATO) will not accept any sort of applications for membership, or Membership Action Plans, (the so-called road MAP for possible future membership), from countries with contested borders, and boundaries that have not been agreed by all of the contesting parties to the disputes in question.

Now, for Russia, - and I have written this before - interest in Ukraine goes far beyond mere restoration of the Tsarist (or Soviet) Imperium, or successfully wielding influence or projecting power in the "Near Abroad", or taking advantage of western distractions, with Covid or something similar, or seeking to deflect or distract domestic attention from domestic concerns - though all of these may also play a motivating role in Russia's actions.

To Russians, Ukraine is the cradle of their culture and civilisation.  This tie is emotional, (cultural, religious) - a matter of core cultural identity - as much as political or nostalgic.

(And, on this topic, - restoring influence to areas where it is deemed appropriate to be able to wield such influence, in the so-called "Near Abroad" - I will merely observe that the western silence on recent events in Kazakhstan is telling).

Nevertheless, it is my opinion that Ukraine is the one place in the former Russian (and Soviet) Imperium where Russia will go to the absolute wire.

This is for reasons of cultural and national and religious (they are all linked) identity: Russians see Ukraine as the cradle of their culture, identity and civilisation.

Let us recall that the ancestor state of Russia, where Prince Vladimir accepted the Christian faith (what became Orthodox Christianity) on behalf of his people in 988, went by the name of "Kievan Rus" - and we would do well to remember this.

In any case, I would argue that Russia is seeking to engineer conditions for a possible conflict that would lead to a (permanent) division of the country.

Now, it will be interesting to see where the Russian will seek to draw the line of this division.

My guess is that they may wish to include Kiev (Kyiv), which, frankly, will serve to stymie any attempt at political change (in Ukraine) for a few decades, as change (the kind of change that dreams of NATO or the EU membership) will not be possible unless the new political boundaries (the very word 'border' will be contested) are recognised and accepted.

And the capital of a "west" Ukraine may well lie elsewhere than in Kyiv, although I would expect to see that issue contested very strongly.


----------



## yaxomoxay

I’ll get into this thread with my now rarely worn Kissingerian hat. 

To answer the question in the title: yes. 

Europe will do nothing. 
NATO will do nothing. 
The US will do nothing, and even made up the “incursion vs invasion” difference to feel absolved (aka “Green light Mr Putin, but go easy please).


----------



## Thomas Veil

That "smaller incursion/larger incursion" talk of Biden's really didn't help; it just made us look like we'd give in easily. Bad mistake on Joe's part.

With regard to sanctions...when this whole thing started a few weeks ago I read an article which suggested Biden and the State Department were looking at going further than what's been done before. Something like trying to get the world community to lock up Russia's financial assets around the globe. That would be really interesting if it were to happen, not just because Putin would probably be furious, but because if it _didn't_ hurt them much we'd probably get a fair idea of how much liquidity they've got hidden away in shady offshore accounts.



Huntn said:


> I’ve heard as a theory that sanctions hurt the people which ultimately undermines Putin’s grasp of power, now how long does it take? The USSR did crumble eventually…



IIRC, that was largely because _our_ military buildup made them spend a lot of money on _their_ military buildup, a situation which was not sustainable for them. I don't know that I'd hold out hope for a popular revolt, although that would be terrific.



SuperMatt said:


> I believe Trump’s anti-NATO talk and behavior helped get us to this point.





Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Trump was Putin's bitch.



This and this. And now that he's brimming with confidence, I don't think Putin believes that Biden has the will to respond in any meaningful way.



Scepticalscribe said:


> Therefore, the eventual outcome I envisage, is that of two Ukraines, where the western part will not be able to proceed with any sort of integration into the 'western' world, or western political and economic (EU), and military (NATO) alliances, unless they accept (and recognise) the (permanent) division of the country, which is something that they will deem unpalatable.



I do understand the reason Ukraine isn't already a NATO member--namely not wanting to prod the bear, so to speak. But at the moment that philosophy looks somewhat naive. I'm not sure what Russia's reaction would've been had we admitted Ukraine to NATO, but had we done so, I really can't see how we'd be where we are today.

If what you suggest comes to pass and we end up with two Ukraines, perhaps we should go ahead and include "Western Ukraine" in the alliance. Again, Putin would throw a fit, but doing nothing will probably ensure that in ten years there won't be a "Western Ukraine" either. It'll be all Putin's, and he'll be on NATO's doorstep _anyway_. If we take the initiative and admit Ukraine (or whatever's left of it), Putin has nobody to blame but himself. He could've left well enough alone, but noooooo...


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## ericwn

yaxomoxay said:


> I’ll get into this thread with my now rarely worn Kissingerian hat.
> 
> To answer the question in the title: yes.
> 
> Europe will do nothing.
> NATO will do nothing.
> The US will do nothing, and even made up the “incursion vs invasion” difference to feel absolved (aka “Green light Mr Putin, but go easy please).




I’m afraid you’re spot on.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Scepticalscribe said:


> Romania and Poland are protected by treaties under international law in a way that Ukraine is not.
> 
> For one thing, both countries are members of the EU; Ukraine is not.
> 
> For another, and of equal relevance in this context - or discussion - is the fact that both Poland and Romania are members of NATO; again, Ukraine is not.
> 
> While the rhetoric (and tone and temperature) of the current discourse does bear an unsettling resemblance to the political (and military) noise that preceded the conflict between Russia and Georgia in 2008, I do not think that it is possible for Russia to win a war in Ukraine.
> 
> Or, rather, to be more precise, I do not believe that it will not be possible for Russia to hold the western half of the country, where they are loathed.  In the east - the regions they currently control or influence - matters are different.
> 
> And Crimea is a place apart, and is culturally dramatically different from both east and west Ukraine.
> 
> In any case, there, (in Crimea), Russia's interest is, I believe, strategic, namely, it is the current expression of the old desire - a desire dating from the time Catherine the Great was on the throne in the late 18th century, - to have access to a (permanent) warm water port.
> 
> However, in the current situation, I think that Russia hopes to exert sufficient pressure (political and military) to (permanently) divide, or split, Ukraine, (which is, bear in mind, a profoundly unstable political entity, and has been, ever since Stalin changed the shape and location of the country at the end of WW2, by absorbing part of what used to be east Ukraine into Russia proper, and by compensating for this by shifting the borders of what we call Ukraine several hundred kms west).
> 
> Therefore, the eventual outcome I envisage, is that of two Ukraines, where the western part will not be able to proceed with any sort of integration into the 'western' world, or western political and economic (EU), and military (NATO) alliances, unless they accept (and recognise) the (permanent) division of the country, which is something that they will deem unpalatable.
> 
> This tactic has already been applied - very successfully - in both Georgia and Moldova.  For this is what Russia has already achieved with both Georgia and Moldova, as both countries are now permanently divided, in de facto terms, if not (yet) de jure.
> 
> And, politically, both countries are in a state of stasis, stuck in a kind of political amber, resulting in something akin to a 'congealed', rather than a 'frozen' conflict, because the price of change (recognise the 'new' boundaries) is unacceptable and unpalatable domestically.
> 
> In other words, Russia is engineering an appalling dilemma: Territorial integrity (which is not possible with alienated populations) or national sovereignty (with the pro-Russian section of your population - and the territories that come with them, permanently hived off).  Because to have both will not be possible under current conditions.  Not if you hope to achieve political stability.
> 
> And, for local political elites to openly accept these divisions would amount to political suicide, (for reasons of national pride, political optics - who wants to be the premier who is seen, historically, to have "sacrificed" some of the sacred national territories?), never mind that the recognition of such divisions would serve to stabilise the country, - as unsettled groups with conflicted and divided loyalties are no longer a part of the state - but at an unacceptable political cost.
> 
> In any case, - and this is key - the EU (and NATO) will not accept any sort of applications for membership, or Membership Action Plans, (the so-called road MAP for possible future membership), from countries with contested borders, and boundaries that have not been agreed by all of the contesting parties to the disputes in question.
> 
> Now, for Russia, - and I have written this before - interest in Ukraine goes far beyond mere restoration of the Tsarist (or Soviet) Imperium, or successfully wielding influence or projecting power in the "Near Abroad", or taking advantage of western distractions, with Covid or something similar, or seeking to deflect or distract from domestic concerns - though all of these may also play a motivating role in Russia's actions.
> 
> To Russians, Ukraine is the cradle of their culture and civilisation.  This tie is emotional, (cultural, religious) - a matter of core cultural identity - as much as political or nostalgic.
> 
> (And, on this topic, - restoring influence to areas where it is deemed appropriate to be able to wield such influence, in the so-called "Near Abroad" - I will merely observe that western silence on recent events in Kazakhstan is telling).
> 
> It is my opinion that Ukraine is the one place in the former Russian (and Soviet) Imperium where Russia will go to the absolute wire.
> 
> This is for reasons of cultural and national and religious (they are all linked) identity: Russians see Ukraine as the cradle of their culture, identity and civilisation.
> 
> Let us recall that the ancestor state of Russia, where Prince Vladimir accepted the Christian faith (what became Orthodox Christianity) on behalf of his people in 988, went by the name of "Kievan Rus" - and we would do well to remember this.
> 
> In any case, I would argue that Russia is seeking to engineer conditions for a possible conflict that would lead to a (permanent) division of the country.
> 
> Now, it will be interesting to see where the Russian will seek to draw the line of this division.
> 
> My guess is that they may wish to include Kiev (Kyiv), which, frankly, will serve to stymie any attempt at political change (in Ukraine) for a few decades, as change (the kind of change that dreams of NATO or the EU membership) will not be possible unless the new political boundaries (the very word 'border' will be contested) are recognised and accepted.
> 
> And the capital of a "west" Ukraine may well lie elsewhere than in Kyiv, although I would expect to see that issue contested very strongly.




Great post, this is the most through and frankly most objective thing I’ve read on this topic. Makes a lot of sense. Thank you!


----------



## AG_PhamD

yaxomoxay said:


> I’ll get into this thread with my now rarely worn Kissingerian hat.
> 
> To answer the question in the title: yes.
> 
> Europe will do nothing.
> NATO will do nothing.
> The US will do nothing, and even made up the “incursion vs invasion” difference to feel absolved (aka “Green light Mr Putin, but go easy please).



The US and the UK are supplying relatively sophisticated weaponry, which hasn’t always been the case. So that’s not nothing. But I don’t think anyone in the West is going to shed blood for Ukraine.

It’ll be interesting to see how the Biden administration handles this. I think they are pretty desperate for a “win” in something. An invasion of Ukraine will look really bad for Biden, an invasion without consequences would probably be much worse. 

On the other hand, the EU, especially Germany, is dependent on Russian natural gas. Russia could cut off that supply which would cause problems for everyone (Russia very much included, who knows if they’re willing to take that sacrifice). 

Based on Biden’s history of appeasement, it kinda makes me think he’d do nothing if an invasion occurs. Americans will not be happy about that as it reflects poorly as our status as a world power- the withdrawal from Afghanistan was perceived as humiliating.


----------



## Huntn

AG_PhamD said:


> The US and the UK are supplying relatively sophisticated weaponry, which hasn’t always been the case. So that’s not nothing. But I don’t think anyone in the West is going to shed blood for Ukraine.
> 
> It’ll be interesting to see how the Biden administration handles this. I think they are pretty desperate for a “win” in something. An invasion of Ukraine will look really bad for Biden, an invasion without consequences would probably be much worse.
> 
> On the other hand, the EU, especially Germany, is dependent on Russian natural gas. Russia could cut off that supply which would cause problems for everyone (Russia very much included, who knows if they’re willing to take that sacrifice).
> 
> Based on Biden’s history of appeasement, it kinda makes me think he’d do nothing if an invasion occurs. Americans will not be happy about that as it reflects poorly as our status as a world power- the withdrawal from Afghanistan was perceived as humiliating.



Regarding Afghanistan I wonder how it would have looked politically if Trump had been there to finish out his version? We know it would have been approval from the GOP No matter how bleak. My understanding is that a lot of what a Biden did was of what took place on Trump's watch, not that Biden liked it, but more of the die has been cast.

I’d also like to know what the military told Biden, hang in there or cut bait? It’s not as if this was good for our economic stability, an unending occupation among a group of people who don’t want to be like us. Besides, our military budget may just end up bankrupting us or all our bridges will fall down. And for anyone with long term memory, many were against invading both Afganistan and Iraq something that happened under… a Republican President, with cheering Republicans.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Thomas Veil said:


> I do understand the reason Ukraine isn't already a NATO member--namely not wanting to prod the bear, so to speak. But at the moment that philosophy looks somewhat naive. I'm not sure what Russia's reaction would've been had we admitted Ukraine to NATO, but had we done so, I really can't see how we'd be where we are today.



Not wanting to "prod the bear" was only a part of this.

Remember, the "bear" was comatose, deep in hibernation, in the 1990s: Their currency - the rouble - had completely collapsed and Russia had defaulted on its debts as recently as 1998 - and yet, nobody, anywhere, was of the opinion that Ukraine should be encouraged to apply for membership of any western economic, military or political body, because of conditions (not least stratospheric corruption) within Ukraine itself.

Notwithstanding that, I think that the "colour revolutions" in both Georgia (late 2003) and Ukraine (2004-2005) profoundly shocked Mr Putin, and brought about a radical transformation in his thinking on matters regarding Russia's relations with some of the countries in the "Near Abroad" (i.e. former Soviet states, especially those in Europe with some sort of Slavic culture).

However, to my mind, the really important event - the ripples of which are still felt - occurred in 2008, and it was not the conflict between Russia and Georgia.

Rather, it was the recognition - by the west - of Kosovo when it declared independence from Serbia, in February, 2008.

This is important because it was the first time since the Second World War that a functioning, relatively stable, peaceful, democratic, sovereign state (which Serbia currently is, - and which it was, in 2008), was dismembered - or divided - against its will.

At the time, Russia signalled strong disapproval, and vehement disagreement, and stated, moreover, that it viewed this action as a "red line" making it clear that it would challenge (militarily, if necessary), any future actions of a similar nature.

Three things are worth noting.

Firstly, at the time of Kosovo's declaration of independence (and subsequent recognition by most countries in the west), - despite strongly, indeed, vehemently dissenting - Russia actually did nothing, at least militarily, as earlier it had done nothing in response to the "colour" revolutions in both Georgia and Ukraine.

The west blithely assumed that this policy of Russia registering diplomatic disapproval (while doing nothing about it) would continue, and that, therefore, Russia could be safely ignored.

Secondly, again, at the time, Russia's strong protests were assumed to have been expressed because Russia (historically) was a strong supporter of Serbia, (common Orthodox religious cultures, and Slavic identities among other things serving to cement this, along with Serbia's ardent anti-fascist role during WW2), and Serbia, frankly, didn't matter: For one thing, the Balkan war of the 1990s had left Serbia disgraced, Serbia had subsequently started (and lost) an ugly war with Kosovo, and, above all, because Muslim Kosovo loathed Serbia and - de facto - was, to all intents and purposes an independent entity by then, or, at the very least, was one not governed from, or remotely answerable to, Belgrade.

Now, Russia did step up its diplomatic efforts, and passionately argued against (and lobbied strongly against) the idea of extending NATO membership to both Georgia and Ukraine.

The closest both countries came to achieving this was when the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008 (the date is not a coincidence) did discuss (and this was an item formally included on the agenda) drawing up a MAP (Membership Action Plan - i.e. a road-map to eventual membership of NATO) for both Georgia and Ukraine.

President George W Bush argued strongly in favour of this proposal; Germany was uncomfortable -  whereas France (who had been lobbied passionately by Russia) was decidedly unenthusiastic.  After some discussion, it was decided to defer further consideration of the matter.

Then, of course, later that year, as summer approached autumn, the world economic crash happened.  The other thing that happened was the Russian Georgian conflict (which Georgia started, by the way, although they had been provoked by Russia), leading to the divided and paralysed state we see there today, where Russia occupies (and supports) what were formerly two regions of Georgia, namely South Ossetia, and Abkhazia.

And this brings me to the third thing of importance - by far the most important matter - arising from the recognition of Kosovo: This was the first time since 1945 in Europe that a functioning state was carved up, dismembered, divided, split, against its will.

Thus, the principle of of dismembering a state (a functioning, stable, peaceful, even a democratic state, a sovereign state) - irrespective of the wishes of that state - was established.

*And we - that is, the west - did it.

We handed that card to the Russians* - they would never have played it first - but, having played it ourselves, it is difficult to replace it in the pack, and even more difficult to attempt to argue that this is perfectly okay for us to do this, but that this is something that should not be attempted by others.

And the Russians have been playing it - with striking success - ever since.

In Ukraine itself, unfortunately, the tragedy is that the state failed - failed utterly - to integrate its two cultures, as each manifestly despised the other, and equally, it failed to construct some sort of cultural and political architecture which would allow for the claiming of, expression of (and respect for) multiple, or several, identities.

There was a time when a federal - or confederated - form of political architecture might have worked, but - personally, and I regret having to say this - I think that the time for that has passed.



Thomas Veil said:


> If what you suggest comes to pass and we end up with two Ukraines, perhaps we should go ahead and include "Western Ukraine" in the alliance. Again, Putin would throw a fit, but doing nothing will probably ensure that in ten years there won't be a "Western Ukraine" either. It'll be all Putin's, and he'll be on NATO's doorstep _anyway_. If we take the initiative and admit Ukraine (or whatever's left of it), Putin has nobody to blame but himself. He could've left well enough alone, but noooooo...



Admitting "west Ukraine" (to NATO or the EU) is not something "we", or "the west" will be able to do unless and until the boundaries (borders? That word is not used in situations where where the boundaries/borders are a matter of dispute) that define a "west" Ukraine are not just agreed, but acknowledged and recognised by that "west" Ukraine.  (And by the international bodies - such as NATO - extending such invitations).

Neither the EU nor NATO will admit, will ever admit, - will even begin to contemplate admitting - a state with disputed boundaries/borders.  The boundaries/borders will have to be agreed - and formally internationally recognised (both de jure and de facto, in other words) - by all parties.

And that is the twisted beauty of the contents of the poisoned chalice that I believe that Mr Putin is busily brewing.

A future 'west' Ukraine could only ever join NATO on the condition of recognising that 'east' Ukraine has all of the rights that this (putative) 'west' Ukraine claims; and such conditions would also apply to NATO.  Accepting 'west' Ukraine would mean recognising 'east' Ukraine.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Huntn said:


> Regarding Afghanistan I wonder how it would have looked politically if Trump had been there to finish out his version? We know it would have been approval from the GOP No matter how bleak. My understanding is that a lot of what a Biden did was of what took place on Trump's watch, not that Biden liked it, but more of the die has been cast.
> 
> I’d also like to know what the military told Biden, hang in there or cut bait? It’s not as if this was good for our economic stability, an unending occupation among a group of people who don’t want to be like us. Besides, our military budget may just end up bankrupting us or all our bridges will fall down. And for anyone with long term memory, many were against invading both Afganistan and Iraq something that happened under… a Republican President, with cheering Republicans.




I don’t think most people are opposed to getting out of Afghanistan- except some war hawks and defense contractors. I am sure regardless of who was in charge and how things were done there would have been messy situations. The Taliban would have inevitably took over the country at some point.

But pulling out the contractors military before civilians and not notifying our partner forces? I’m by no means a military expert but don’t see how anyone could think pulling the military first was the intelligent thing to do. Evidently both the military and intelligence agencies warned of a rapid collapse and chaos if this course of action was taken. I have yet to hear a solid explanation defending not why we left, but why left the way we did. Maybe 11 days for things to implode was faster than expected, but not much faster than predictions as little as “weeks”. Apparently this wasn’t too much of a surprise for people who had actually dealt with the Afghan Army and police on the ground.

If Trump was still President and the conditions based withdrawal was indeed followed, we’d probably be in Afghanistan for the next 20 years…. or forever. I’m not sure there is a political solution to whatever it was we were trying to solve in Afghanistan. In that sense I don’t think leaving is unreasonable. But I think most people see the manner in which we left as disgraceful. And the polling clearly reflected that.

When the President says this won’t be another Saigon, then a day or so later you see people literally hanging from the side of C-17’s taking off and falling out of the sky to their death (or alternatively being crushed in the landing gear), the optics can’t get much worse than that.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> I don’t think most people are opposed to getting out of Afghanistan- except some war hawks and defense contractors. I am sure regardless of who was in charge and how things were done there would have been messy situations. The Taliban would have inevitably took over the country at some point.
> 
> But pulling out the contractors military before civilians and not notifying our partner forces? I’m by no means a military expert but don’t see how anyone could think pulling the military first was the intelligent thing to do. Evidently both the military and intelligence agencies warned of a rapid collapse and chaos if this course of action was taken. I have yet to hear a solid explanation defending not why we left, but why left the way we did. Maybe 11 days for things to implode was faster than expected, but not much faster than predictions as little as “weeks”. Apparently this wasn’t too much of a surprise for people who had actually dealt with the Afghan Army and police on the ground.
> 
> If Trump was still President and the conditions based withdrawal was indeed followed, we’d probably be in Afghanistan for the next 20 years…. or forever. I’m not sure there is a political solution to whatever it was we were trying to solve in Afghanistan. In that sense I don’t think leaving is unreasonable. But I think most people see the manner in which we left as disgraceful. And the polling clearly reflected that.
> 
> When the President says this won’t be another Saigon, then a day or so later you see people literally hanging from the side of C-17’s taking off and falling out of the sky to their death (or alternatively being crushed in the landing gear), the optics can’t get much worse than that.



There is a lengthy thread about what happened in Afghanistan. It started before you joined here I think and probably has fallen pretty far down the list, so you might not have seen it.

But, it is extensive and discusses many aspects of what happened in Afghanistan… if you wish to read what’s been said already and contribute.









						Afghanistan (Again)
					

Afghanistan never seems to be far from the news.  For an interesting, intelligent, and invariably well informed piece on Afghanistan (I knew some of their writers when I was deployed there - and met with them reasonably regularly - and the publication retains - and has always employed -...




					talkedabout.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

DISCLAIMER: The following came to my ears second hand. So nothing to link here, but I think you can file it under highly plausible.

The voice of Ukraine is suspiciously absent from Western news coverage of this situation. You can find it but you have to dig deep, and when you do find it you find out they really don’t want us there, absolutely nothing is imminent, and our propaganda is just making things a lot worse, not the least of which is pulling out our diplomats. This is so Team America: World Police.

I sometimes wonder if some people in the region would rather we just go to war with Russia directly and get it over with. Yes, there would be massive downhill misery initially but at least they would be done worrying about if their country is going to be turned into the next litter box in our constant proxy wars and skirmishes.


----------



## Eric

Anyone else thrown by the fact that it took a Democratic president to stand up against Putin and Russia? Trump would've been sending troops to support Russia, not the Ukraine. Before Trump they had a firm stance against them and always have, they've sold their souls out to a madman.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Anyone else thrown by the fact that it took a Democratic president to stand up against Putin and Russia? Trump would've been sending troops to support Russia, not the Ukraine. Before Trump they had a firm stance against them and always have, they've sold their souls out to a madman.



I have been quite impressed with Biden’s approach. He has pulled NATO together. Europeans were reluctant to do anything, but they seem to be coming together. It’s abundantly clear that the Trump strategy of attacking your allies was ineffective, but the recent actions of Biden have drawn attention to how he is infinitely better than Trump at handling real problems.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> I have been quite impressed with Biden’s approach. He has pulled NATO together. Europeans were reluctant to do anything, but they seem to be coming together. It’s abundantly clear that the Trump strategy of attacking your allies was ineffective, but the recent actions of Biden have drawn attention to how he is infinitely better than Trump at handling real problems.



Agreed, I wasn't too happy at first (even looking back in this thread) but he has really came around on this IMO. Let's hope it makes a difference.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> DISCLAIMER: The following came to my ears second hand. So nothing to link here, but I think you can file it under highly plausible.
> 
> The voice of Ukraine is suspiciously absent from Western news coverage of this situation. You can find it but you have to dig deep, and when you do find it you find out they really don’t want us there, absolutely nothing is imminent, and our propaganda is just making things a lot worse, not the least of which is pulling out our diplomats.




My own experience is that I didn't have to drill down to find Ukraine's position on this. I found it via normal channels like The Guardian and NBC. 

That said, you're right, Kyiv's message to the West has pretty much been, "Shut up, you're just making things worse."


----------



## SuperMatt

Bloomberg with an epic fail:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1489709213085491200/









						Bloomberg News accidentally publishes its pre-written "Russia invades Ukraine" story | Boing Boing
					

Today Bloomberg News published a headline titled “Russia invades Ukraine.” The big problem with the story? Russia has not invaded Ukraine. We prepare headlines for many scenarios and th…




					boingboing.net


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> Bloomberg with an epic fail:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1489709213085491200/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloomberg News accidentally publishes its pre-written "Russia invades Ukraine" story | Boing Boing
> 
> 
> Today Bloomberg News published a headline titled “Russia invades Ukraine.” The big problem with the story? Russia has not invaded Ukraine. We prepare headlines for many scenarios and th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boingboing.net



Maybe the US housing cost surge is also false!!!


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Maybe the US housing cost surge is also false!!!




They're saying it wrong. It’s a housing boom! If you can’t afford to buy a house because of inflation or market manipulation in concert with corrupt government zoning restrictions then you’re going to be mad. But because of a boom? Who can be mad at a boom? A boom means good times for everybody. Similarly defining the economy completely based on how the rich are doing let’s you, the not rich, know how you are doing despite personal evidence to the contrary.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> They're saying it wrong. It’s a housing boom! If you can’t afford to buy a house because of inflation or market manipulation in concert with corrupt government zoning restrictions then you’re going to be mad. But because of a boom? Who can be mad at a boom? A boom means good times for everybody. Similarly defining the economy completely based on how the rich are doing let’s you, the not rich, know how you are doing despite personal evidence to the contrary.



We love the boom! All hail the boom!


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> We love the boom! All hail the boom!




I just realized that bombs go boom!   This whole Ukraine thing could be a real boom boom!  What's not to love?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

So now we're back to "eminent!" status.  

I really have to wonder why Putin would do this now, with the entire western world focused on it.  The only thing I can think of is both Putin and Biden aren't doing well domestically.  What better way to distract from that than slaughtering a bunch of people in another country that isn't yours.    

It's like these leaders, their intelligence services, and their state media still aren't aware that the internet exists and they can no longer completely control the narrative.


----------



## Eric

Yeah it sounds almost inevitable at this point, it'll be interesting to see how the rest of the world responds.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I think Democrats are misguided if they think this is going to be seen as popular just because Trump was seen as a Putin puppet.  Not to mention the corpse of our 20 year failure in Afghanistan is still warm.  Nobody wants us involved in another major conflict, well, except clinical psychopaths of which I am sure there are many in and involved with our military.


----------



## Eric

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> *I think Democrats are misguided if they think this is going to be seen as popular just because Trump was seen as a Putin puppet. * Not to mention the corpse of our 20 year failure in Afghanistan is still warm.  Nobody wants us involved in another major conflict, well, except clinical psychopaths of which I am sure there are many in and involved with our military.



Sounds made up, no Democrats are saying this, then again I don't watch cable news and if that's the case who cares. 

This isn't about who is or was president, it's about uniting against a common enemy and Putin is it. If we're not going to stand behind NATO then what's the point of it? Putin will only respond to force, as a world I think we all need to unite and show it.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> Sounds made up, no Democrats are saying this, then again I don't watch cable news and if that's the case who cares.
> 
> This isn't about who is or was president, it's about uniting against a common enemy and Putin is it. If we're not going to stand behind NATO then what's the point of it? Putin will only respond to force, as a world I think we all need to unite and show it.




I’m saying it’s between the lines as all news sources have been pro military action from the jump. It’s what they do and all agree on. 

This is a European issue.  They should be on the front lines, not us.  Being in NATO doesn’t say the US leads and controls the charge every time.  

This is going to be a PR disaster for Democrats.  With all the domestic threats and failings they attempt to pivot to this type distraction again.  It’s certainly not going to earn any new voters and will absolutely lose them some as the the “we can’t afford to do this” message gets sent out on domestic initiatives but found a spare half billion (so far) under the couch to spend on this.


----------



## Eric

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I’m saying it’s between the lines as all news sources have been pro military action from the jump. It’s what they do and all agree on.
> 
> This is a European issue.  They should be on the front lines, not us.  Being in NATO doesn’t say the US leads and controls the charge every time.
> 
> This is going to be a PR disaster for Democrats.  With all the domestic threats and failings they attempt to pivot to this type distraction again.  It’s certainly not going to earn any new voters and will absolutely lose them some as the the “we can’t afford to do this” message gets sent out on domestic initiatives but found a spare half billion (so far) under the couch to spend on this.



Dems are going to lose handily in the midterms either way, man you're _really_ hung up on them for some reason but this is bigger than any party. A sovereign nation is about to be invaded by another hostile nation, we all have a role to protect those who can't protect themselves. Try to look at it from a humanitarian point of view and not just what will and won't hurt one party or the other.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> Dems are going to lose handily in the midterms either way, man you're _really_ hung up on them for some reason but this is bigger than any party. A sovereign nation is about to be invaded by another hostile nation, we all have a role to protect those who can't protect themselves. Try to look at it from a humanitarian point of view and not just what will and won't hurt one party or the other.




We should be involved.  We shouldn't be front line.  I don't think we are in a moral or track record position to be claiming "humanitarian" effort.  That's little more than a propaganda talking point to manufacture consent for us being there.  I'm sure we'll be doing plenty of humanitarian drone strikes that take out more civilians than enemy combatants.   

At least Bernie put it out there that imagine if Mexico started allying with our adversaries which included a military presence on our border.  Would we be cool with that?  Would we just let it slide?


----------



## GermanSuplex

I’m not saying Trump is to blame for this, but it’s a shame Biden will be tasked with dealing with and being blamed for all of this, while the people accusing him are too tone deaf, dumb or devoted to understand how Trump’s weak presidency and embrace of lies and misinformation emboldened this kind of behavior by Putin.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I think Democrats are misguided if they think this is going to be seen as popular just because Trump was seen as a Putin puppet.  Not to mention the corpse of our 20 year failure in Afghanistan is still warm.  Nobody wants us involved in another major conflict, well, except clinical psychopaths of which I am sure there are many in and involved with our military.



This is not what’s happening.

Biden is being raked over the coals by folks from the right-wing American Enterprise Institute for NOT sending tons of troops into Ukraine. They call it weakness.

I’d also like to point out that the same folks calling him too weak now, were calling him too aggressive when he was pressuring Germany to stop Nordstream 2 in order to slow Putin down. No surprise, these warmongers were working for Bush when we charged into Afghanistan and Iraq.

Look up Kori Schake if you want to see the kind of things being tossed about.

Biden is handling a bad situation in a good way. He is working to pull NATO together. Putin was hoping for the opposite. If Trump was still in power, and something like this happened, he would probably have torn NATO apart by now and Putin would win big. By putting troops in nearby NATO countries, Biden is saying “we’ve got your back” and he’s also gotten the Germans to have Nordstream 2 cancellation as a possibility, which is something they were STRONGLY against up until just a few weeks ago.


----------



## SuperMatt

GermanSuplex said:


> I’m not saying Trump is to blame for this, but it’s a shame Biden will be tasked with dealing with and being blamed for all of this, while the people accusing him are too tone deaf, dumb or devoted to understand how Trump’s weak presidency and embrace of lies and misinformation emboldened this kind of behavior by Putin.



Trump got impeached for withholding defensive weapons from Ukraine unless they did what he wanted. Who knows what other shenanigans he was involved in! I think it was a major contributor to the current situation, not to mention how he attacked our NATO allies constantly…


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> This is not what’s happening.
> 
> Biden is being raked over the coals by folks from the right-wing American Enterprise Institute for NOT sending tons of troops into Ukraine. They call it weakness.
> 
> I’d also like to point out that the same folks calling him too weak now, were calling him too aggressive when he was pressuring Germany to stop Nordstream 2 in order to slow Putin down. No surprise, these warmongers were working for Bush when we charged into Afghanistan and Iraq.
> 
> Look up Kori Schake if you want to see the kind of things being tossed about.
> 
> Biden is handling a bad situation in a good way. He is working to pull NATO together. Putin was hoping for the opposite. If Trump was still in power, and something like this happened, he would probably have torn NATO apart by now and Putin would win big. By putting troops in nearby NATO countries, Biden is saying “we’ve got your back” and he’s also gotten the Germans to have Nordstream 2 cancellation as a possibility, which is something they were STRONGLY against up until just a few weeks ago.




In my mind a lot of this depends on believing the military's narrative which I don't know why anybody would at this point.  Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and Assad is gassing his own people anyone?  We pretty much bailed on Venezuela as soon as the US intelligence's multiple false flag and narratives were exposed.  

This is a civil war with both sides not holding up to their end of the deal on the bargain.  A good pertage of the population either wants to be closely tied to Russia or part of it, but the way the US media is covering it you'd think Russia is just going to invade and take over against everybody's will.  

I have no love for Putin but this is clearly a resurrection of the cold war where many innocent civilians will die while most of us will sit at home comfortably safe waiving our ideology victory flags.

I agree Biden is in a tough spot based on rhetoric more than reality, but no matter what he does it won't change anybody's mind.  I'd prefer we'd play way more of an advisory role and remove Europe's training wheels on conflict.  They've certainly supported and learned enough from us.  Its time for them to fly.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Trump got impeached for withholding defensive weapons from Ukraine unless they did what he wanted. Who knows what other shenanigans he was involved in! I think it was a major contributor to the current situation, not to mention how he attacked our NATO allies constantly…



If Trump were in power he would be siding with Putin, thank God that maniac is gone.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This is a civil war with both sides not holding up to their end of the deal on the bargain. A good pertage of the population either wants to be closely tied to Russia or part of it, but the way the US media is covering it you'd think Russia is just going to invade and take over against everybody's will.



This sounds like it’s coming from some Russian propaganda source. This is NOT a civil war. It is an invasion of a sovereign country by Russia. Period. Just because some people (a minority) in Ukraine want it to happen is NOT justification for it.

Excusing their actions based on this would be like excusing Mexico invading Texas just because there are a lot of people of Mexican heritage living there.

Here’s another take on the situation from somebody with a bit more knowledge: The former US ambassador to Ukraine.









						Understanding the Russia-Ukraine crisis | Stanford News
					

As Russia increases its military presence along the Ukrainian border, Stanford scholar Steven Pifer discusses what Russia hopes to achieve and why its policies toward Ukraine are backfiring.




					news.stanford.edu


----------



## Thomas Veil

Well, this looks to be it, folks…



> The U.S. suspended consular services in the Ukrainian capital and ordered most embassy staff to depart after warning that a Russian military invasion could happen at any moment. *Moscow also began withdrawing its diplomatic presence in Ukraine.*



My bold. 









						Biden Warns Putin of ‘Swift and Severe Costs’ of Invading Ukraine — The Wall Street Journal
					

Two leaders’ phone discussion yields ‘no fundamental change,’ U.S. official says, as both U.S. and Russia pull diplomatic staff out of Ukraine




					apple.news


----------



## MarkusL

SuperMatt said:


> Biden is handling a bad situation in a good way. He is working to pull NATO together. Putin was hoping for the opposite. If Trump was still in power, and something like this happened, he would probably have torn NATO apart by now and Putin would win big. By putting troops in nearby NATO countries, Biden is saying “we’ve got your back” and he’s also gotten the Germans to have Nordstream 2 cancellation as a possibility, which is something they were STRONGLY against up until just a few weeks ago.



Nordstream 2 should have been cancelled a decade ago. It was designed to allow Russia to pressure its neighbors while still maintaining a cash flow from Germany. Now the pipeline is completed and the Germans are pretending to be surprised that Putin is using it for its intended purpose.


----------



## SuperMatt

MarkusL said:


> Nordstream 2 should have been cancelled a decade ago. It was designed to allow Russia to pressure its neighbors while still maintaining a cash flow from Germany. Now the pipeline is completed and the Germans are pretending to be surprised that Putin is using it for its intended purpose.



Germans and Russians working together… what could go wrong?


----------



## MarkusL

SuperMatt said:


> Germans and Russians working together… what could go wrong?



Yeah, I was initially shy about mentioning Molotov and Ribbentrop, but now that you alluded to it...


----------



## Scepticalscribe

MarkusL said:


> Nordstream 2 should have been cancelled a decade ago. It was designed to allow Russia to pressure its neighbors while still maintaining a cash flow from Germany. Now the pipeline is completed and the Germans are pretending to be surprised that Putin is using it for its intended purpose.




An excellent point.  

And, I agree, Nordstream 2 should have been cancelled a decade ago.


----------



## Thomas Veil

> *What are Putin’s demands?*​To end the standoff (maybe), Putin wants Nato to promise never to accept Ukraine (or Georgia and Moldova) as members. He wants the alliance to pull back from “frontline” countries such as Poland, Romania and Bulgaria, former members of the defunct Warsaw Pact. He wants Kyiv to accept autonomous status for the Donbas region and relinquish its claim to Crimea (as part of the so-called Minsk accords). He wants to limit or halt deployments in eastern and southern Europe of new US medium-range missiles. More ambitious still, he wants to redesign Europe’s “security architecture”, to re-establish Russia’s influence and extend its geopolitical reach. To most of this, the US says “no”. Hence the current crisis.



Putin is dreaming.

If these are indeed his motives, his ego is writing checks his strategy can’t cash. If anything, his actions are unifying and strengthening the resolve of the West. They will end up _accelerating_ the very things he wants to quash.

In the background a Cold War II has been brewing. All this is going to do is make it official.









						The edge of war: what, exactly, does Putin want in Ukraine?
					

The massive military buildup could be a bluff, or a political ploy designed for a Russian audience. Either way, the US is digging in




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## SuperMatt

Thomas Veil said:


> Putin is dreaming.
> 
> If these are indeed his motives, his ego is writing checks his strategy can’t cash. If anything, his actions are unifying and strengthening the resolve of the West. They will end up _accelerating_ the very things he wants to quash.
> 
> In the background a Cold War II has been brewing. All this is going to do is make it official.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The edge of war: what, exactly, does Putin want in Ukraine?
> 
> 
> The massive military buildup could be a bluff, or a political ploy designed for a Russian audience. Either way, the US is digging in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



Perhaps he got this confidence from 4 years of Trump trashing NATO allies and refusing to stand up to him. We know for a fact that that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections, and if Putin had this invasion together sooner, he probably could have pulled it off under a Trump presidency. The fact that Biden actually got Germany to put the cancellation of Nordstream 2 on the table shows you how he is infinitely more effective at handling such a situation.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Thomas Veil said:


> Well, this looks to be it, folks…
> 
> 
> My bold.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden Warns Putin of ‘Swift and Severe Costs’ of Invading Ukraine — The Wall Street Journal
> 
> 
> Two leaders’ phone discussion yields ‘no fundamental change,’ U.S. official says, as both U.S. and Russia pull diplomatic staff out of Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Well, candidly, I think that the Americans (especially Democrat administrations) are haunted by what happened to Chris Stevens; imagine if something similar occurred, and the resulting outcry (not least from Republicans and their appalling fellow travellers).

Granted, several (western) European countries (Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, UK, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Germany and Cyprus among others) have advised their citizens to leave Ukraine, (as have the US, Australia, and NZ) and are reducing the numbers staffing their embassies (and, in some cases, have moved embassy and consular staff to places such as Lviv, the far west of (European) Ukraine).

And some airlines have curtailed, or suspended outright, their commercial flights to Ukraine.

However, to me, the real sign - and signal - that something on the lines of military action is imminent will be the actions of the Chinese; thus far, while their citizens have been advised to "keep a close eye" on Ukraine, they have not been advised to leave, and nor has the Chinese embassy reduced its staff or curtailed its activities in Kyiv in any way.

While @MarkusL rightly drew attention to Russian gas networks (Nordstream 2) - and the importance of ending Europe's regrettable energy reliance on Russia, Nicola Sturgeon (the Scottish SNP leader) has argued strongly for tighter controls in the City of London where vast amounts of dubious monies emanating from Russia are thought to wield extraordinary (and excessive) influence; the distinguished writer Anne Applebaum has put it more bluntly, calling for steps to be taken to deal with the flow of Russian monies being laundered through London.

Guns (tanks, bombs) aren't the only weapons that can be called upon; Russia would also feel (as in suffer from) the imposition of severe economic sanctions.


----------



## Edd

Scepticalscribe said:


> Well, candidly, I think that the Americans (especially Democrat administrations) are haunted by what happened to Chris Stevens; imagine if something similar occurred, and the resulting outcry (not least from republican and their appalling fellow travellers).
> 
> Granted, several (western) European countries (Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, UK, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Germany and Cyprus among others) have advised their citizens to leave Ukraine, (as have the US, Australia, and NZ) and are reducing the numbers staffing their embassies (and, in some cases, have moved embassy and consular staff to places such as Lviv, the far west of (European) Ukraine).
> 
> And some airlines have curtailed, or suspended outright, their commercial flights to Ukraine.
> 
> However, to me, the real sign - and signal - that something on the lines of military action is imminent will be the actions of the Chinese; thus far, while their citizens have been advised to "keep a close eye" on Ukraine, they have not been advised to leave, and nor has the Chinese embassy reduced its staff or curtailed its activities in Kyiv in any way.
> 
> While @MarkusL rightly drew attention to Russian gas networks (Nordstream 2) - and the importance of ending Europe's regrettable energy reliance on Russia, Nicola Sturgeon (the Scottish SNP leader) has argued strongly for tighter controls in the City of London where vast amounts of dubious monies emanating from Russia are thought to wield extraordinary (and excessive) influence; the distinguished writer Anne Applebaum has put it more bluntly, calling for steps to be taken to deal with the flow of Russian monies being laundered through London.
> 
> Guns (tanks, bombs) aren't the only weapons that can be called upon; Russia would also feel severe economic sanctions.



I'm going to sound naive.  About the Chinese, are you thinking they have inside information about Putin's true intentions here?


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Well, candidly, I think that the Americans (especially Democrat administrations) are haunted by what happened to Chris Stevens; imagine if something similar occurred, and the resulting outcry (not least from republican and their appalling fellow travellers).
> 
> Granted, several (western) European countries (Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, UK, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Germany and Cyprus among others) have advised their citizens to leave Ukraine, (as have the US, Australia, and NZ) and are reducing the numbers staffing their embassies (and, in some cases, have moved embassy and consular staff to places such as Lviv, the far west of (European) Ukraine).
> 
> And some airlines have curtailed, or suspended outright, their commercial flights to Ukraine.
> 
> However, to me, the real sign - and signal - that something on the lines of military action is imminent will be the actions of the Chinese; thus far, while their citizens have been advised to "keep a close eye" on Ukraine, they have not been advised to leave, and nor has the Chinese embassy reduced its staff or curtailed its activities in Kyiv in any way.
> 
> While @MarkusL rightly drew attention to Russian gas networks (Nordstream 2) - and the importance of ending Europe's regrettable energy reliance on Russia, Nicola Sturgeon (the Scottish SNP leader) has argued strongly for tighter controls in the City of London where vast amounts of dubious monies emanating from Russia are thought to wield extraordinary (and excessive) influence; the distinguished writer Anne Applebaum has put it more bluntly, calling for steps to be taken to deal with the flow of Russian monies being laundered through London.
> 
> Guns (tanks, bombs) aren't the only weapons that can be called upon; Russia would also feel severe economic sanctions.



My absolutely layperson view is this: Putin does things Putin can get away with scot free. Present situation doesn't seem like Putin can get away with war scot free. Now Putin needs to save face without looking weak. If this was trivial, he would have done it already. Putin is in damage control mode. I suspect war doesn't control damage too well. Thus, no war.


----------



## Zoidberg

Edd said:


> I'm going to sound naive.  About the Chinese, are you thinking they have inside information about Putin's true intentions here?



They are frenemies now (in that they have different but similar interests). I don't think Russia would dare hurt one hair of the Chinese representatives. That said, for all we know, they have been told to pack up and be ready to leave by a certain date.


----------



## Edd

Zoidberg said:


> They are frenemies now (in that they have different but similar interests). I don't think Russia would dare hurt one hair of the Chinese representatives. That said, for all we know, they have been told to pack up and be ready to leave by a certain date.



I've a sense of the Russia/China relationship but the notion that Putin told them "Hey guys, this is BS, no worries" confuses me.  If they're in cahoots, wouldn't China evacuate the embassy as a part of Russia's ruse?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Edd said:


> I'm going to sound naive.  About the Chinese, are you thinking they have inside information about Putin's true intentions here?




No, not necessarily. 

 However, that does not preclude the possibility that they might be warned - or advised - in advance before anything does happen.  In fact, I would expect something of the sort to take place.

In other words, I would be surprised if Mr Putin was prepared to risk Chinese casualties even as an accidental, or unintentional, side effect, or consequence, of any foreign adventure (even in the "Near Abroad") that he might have it in mind to embark upon in Ukraine.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Edd said:


> I've a sense of the Russia/China relationship but the notion that Putin told them "Hey guys, this is BS, no worries" confuses me.  If they're in cahoots, wouldn't China evacuate the embassy as a part of Russia's ruse?




This is too unsubtle a reading.

They are not "in cahoots".  China's attitude is best viewed as benign neutrality.

However, they are not antagonists, and Mr Putin will not wish to generate a situation where circumstances compel current Chinese detached benevolence on the matter of Russian interests in Ukraine to undergo revision or re-evaluation.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> They are frenemies now (in that they have different but similar interests). I don't think Russia would dare hurt one hair of the Chinese representatives. That said, for all we know, they have been told to pack up and be ready to leave by a certain date.



Well said.

That is a distinct possibility.


----------



## Edd

Sorry Zoidberg, I didn't read your reply closely enough.


----------



## Zoidberg

Edd said:


> Sorry Zoidberg, I didn't read your reply closely enough.




Russia and China will possibly clash in Africa at some point, but Ukraine is clearly not China's turf, so they can be expected to stay out of the way. If this conflict weakens the EU, US and NATO, it benefits China indirectly, so even if they are not really allies with the Russians, they have an incentive to cooperate with them to a point. Friends of circumstance if you will.

Other nations have no solid advance information about the now probable invasion, so they are being prudent and getting their people out ahead of time, but for all we know China knows that as long as they evacuate by Tuesday night it's fine (but not too early, or that would set off some unmistakable alarm bells).


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Mr Putin will not wish to generate a situation where circumstances compel current Chinese detached benevolence on the matter of Russian interests in Ukraine to undergo revision or re-evaluation.



Indeed, a conflict between China and Russia would end very poorly for Russia. I can't imagine Beijing to show the sort of compunction and restraint in war that one expects from Western nations that have to deal with elections, free press and opposition parties.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Russia and China will possibly clash in Africa at some point, but Ukraine is clearly not China's turf, so they can be expected to stay out of the way.




In addition to Africa, - with which I agree, though it won't happen for some time, as China's interventions & support in Africa tend to take mainly an economic approach - I would also argue (or, rather, submit) that the map of Siberia may look quite different in around half a century or so, and not to the benefit of Russia.

However, I would be very surprised if Russia (tumbling birth rates, frightful demographics, dodgy economics and limited economic growth) will be able to lay credible claim to quite as much of the eastern Siberian landmass (with all of its mineral and natural resources wealth) as is the case at present, whereas China may cast covetous eyes (its needs - re population, economy, and resources - could well be very different to that of Russia) in the direction of parts of eastern Siberia.  But, that is a long way off, and is something that I do not envisage happening for several decades yet.

Or, rather, I will be astonished (but, obviously, will hardly be around to witness this in person) if China does not challenge - in some way - for this.

But agreed, China will not challenge for Ukraine; this is not China's turf.

And, moreover, China may also wish (in the future) for a degree of benign neutrality from Russia should China wish to act on issues of interest to China, such as Taiwan.



Zoidberg said:


> If this conflict weakens the EU, US and NATO, it benefits China indirectly, so even if they are not really allies with the Russians, they have an incentive to cooperate with them to a point. Friends of circumstance if you will.



Exactly.

A mutually convenient relationship; a state of benevolent neutrality - as both would greatly desire to see a weakened EU - and an incapable US, and NATO shown to be inadequate.

They are not allies, but they have common interests, and shared preferred outcomes on a limited range of issues; for now, at least, they are not antagonists.



Zoidberg said:


> Other nations have no solid advance information about the now probable invasion, so they are being prudent and getting their people out ahead of time, but for all we know China knows that as long as they evacuate by Tuesday night it's fine (but not too early, or that would set off some unmistakable alarm bells).



I believe that China will be informed about any proposed action planned by Russia, - so that precautions (if necessary) can be taken, but this may not have happened yet.


----------



## Zoidberg

Not really relevant, but it's interesting that the US is operating their drones in the open (the ones they want to show, that is), and they can thus tracked by the general public:

This is an RQ4A Global Hawk flying over Eastern Ukraine right now: https://www.flightradar24.com/FORTE12/2acf2d4d. It can fly for over 30 hours so it will be around for a while. It gives us a rare real time glimpse into their flight paths.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Zoidberg

theSeb said:


> China does have interests in Ukraine and are trying to build relationships with countries like Ukraine and Poland. They are leasing quite a lot of land and importing quite a lot of food from Ukraine.



That can be said from pretty much every single country in the world: the Chinese invest in harbours in Australia, in whole islands in the Indian ocean, they buy food from everywhere, they put up telecom infrastructure wherever they can, they invest in land/real estate everywhere. Doesn't mean they care that much about Ukraine, they know it's not their natural turf. Just like investment funds that put some seed money into hundreds of startups, but they are not really invested in any one in particular until it shows a lot of promise and starts growing a lot. From my brief foray in the startup world and the endless boring meetings they made us watch, they understand it's okay to invest and lose a little bit on a lot of small projects if it guarantees a foot in the door when one of them happens to balloon.  It also serves to build a welcome –from their standpoint– dependence on Chinese exports (For the record, Russia does it as well in African countries with mercenaries since France lost its influence in the region, and US influence is also a given pretty much everywhere in one way or another). If Russia invades and somehow gets their asses whooped, they will learn from their mistakes. If they take Ukraine swiftly, they'll learn from their success. Playing armchair geopolitics as we are, I'd wager that China stands to gain much more from the current crisis in NATO/US/EU than they stand to lose from their small direct investments if Ukraine sinks into a war.


----------



## Citysnaps

I like Biden's strategy of publicly disclosing Russian strategy/plans picked up through US intelligence means. I think that will pay off allowing Putin to slowly back down without losing too much face.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Seems like all of this could've been avoided with a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO. In many ways I think NATO has outlived its purpose. Would we tolerate Mexico joining a Russian alliance? 

And before I get called a Russian asset or whatever, no, I don't like the Russian government or Putin. They are certainly a "bad guy" here. But call me insane for being skeptical about reigniting the Cold War. Still hoping this is all going to blow over.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> This sounds like it’s coming from some Russian propaganda source. This is NOT a civil war. It is an invasion of a sovereign country by Russia. Period. Just because some people (a minority) in Ukraine want it to happen is NOT justification for it.
> 
> Excusing their actions based on this would be like excusing Mexico invading Texas just because there are a lot of people of Mexican heritage living there.
> 
> Here’s another take on the situation from somebody with a bit more knowledge: The former US ambassador to Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Understanding the Russia-Ukraine crisis | Stanford News
> 
> 
> As Russia increases its military presence along the Ukrainian border, Stanford scholar Steven Pifer discusses what Russia hopes to achieve and why its policies toward Ukraine are backfiring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.stanford.edu




Thanks for sharing the link.  I wonder how much effective Russian propaganda happens within Ukraine, meaning people buying "you'd be better off more aligned with us".  I've heard their economy isn't doing great even before all this and that can lead some to support leaders like Trump Putin to solve their economic woes when the current government seemingly isn't doing much about it.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> Seems like all of this could've been avoided with a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO. In many ways I think NATO has outlived its purpose. Would we tolerate Mexico joining a Russian alliance?
> 
> And before I get called a Russian asset or whatever, no, I don't like the Russian government or Putin. They are certainly a "bad guy" here. But call me insane for being skeptical about reigniting the Cold War. Still hoping this is all going to blow over.



On the contrary, this is exactly why NATO is more relevant than ever. It’s a defensive alliance, necessary due to Russia proving again that they remain essentially a bully.


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> Seems like all of this could've been avoided with a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO. In many ways I think NATO has outlived its purpose. Would we tolerate Mexico joining a Russian alliance?
> 
> And before I get called a Russian asset or whatever, no, I don't like the Russian government or Putin. They are certainly a "bad guy" here. But call me insane for being skeptical about reigniting the Cold War. Still hoping this is all going to blow over.



It looks like Putin wanted a guarantee from Ukraine that they would not join NATO, because as Russia realizes this isn’t going well, they are ramping up diplomatic talks. Part of those talks: the Ukrainian president hints at giving up the “dream” of joining NATO.

NATO isn’t a threat to take over Russia. It IS a bulwark against his expansion. If Ukraine joins NATO, Putin can effectively give up HIS dream of annexing Ukraine, thereby expanding Russia’s boundaries.

All signs (at the moment) seem to indicate that Russia wants to talk, not invade. Biden’s strategy appears to be working quite well. I hope it continues to work and that all of this is resolved peacefully.


----------



## Huntn

TBL said:


> Seems like all of this could've been avoided with a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO. In many ways I think NATO has outlived its purpose. Would we tolerate Mexico joining a Russian alliance?
> 
> And before I get called a Russian asset or whatever, no, I don't like the Russian government or Putin. They are certainly a "bad guy" here. But call me insane for being skeptical about reigniting the Cold War. Still hoping this is all going to blow over.



You Russian asset! 
The idea that Russia should be allowed to dictate to any country who it can or can’t join in a partnership military or economic is preposterous. Putin is a defacto dictator. This is a regional bully playing his manipulative, sinister games.

I don’t feel that NATO has outlived it’s purpose. It’s a military alliance of Western European Nations that we joined, yes during the Cold War, but it gives strength to everyone involved against an arguably rogue Nation. Considering  how Ukraine has been treated by Russia it is perfectly natural for Ukraine to want to join NATO because then an invasion would put a completely different light on Putin’s aggression.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> All signs (at the moment) seem to indicate that Russia wants to talk, not invade



There is no way that Russia won’t invade. Putin certainly got some sort of green light from the western countries. Call me a cynic, but I am pretty sure all the calls and visits to Putin were to make sure that gas would still flow westward even after the invasion rather than actual diplomacy. Want to stop - or at least pressure - a Russian invasion? Put 1000 American soldiers at the border, or leave the embassy in Kiev.

I particularly like the US-Europe grandstanding. “We’ll punish Russia!”  while Putin probably thinks “maybe, I got Ukraine now, an alliance with China, gasducts, and quite likely I’ll keep most EU/German business.”



> . Biden’s strategy appears to be working quite well.





I almost spit my coffee. Biden’s foreign policy is as awful as the post Bill Clinton foreign policy. And here he is showing, once again, American unreliability. I am actually very disappointed because I had high hopes for Biden in matters of foreign policy.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> Seems like all of this could've been avoided with a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO.



This is a very naive belief. Russia - and Putin of course - are quite paranoid. They have been paranoid since the Berlin Wall fell if not since Stalin. Paranoia is their middle name. Right or wrong they feel threatened. They feel the US/NATO presence everywhere.

Which guarantee could Nato and the rest of the world give Russia? A promise? All it takes to join nato is a few signatures. They can be done in secret, and shock Russia, making Ukraine THE untouchable stronghold of the area. 

“I promise that we won’t allow Ukraine to join NATO” is not enough. Even a signed treaty would not be enough as Russia would have very little enforcement power. Once Ukraine joins NATO, Russian military strength (on a geopolitical scene) is gone forever. They can’t risk it, even if there is a “promise.”


----------



## Deleted member 215

So then what can be done? If Russia sees Ukraine's joining of NATO as an existential threat and it will always be a possibility, it seems that an invasion is inevitable. Does Russia want to risk world war to mitigate its paranoia?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> And before I get called a Russian asset or whatever, no, I don't like the Russian government or Putin. They are certainly a "bad guy" here. But call me insane for being skeptical about reigniting the Cold War. Still hoping this is all going to blow over.




I’ve been recently established as a Russia sympathizing anti-vaxxer who believes 9/11 was orchestrated by a family of bigfoots avenging the aborted fetuses tossed off the western edge of the flat earth.  You've started the ball rolling.  The rest will just follow organically.  I'll keep my eye out for when I should send you a membership card.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I’ve been recently established as a Russia sympathizing anti-vaxxer who believes 9/11 was orchestrated by a family of bigfoots avenging the aborted fetuses tossed off the western edge of the flat earth.  You've started the ball rolling.  The rest will just follow organically.  I'll keep my eye out for when I should send you a membership card.




'Tis the life we chose. As a non-Democrat quasi-isolationist leftist, I have enemies on many sides.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> So then what can be done? If Russia sees Ukraine's joining of NATO as an existential threat and it will always be a possibility, it seems that an invasion is inevitable. Does Russia want to risk world war to mitigate its paranoia?



They are not risking the world. No one will come in defense of Ukraine. This planned invasion has been in the news for months - and us political junkies have talked about Russia and Ukraine for years - and did you see anything concrete happening? Anything that would indicate a “if you do it it’s WW3”? Anything that would indicate a “we’re willing to go all the way to defend Ukraine?” (Which would be the main deterrent). 

Exactly, I didn’t think so. 

Lots of talking - I want to believe most in good faith - and nothing concrete.


----------



## Deleted member 215

If 2014 is an indicator of anything (which, I believe it is), then I agree. If Russia does invade, there will likely be no military response from Europe or the U.S.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> If 2014 is an indicator of anything (which, I believe it is), then I agree. If Russia does invade, there will likely be no military response from Europe or the U.S.



Precisely. Russia has nothing to lose. They’ll invade, prices will spike in the west, we the citizens will be pissed off because gas is $5/gallon, time will pass, things will ease, gas will get cheaper and everyone will be happy.


----------



## Huntn

If you want to see a spectrum assessment of Joe Biden Foreign Policy, you  can read Donny’s surrogate for a laugh  and then move onto the second article:

The worst President of his lifetime, just excuse that he (the author) was in a coma from 2016-20 :








						Joe Biden is the worst president of my lifetime: Will Cain
					

Host of "The Will Cain Podcast" argues Joe Biden in his first year in office may have shown he's the worst U.S. president in history.




					www.foxnews.com
				




…From A to F, a lot of Bs and Cs:








						Is Biden’s Foreign Policy Grade A Material?
					

More than 30 experts grade the U.S. president’s first year of foreign policy.




					foreignpolicy.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> If you want to see a spectrum assessment of Joe Biden Foreign Policy, you  can read Donny’s surrogate for a laugh  and then move onto the second article:
> 
> The worst President of his lifetime, just excuse that he was in a coma from 2016-20:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Biden is the worst president of my lifetime: Will Cain
> 
> 
> Host of "The Will Cain Podcast" argues Joe Biden in his first year in office may have shown he's the worst U.S. president in history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> …From A to F, a lot of Bs and Cs:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Biden’s Foreign Policy Grade A Material?
> 
> 
> More than 30 experts grade the U.S. president’s first year of foreign policy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> foreignpolicy.com



No offense meant to you but at the moment I do not give a fuck of Trump, Fox, Carlson or similar. 

We - meant as the West - fucked up foreign policy since 2003 at minimum. So don’t be surprised if I don’t cheer at Biden getting a B+ from FP magazine.


----------



## Huntn

TBL said:


> So then what can be done? If Russia sees Ukraine's joining of NATO as an existential threat and it will always be a possibility, it seems that an invasion is inevitable. Does Russia want to risk world war to mitigate its paranoia?



Logic would tell me that if Russia invaded Ukraine after it became a NATO member, we had better see a war or the NATO alliance would mean nothing, might as well toss it, and yes, the US would be expected to contribute to the war effort.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> Logic would tell me that if Russia invaded Ukraine after it became a NATO member, we had better see a war or the NATO alliance would mean nothing, might as well toss it, and yes, the US would be expected to contribute to the war effort.



Agreed.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> No offense meant to you but at the moment I do not give a fuck of Trump, Fox, Carlson or similar.
> 
> We - meant as the West - fucked up foreign policy since 2003 at minimum. So don’t be surprised if I don’t cheer at Biden getting a B+ from FP magazine.



All we have to judge our President on is what is reported about him and available in the media, then gravitate to our political favorites. The Afghanistan withdrawal seemed to be fucked up but as I critique  him, I also know who set it all for him in advance. We really don’t know what advice our Joint Chiefs gave him, how much he followed or ignored.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> All we have to judge our President on is what is reported about him and available in the media, then gravitate to our political favorites. The Afghanistan withdrawal seemed to be fucked up but as I critique  him, I also know who set it all for him in advance. We really don’t know what advice our Joint Chiefs gave him, how much he followed or ignored.



I do understand where you’re coming from. I truly do even if some of my evaluations are different than yours. I am simply more focused on the much larger issue now - which has become endemic to the whole West. 

Europeans also have been abysmal in this crisis, and this time they can’t and shouldn’t hide behind the “but but but US didn’t do noffin’”


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> If 2014 is an indicator of anything (which, I believe it is), then I agree. If Russia does invade, there will likely be no military response from Europe or the U.S.




We’ve got lines in the sand. I know it’s historical Roman context, but I’ve always found it odd, if not fitting. As drawing lines go, doing it in the sand is probably the easiest to erase and/or move.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> All we have to judge our President on is what is reported about him and available in the media, then gravitate to our political favorites. The Afghanistan withdrawal seemed to be fucked up but as I critique  him, I also know who set it all for him in advance. We really don’t know what advice our Joint Chiefs gave him, how much he followed or ignored.




This is one of the reasons I think we give way too much credit/blame to the President. They have their advisors, but either them or directly below them there are people not voted into office who transcend presidencies and who are more concerned about their career and/or wealth than what is good for the country or planet.  Then they have to translate what they are given into action.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This is one of the reasons I think we give way too much credit/blame to the President. They have their advisors, but either them or directly below them there are people not voted into office who transcend presidencies and who are more concerned about their career and/or wealth than what is good for the country or planet.  Then they have to translate what they are given into action.



The only solution is to have me as the permanent Secretary of State, and permanent National Security Advisor.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> I do understand where you’re coming from. I truly do even if some of my evaluations are different than yours. I am simply more focused on the much larger issue now - which has become endemic to the whole West.
> 
> Europeans also have been abysmal in this crisis, and this time they can’t and shouldn’t hide behind the “but but but US didn’t do noffin’”



It’s their backyard, they our European partners should have the lead. I absolutely hate that the US has been in a state of War for 20  years, but at least make it a worthy war which  the last 20 years have not been. So I’m saying I prefer no war, but as a realist there are circumstances were you war or you get rolled over, or you’re just being preemptive, some pain now to avoid more  later, or a trigger sets off nuclear Armageddon. There is some element of a crap shoot in any choice you make.

Ukraine is interesting. They want in with NATO. Are they worth membership if it comes down to a shooting war? Something to think about. My guess is that the NATO countries are weighing how worth it economically would it be to bring Ukraine under their wing If it starts a war between the West and Russia. It seems to me that Russia is a growing threat if we allow it to grow while I look over my shoulder at looming threats. This could all turn into a big turd pie.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This is one of the reasons I think we give way too much credit/blame to the President. They have their advisors, but either them or directly below them there are people not voted into office who transcend presidencies and who are more concerned about their career and/or wealth than what is good for the country or planet.  Then they have to translate what they are given into action.



I’m not defending Biden, but as President I can see it often being the  best worst choice, and politics in the US are such that you are going to be drowned in partisan buffoonery regardless.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Putin certainly got some sort of green light from the western countries. Call me a cynic, but I am pretty sure all the calls and visits to Putin were to make sure that gas would still flow westward even after the invasion rather than actual diplomacy.



That's... something.

Just to take one example (Macron's visit to Moscow), France is 70% nuclear, and doesn't import much gas (it could get it from elsewhere if need be).

Another example: the UK didn't send their best (Truss), but they have been sending a shit ton of weapons to Ukraine in the last few weeks –the kind that can wreak havoc on tanks– hardly a way to keep the "gas flowing".

To see how countries respond when they really are dependent on gas, look no further than Germany's token shipment of helmets, and meek, reluctant response.

If you want something to be cynical about, there's room for that though: I seriously doubt the UK's Tories will impose really harsh sanctions against Russian interests at home, considering all the money they have been receiving from them.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> That's... something.
> 
> Just to take one example (Macron's visit to Moscow), France is 70% nuclear, and doesn't import much gas (it could get it from elsewhere if need be).
> 
> Another example: the UK didn't send their best (Truss), but they have been sending a shit ton of weapons to Ukraine in the last few weeks –the kind that can wreak havoc on tanks– hardly a way to keep the "gas flowing".
> 
> To see how countries respond when they really are dependent on gas, look no further than Germany's token shipment of helmets, and meek, reluctant response.
> 
> If you want something to be cynical about, there's room for that though: I seriously doubt the UK's Tories will impose really harsh sanctions against Russian interests at home, considering all the money they have been receiving from them.



And this disproves what?

The fact that France can survive without Ukrainian gas doesn’t meant that a) France isn’t interested in Ukrainian gas b) that Macron wasn’t sent as a mediator specifically for energy matters (that way there is no begging). France has absolutely no interest in a gas/energy crisis in other European nations, specifically Germany as you point out.

As for UK I’d argue that anything other than threat of full force is virtually moot. 2000 anti tank missiles and 50 troops are better than 0, and will cause some issues on the Russian side but still it would be like paying pennys for Russia. The Russian win will be easy and swift (sadly).


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> I’m not defending Biden, but as President I can see it often being the  best worst choice, and politics in the US are such that *you are going to be drowned in partisan buffoonery regardless.*




Especially in regards to Russia.  On some level I'm sure Putin likes all the international importance and attention he's getting.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> As for UK I’d argue that anything other than threat of full force is virtually moot. 2000 anti tank missiles and 50 troops are better than 0, and will cause some issues on the Russian side but still it would be like paying pennys for Russia.



That's how many Stingers were sent to Afghanistan, and it sent the Soviet Union back home with their tail between their legs. Now Ukraine has that and much more. And you can count on many nations who don't want to go back to the days of the Soviet Union to keep providing as much equipment as needed. They don't need to win the war, they just need to make it costly enough for the Russians that they give up.

(The troops were just to train the locals in the use of the weapons, afaik they are back already.)


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> That's how many Stingers were sent to Afghanistan, and it sent the Soviet Union back home with their tail between their legs. Now Ukraine has that and much more. And you can count on many nations who don't want to go back to the days of the Soviet Union to keep providing as many equipment as needed. They don't need to win the war, they need to make it costly enough for the Russians that they give up.
> 
> (The troops were just to train the locals in the use of the weapons, afaik they are back already.)



Didn’t realize they were back already, thanks for the info. 

I still don’t think that it is nearly enough to make it a big deal for Mr Putin otherwise it would’ve been easy to deter him. I guess time will tell.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Didn’t realize they were back already, thanks for the info.
> 
> I still don’t think that it is nearly enough to make it a big deal for Mr Putin otherwise it would’ve been easy to deter him. I guess time will tell.




From listening to people who know what they are talking about it would seem that the Russians would make huge gains in the first few hours or days, but that the following months/years could become Afghanistan II.
Ukraine has significant military forces. Their equipment is old so they need help in that regard –and their Navy fits in a small marina– but between the regular army and volunteers, they could make it extremely costly for the Russians in the long term, which is why the strategy of giving them top notch weaponry is actually a smart move from the West:

- No Westerners are put in danger.
- It costs very little (a relatively cheap single-use missile can down a very expensive helicopter/tank).
- I stopped counting, but the US, the UK, and several Baltic countries have sent many thousands of these (that we know of). That's much harder to defeat than ~20 aging, fragile fighter jets (or however many Ukraine has) that can only briefly stay airborne and need huge logistics behind.
- The Soviet Union/Russia already knows how much damage these things can do in a long-term guerrilla war so they will think twice.


----------



## User.45

TBL said:


> Seems like all of this could've been avoided with a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO.



This is the equivalent of giving your lunch to a bully and expecting them to stop bullying you. Like that's what bullies do, right?



TBL said:


> In many ways I think NATO has outlived its purpose.



Coming from the ex-Soviet union. Hell fucking no it didn't. 


TBL said:


> Would we tolerate Mexico joining a Russian alliance?



The analogy would be more comparable if we invaded Southern Canada (cultural similarities), and then didn't expect Canada to seek alliances to help defend itself from future invasions.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> There is no way that Russia won’t invade. Putin certainly got some sort of green light from the western countries. Call me a cynic, but I am pretty sure all the calls and visits to Putin were to make sure that gas would still flow westward even after the invasion rather than actual diplomacy. Want to stop - or at least pressure - a Russian invasion? Put 1000 American soldiers at the border, or leave the embassy in Kiev.



This is a totally absurd statement assuming it is worth it for Russia to invade. If Putin doesn't invade in the next 2 weeks, he won't. He underestimated the NATO's response and now he is trying to save face.




yaxomoxay said:


> I almost spit my coffee. Biden’s foreign policy is as awful as the post Bill Clinton foreign policy. And here he is showing, once again, American unreliability. I am actually very disappointed because I had high hopes for Biden in matters of foreign policy.



So humor us, what would indicate/prove reliability?

Putin is a formidable enemy, and nobody should underestimate him. He's an exKGB mastermind who has 40+ years of experience that no westerner has access to, and let's be fair, he is also very smart, otherwise he would have already been sidelined. I do think Putin expected this to go down like Crimea and got more pushback than anticipated.


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> This is a totally absurd statement assuming it is worth it for Russia to invade. If Putin doesn't invade in the next 2 weeks, he won't. He underestimated the NATO's response and now he is trying to save face.
> 
> 
> 
> So humor us, what would indicate/prove reliability?
> 
> Putin is a formidable enemy, and nobody should underestimate him. He's an exKGB mastermind who has 40+ years of experience that no westerner has access to, and let's be fair, he is also very smart, otherwise he would have already been sidelined. I do think Putin expected this to go down like Crimea and got more pushback than anticipated.



I wonder - was Clinton’s foreign policy the worst in recent times? It seems like the GW Bush foreign policy failures would be hard to beat. Over a trillion bucks wasted in Afghanistan, and nothing but corpses to show for it.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> I wonder - was Clinton’s foreign policy the worst in recent times? It seems like the GW Bush foreign policy failures would be hard to beat. Over a trillion bucks wasted in Afghanistan, and nothing but corpses to show for it.



I'm old enough to see this ad on TV:


> The advert, which has been broadcast in the US for the past week, begins with footage from the 1972 Olympic games in Munich, during which 13 Israeli athletes were killed by terrorists, and continues with a narrator saying: "Freedom is spreading through the world like a sunrise. And this Olympics there will be two more free nations and two less terrorist regimes."
> 
> As the flags of Afghanistan and Iraq flutter in the breeze, it concludes: "With strength, resolve and courage, democracy will triumph over terror and hope will defeat hatred."











						Anger as Bush bids to exploit Olympic games
					

President George Bush stood accused of appropriating the Olympic movement for political means last night, amid reports he was planning to visit Athens later this week to watch some sporting events, including a potential gold-medal winning bid by the Iraqi football team.




					www.theguardian.com
				




I was extremely apolitical then, but this really made my blood boil.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> From listening to people who know what they are talking about it would seem that the Russians would make huge gains in the first few hours or days, but that the following months/years could become Afghanistan II.
> Ukraine has significant military forces. Their equipment is old so they need help in that regard –and their Navy fits in a small marina– but between the regular army and volunteers, they could make it extremely costly for the Russians in the long term, which is why the strategy of giving them top notch weaponry is actually a smart move from the West:
> 
> - No Westerners are put in danger.
> - It costs very little (a relatively cheap single-use missile can down a very expensive helicopter/tank).
> - I stopped counting, but the US, the UK, and several Baltic countries have sent many thousands of these (that we know of). That's much harder to defeat than ~20 aging, fragile fighter jets (or however many Ukraine has) that can only briefly stay airborne and need huge logistics behind.
> - The Soviet Union/Russia already knows how much damage these things can do in a long-term guerrilla war so they will think twice.



If the Russians were to invade Ukraine - (and they would love to be able to provoke Ukraine into starting such a conflict - as had happened in Georgia in 2008) - and, even now, that is by no means definite, for it is better, perhaps, to threaten to do so in the hope of actually achieving one's aims (a permanently divided Ukraine, and a western part of Ukraine only ever able to join some sort of western political/economic (EU) or military (NATO) alliance on the condition that they recognise the separate existence and/or independence of a Russian controlled/influenced east Ukraine) - while they may conquer the country, I very much doubt that they would be able to hold western Ukraine. Not long term.

This is because they (Russia) are loathed in the west of the country (Ukraine) and their rule would never be (permanently) accepted by the population, and the price (political, military, economic, diplomatic) of insisting on this would come at a cost that Russia would not be willing to pay.

Therefore, I would envisage, instead, a strategic Russian withdrawal from the west of the country, (remember, Russia withdrew from some of the military gains they had made in Georgia in 2008, - they could have taken Tbilisi had they wished to do so - but instead withdrew to the places where - which - they really wanted), and peace talks aimed at securing a permanent - and internationally recognised and accepted (which would include recognising Donbass, Luhansk, Crimea, perhaps Kyiv, as under, or subject to, Russian influence) agreement which would formalise the permanent division of the country.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## SuperMatt

theSeb said:


> The chance of Russia actually invading is tiny. War costs money and Russia does not have enough to fuel what a full scale invasion of Ukraine would cost. Russia has also seen the effects of Turkish made drones on their tanks and artillery. Ukraine has those drones. The best Russia can hope to achieve is something really clever utilising their special forces.



They want concessions. If Ukraine and/or NATO doesn’t give them anything, that would be best. Let Putin know that this type of nonsense is not tolerated and doesn’t get him anything that he wants.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Let Putin know that this type of nonsense is not tolerated and doesn’t get him anything that he wants.




It seems the nonsense was tolerated with Crimea so who can really blame him for trying here.

Maybe he can get a bunch of Palestinians to move there and then at that point we'll just hand him the keys.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> It seems the nonsense was tolerated with Crimea so who can really blame him for trying here.



There's a big difference, though: at the time Ukraine was experiencing general unrest with only an interim government, so it was harder to determine a right course of action when there wasn't an established government. For instance, during the 2014 Crimean crisis, a number a high ranking officers promptly defected and joined the Russians. You wouldn't want to send 5000 man-pads only for them to end up in the hands of the Russian military.

That said, it would be wrong to say that it was "tolerated": Russia was subject to sanctions, which was a weak response, but it was not an endorsement either.

It was smart of the Russians, though, looking back: as I understand it, by preemptively annexing Crimea and fuelling a war in the East, they ensured that if Ukraine eventually elected a democratic, pro-Western government, they would be unable to join NATO unless they renounced to their sovereignty over the East of the country (countries cannot join while they are in an active conflict such as that one).


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> The timing of this is very interesting. Russia's economy depends heavily on fossil fuel exports, while the rest of the world tries to wean itself off them. Germany's reliance on Russia's natural gas is often pointed at as the reason why Germany is willing to look the other way in matters such as these, but it's not like they don't realise that being reliant on natural gas is a bad thing.
> 
> In reality, over 50% of Germany's energy is from renewable sources and that number keeps increasing every year. Natural gas is only something like 13% or 15% of Germany's energy supply, but it is an important one for a very large percentage of German homes. Back in 2000 approx 74% of new German homes had gas boilers installed for heating. That number has gradually come down over the years to around 40% in 2020. I believe that Germany, much like the UK, plans to make new gas boiler installations illegal by 2026 and are pushing for heat pumps and pellet based heating instead.
> 
> Russia will not have the same grip over Europe in the near future, as it does now.




What's preventing Russia from diversifying its economy?


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## SuperMatt

From the meeting in Moscow between Putin and Scholz (the German chancellor):





Caption this...


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> Probably the fact that it’s controlled by a bunch of people who behave very much like a mafia organisation and draw their power and wealth from controlling the fossil fuel industry. It was not an accident that certain people ended up with the majority of shares in the then bankrupt and newly privatised state companies when these shares became available to ‘the public’




I assumed it was something like but I didn’t want to preemptively prove my ignorance on this one. I was going to say they are like the Texas of Europe but I feel like even Texas has diversified into finance, tech, and abortion bounty hunting.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> From the meeting in Moscow between Putin and Scholz (the German chancellor):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption this...




I bet that's something all world leaders wish they could have done with Trump.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I bet that's something all world leaders wish they could have done with Trump.



Putin: This is actually the *smallest* table in the Kremlin!


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## ericwn

SuperMatt said:


> From the meeting in Moscow between Putin and Scholz (the German chancellor):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption this...




Quite the distance but that’s where all visitors of Putin had to sit recently from what I recall.


----------



## Zoidberg

ericwn said:


> Quite the distance but that’s where all visitors of Putin had to sit recently from what I recall.



Not so. This is him meeting Kazakhstan's newest strongman on the 10th this month:






It's his way of being petty:

Big table = _"I'll sit down with you and pretend I listen to you and we both know I don't care about what you say, but you have to keep the appearances, and the table will show on every picture and people will talk about how big it is and how I put you at the other end on purpose."_

Small table = _"See, I had other tables, I just chose to use the big one for you so in every picture of the meeting the table will remind everyone of how little I care about you and how I made you talk to me for hours even though I had no intention of negotiating."_


----------



## SuperMatt

Zoidberg said:


> Not so. This is him meeting Kazakhstan's newest strongman on the 10th this month:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's his way of being petty:
> 
> Big table = _"I'll sit down with you and pretend I listen to you and we both know I don't care about what you say, but you have to keep the appearances, and it will show on every picture and people will talk about how big the table is and how I put you at the other end on purpose."_
> 
> Small table = _"See, I had other tables, I just chose to use the big one with you so in every picture of the meeting the big table will remind everyone of how little I care about you."_



Honey, I shrunk the table…

Looks like the same centerpiece though!


----------



## Zoidberg

SuperMatt said:


> Honey, I shrunk the table…
> 
> Looks like the same centerpiece though!



Well spotted

Meanwhile, flying over Ukraine right now, FORTE11 does its daily sweep of the territory...





I know drones have their bad reputation for obvious reasons, but they are such an amazing piece of technology...


----------



## ericwn

Zoidberg said:


> Not so. This is him meeting Kazakhstan's newest strongman on the 10th this month:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's his way of being petty:
> 
> Big table = _"I'll sit down with you and pretend I listen to you and we both know I don't care about what you say, but you have to keep the appearances, and the table will show on every picture and people will talk about how big it is and how I put you at the other end on purpose."_
> 
> Small table = _"See, I had other tables, I just chose to use the big one for you so in every picture of the meeting the table will remind everyone of how little I care about you and how I made you talk to me for hours even though I had no intention of negotiating."_




Well said, the big table is only for those with differing opinions.


----------



## Zoidberg

On a lighter note...













						Russia pulls back from Ukraine to avoid further visits from Liz Truss
					

Moscow has ordered the withdrawal of its troops from the Ukrainian border in an attempt to avoid any more diplomatic visits from Liz Truss.




					newsthump.com


----------



## DT

Ahh, there we go, sharing a nice little Russian lap table ...


----------



## Thomas Veil

Yeah, I kind of thought this is what was going to happen.









						U.S. says Russia lied about pullback from near Ukraine, is sending in more troops
					

“There’s what Russia says and then there’s what Russia does,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Wednesday.




					www.nbcnews.com
				




So much for withdrawing some of its soldiers.

I wanted to breathe a sigh of relief. You probably did too. But we all know what a liar Putin is. And for whatever reason, he seems to be having an extended 'roid rage of dickishness.









						U.S., Russian planes have close encounters  over Mediterranean, Pentagon says
					

U.S. officials said no one was injured in the weekend incidents but that the "intercepts" by Russian aircraft were “unprofessional.”




					www.nbcnews.com
				




He's taunting, of course. Between that and the lying, it just reminds me of why Trump and he got along so famously. They're two of a kind.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Thomas Veil said:


> He's taunting, of course. Between that and the lying, it just reminds me of why Trump and he got along so famously. They're two of a kind.



two tumors on the ass of the earth?


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Well spotted
> 
> Meanwhile, flying over Ukraine right now, FORTE11 does its daily sweep of the territory...
> 
> View attachment 11758
> 
> I know drones have their bad reputation for obvious reasons, but they are such an amazing piece of technology...



looks like a phallus with wings


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> From the meeting in Moscow between Putin and Scholz (the German chancellor):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption this...




Scholz, could you pass me your pen.

The other 10 member of the meeting couldn’t make it due to illness, some sort of food poisoning… polonium or something?


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> looks like a phallus with wings



Which –you have to admit– is a significant improvement over plain old regular wingless phalluses.


----------



## Thomas Veil

*US cranks up the information warfare against Putin*








						Analysis: US cranks up the information warfare against Putin
					

Far from buying into claims the Ukraine showdown is easing, the United States is cranking up its relentless informational warfare campaign against Russia, keeping the world on high alert for a possible invasion of Ukraine.




					www.cnn.com
				






> The new US claims represented the latest gambit in a highly unusual public relations campaign using declassified intelligence meant to remove the element of surprise from Putin and to deprive Moscow of the usual advantage it secures with its mastery of misinformation tactics.



This is a big reason we elected Joe. Trump would be on Vlad’s side, minimizing this situation as “fake news“. Biden, on the other hand, isn’t having it. Putting out this information is not only recognizing the reality of it, it’s also calling Putin’s bluff.

I think it’s interesting how this situation is dragging on, given that Putin already has all the troops he needs to invade. It’s been said he’s looking for a pretext. Just sitting there while still amassing troops, it’s starting to remind me of one of those football tricks where you use signals and cadence to try to draw the opposing team into a fall start. I think he’s hoping the West will make a mistake.


----------



## Thomas Veil

The Russian Ministry of Defense released this video of a trainload of equipment “returning” to Russia. 

So speaking of lies…does this look CG to you? 









						Russian Ministry of Defense releases video of armor crossing Crimea bridge | CNN
					

The Russian Ministry of Defense has released footage purporting to show military equipment crossing the Crimean bridge from Crimea into Russia. It is unclear where the units are heading. CNN's Jim Scuitto has more.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Looks like Putin doesn’t think his demands were met, hence war is inevitable. Told ya! 

Now the only deterrent would be to have Ukraine enter NATO in the next few hours which would be virtually impossible, plus I am not sure how many Europeans and Americans are willing to die for the Ukrainian people. 

What a sad story.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Putin doesn’t think his demands were met, hence war is inevitable. Told ya!
> 
> Now the only deterrent would be to have Ukraine enter NATO in the next few hours which would be virtually impossible, plus I am not sure how many Europeans and Americans are willing to die for the Ukrainian people.
> 
> What a sad story.




The whole thing is really bizarre to me and feels like an extension of the near open market corruption we have now and both lead to the question “What exactly are you, the powerless cannon and economic fodder masses, going to do about it?” We thought exposing them would get them to reverse course. Instead they decided to go with Plan B, stop trying to hide it. Brag about it, even.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> The whole thing is really bizarre to me and feels like an extension of the near open market corruption we have now and both lead to the question “What exactly are you, the powerless cannon and economic fodder masses, going to do about it?” We thought exposing them would get them to reverse course. Instead they decided to go with Plan B, stop trying to hide it. Brag about it, even.



A long time ago I used to wonder why some people decide to go in a monastery (Catholic, Buddhist, whatever) or live the ascetic solitary life. I just didn’t understand it.

Now, years later, I do understand.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Blinken is not holding back. He's calling out all of Putin's plays before Putin can execute them.



> "We don't know precisely how things will play out. But here's what the world can expect to see unfold," Blinken said.





> "First, Russia plans to manufacture a pretext for its attack. ... We don't know exactly the form it will take. It could be a fabricated so-called terrorist bombing inside Russia. The invented discovery of the mass grave, a staged drone strike against civilians or a fake, even a real attack using chemical weapons," he said.





> "Russia may describe this event as ethnic cleansing or a genocide, making a mockery of a concept that we in this chamber do not take lightly, nor do I take lightly based on my family history. In the past few days, Russian media has already begun to spread some of these false alarms and claims to maximize public outrage, to lay the groundwork for an inventive justification for war. Today, that only intensified in Russia's state controlled media. We've heard the allegations from Russian backed speakers here today," Blinken continued.
Click to expand...




> Then, he said, "the highest levels of the Russian government may theatrically convene crisis and Russia must respond to defend citizens or ethnic Russians in Ukraine."












						Blinken outlines ways Russia may target Ukraine, including "plans to manufacture a pretext for its attack"
					

The United States says Russia has added thousands of troops to its buildup on Ukraine's border, despite Moscow's claims that some troops were being sent back to base. Follow here for the latest news.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Thomas Veil said:


> "Russia may describe this event as ethnic cleansing or a genocide, making a mockery of a concept that we in this chamber do not take lightly,"




Meanwhile in Yemen....

But hey, we're talking white people here.  SERIOUS BUSINESS.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I’m struggling to see what the point is of the government issuing daily new Russia invasion fanfiction. We get it. There are troops meandering around the border.  And then not.  And then again. They could attack any minute. There might be a false flag operation. WE GET IT. Now how about you shut your pie hole and take care of strategy behind the scenes. WTF do you expect me to do about it? If there is an attack absolutely nobody is going to go “Why didn’t you warn me sooner!? I could have prevented this!” Quit attempting to shell game our attention away from our internal issues.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I’m struggling to see what the point is of the government issuing daily new Russia invasion fanfiction. We get it. There are troops meandering around the border.  And then not.  And then again. They could attack any minute. There might be a false flag operation. WE GET IT. Now how about you shut your pie hole and take care of strategy behind the scenes. WTF do you expect me to do about it? If there is an attack absolutely nobody is going to go “Why didn’t you warn me sooner!? I could have prevented this!” Quit attempting to shell game our attention away from our internal issues.



The reason for this is obvious. 

Less obvious is this continuous talk about a false flag operation. One thing is a passing comment, another thing is making it a foreign policy issue. If anything else happens (false flag or not), Russia will immediately blame this “false flag talk” on the U.S. and Europe as preemptive talk “to shield foreign operations against Russia.”


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> The reason for this is obvious.
> 
> Less obvious is this continuous talk about a false flag operation. One thing is a passing comment, another thing is making it a foreign policy issue. If anything else happens (false flag or not), Russia will immediately blame this “false flag talk” on the U.S. and Europe as preemptive talk “to shield foreign operations against Russia.”




Similar to how Trump and his supporters should zip it on adhering to law and order, the US military should zip it on false flag operations.

It’s like the US military is saying “We’re aware of how you know about us fucking up every military intervention over the last half-century and how we lied about our motivations and intentions, but check this one out. This is the real deal. We swear. Take a look at it again. How about from this angle?”


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Similar to how Trump and his supporters should zip it on adhering to law and order, the US military should zip it on false flag operations.
> 
> It’s like the US military is saying “We’re aware of how you know about us fucking up every military intervention over the last half-century and how we lied about our motivations and intentions, but check this one out. This is the real deal. We swear. Take a look at it again. How about from this angle?”



Don’t forget the “our intelligence sources say that…”


----------



## Deleted member 215

Just saw an article proclaiming that gas prices in the Bay Area will rise to $6 a gallon if Russia invades Ukraine.

Yes, I’m sure gas companies will love a new excuse to raise prices…


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> Just saw an article proclaiming that gas prices in the Bay Area will rise to $6 a gallon if Russia invades Ukraine.
> 
> Yes, I’m sure gas companies will love a new excuse to raise prices…




Just another industry the government is allowing to sanction the American people.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/18/europe/ukraine-russia-news-friday-rebel-evacuations-intl/index.html

I thought this wasn’t a civil war. I guess the “separatists” shelling, and being shelled, must all be Russian crisis actors. I applaud the scale of this production.

Quick question. Which acting troop are the Kurds in Iraq a part of? They’re pretty good too.


----------



## MarkusL

I have been to Kyiv and I am convinced that if the Russians try to invade they will just get stuck in traffic.


----------



## ericwn

yaxomoxay said:


> Don’t forget the “our intelligence sources say that…”
> 
> View attachment 11786




Pretty sure - at least this time around - that the other side does have some WMDs at hand at least.


----------



## ericwn

TBL said:


> Just saw an article proclaiming that gas prices in the Bay Area will rise to $6 a gallon if Russia invades Ukraine.
> 
> Yes, I’m sure gas companies will love a new excuse to raise prices…




Wait, there are vehicles with internal combustion engines left in the Bay Area?


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Meanwhile in Yemen....
> 
> But hey, we're talking white people here.  SERIOUS BUSINESS.




Yah the advantage of a proxy war is that someone else gets to be called genocidal.



Chew Toy McCoy said:


> https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/18/europe/ukraine-russia-news-friday-rebel-evacuations-intl/index.html
> 
> I thought this wasn’t a civil war. I guess the “separatists” shelling, and being shelled, must all be Russian crisis actors. I applaud the scale of this production.
> 
> Quick question. Which acting troop are the Kurds in Iraq a part of? They’re pretty good too.





The situation of the Kurds is different though.  The Kurdish in adjoining states are kept stateless by intent of those other states, regardless of whether that intent gets expressed in cooperative ventures, which is not necessarily or even usually the case.

In Ukraine, however, Russia wants to reclaim the 'separatist' turf in eastern Ukraine,  as well as accommodate the Russophiles who live there.   It's true that in the conflict in Ukraine in 2014, the Rostov area of Russia saw an influx of refugees from the Ukraine border area.   But this time around the Russians have actually prepared that area for immigration and are now urging civilians to evacuate the Donbas area of Ukraine before 'bad things happen'.

Of course Putin also proposes that the 'bad things' will be the doing of Western supporters of Ukraine...   even though it was Russian-backed separatists and not the West that shelled a kindergarten and a number of other facilities in eastern Ukraine per numerous reports from the OSCE in recent days.    Putin's dodge on that is another example of slice-and-dice proxy wars.  Sometimes he embraces the separatists, other times it's more convenient to say _hey that wasn't us..._


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

MarkusL said:


> I have been to Kyiv and I am convinced that if the Russians try to invade they will just get stuck in traffic.




Kind of like the biggest deterrent to civil war in the US is everybody is too busy watching TikTok videos.


----------



## SuperMatt

Germany has finally explicitly put the cancellation of Nord Stream 2 out there.



> “We in Germany are prepared to pay a high price economically. That’s why everything is on the table — also Nord Stream 2,” the minister, Annalena Baerbock, told the Munich Security Conference, the high-profile annual trans-Atlantic security gathering that is taking place from Friday to Sunday.












						Citing U.S. Intelligence, Biden Says Putin Has Decided to Invade Ukraine
					

President Biden said Russia would target Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, in the coming week. The Russian president said earlier Friday that he was still open to diplomacy.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## lizkat

SuperMatt said:


> Germany has finally explicitly put the cancellation of Nord Stream 2 out there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Citing U.S. Intelligence, Biden Says Putin Has Decided to Invade Ukraine
> 
> 
> President Biden said Russia would target Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, in the coming week. The Russian president said earlier Friday that he was still open to diplomacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com





Maybe the Russians should say their border area drills are over now,  and use less CGI and more troop withdrawals to prove it.

Seriously if you look at a map of Russia why don't they put more energy into reclaiming and improving the value of their heartland,  and bumping its usefulness for manufacture and agriculture instead of just sitting around wondering how their world class hackers are doing today and if they've hacked anything on spec that actually belongs to Putin and his cronies.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

lizkat said:


> Yah the advantage of a proxy war is that someone else gets to be called genocidal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The situation of the Kurds is different though.  The Kurdish in adjoining states are kept stateless by intent of those other states, regardless of whether that intent gets expressed in cooperative ventures, which is not necessarily or even usually the case.
> 
> In Ukraine, however, Russia wants to reclaim the 'separatist' turf in eastern Ukraine,  as well as accommodate the Russophiles who live there.   It's true that in the conflict in Ukraine in 2014, the Rostov area of Russia saw an influx of refugees from the Ukraine border area.   But this time around the Russians have actually prepared that area for immigration and are now urging civilians to evacuate the Donbas area of Ukraine before 'bad things happen'.
> 
> Of course Putin also proposes that the 'bad things' will be the doing of Western supporters of Ukraine...   even though it was Russian-backed separatists and not the West that shelled a kindergarten and a number of other facilities in eastern Ukraine per numerous reports from the OSCE in recent days.    Putin's dodge on that is another example of slice-and-dice proxy wars.  Sometimes he embraces the separatists, other times it's more convenient to say _hey that wasn't us..._




The majority of the population in any conflict zone probably just wants to be left the fuck alone. I just find it odd that right now in the US there are plenty of people who long for a Putin-like authoritarian government under Trump, and have said as much, and yet we are supposed to believe that no other sizable group of people on earth has that same mentality.

If Texas decided to secede from the US to become The Unite States of Trump probably nobody would be surprised. Would everybody in the former state of Texas be happy about it? No, but we’d assume a majority was cool with it. We wouldn’t assume the majority of the population is being held hostage and kept silent through a propaganda machine.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> The majority of the population in any conflict zone probably just wants to be left the fuck alone. I just find it odd that right now in the US there are plenty of people who long for a Putin-like authoritarian government under Trump, and have said as much, and yet we are supposed to believe that no other sizable group of people on earth has that same mentality.
> 
> If Texas decided to secede from the US to become The Unite States of Trump probably nobody would be surprised. Would everybody in the former state of Texas be happy about it? No, but we’d assume a majority was cool with it. We wouldn’t assume the majority of the population is being held hostage and kept silent through a propaganda machine.



If this is a "civil war," why does Russia need 190,000 troops on the border with Ukraine?

Sorry, the narrative that the Ukraine situation is a “civil war" doesn’t hold up to even the slightest scrutiny.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> If this is a "civil war," why does Russia need 190,000 troops on the border with Ukraine?
> 
> Sorry, the narrative that the Ukraine situation is a “civil war" doesn’t hold up to even the slightest scrutiny.




Afghanistan.  Let me know if you need help finding evidence of the US and Russia being involved in their civil wars.  We can then branch out to other Middle Eastern countries from there if you want but we shouldn't need to.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Putin doesn’t think his demands were met, hence war is inevitable. Told ya!



I might be missing something, but what is the information suggests that the war is inevitable?


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Afghanistan.  Let me know if you need help finding evidence of the US and Russia being involved in their civil wars.  We can then branch out to other Middle Eastern countries from there if you want but we shouldn't need to.



You are very married to this civil war narrative regarding Ukraine. It’s Russian propaganda. Luckily, most people are NOT buying Putin’s lies.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> You are very married to this civil war narrative regarding Ukraine. It’s Russian propaganda. Luckily, most people are NOT buying Putin’s lies.




I'm not buying Putin's lies, but I'm also not buying that everybody in Ukraine is pro-unification in favor of the west.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I'm not buying Putin's lies, but I'm also not buying that everybody in Ukraine is pro-unification in favor of the west.



If you’re calling it a civil war, you are believing propaganda. There were Nazi sympathizers in France and other Allied countries during WWII, but nobody tried to label that a civil war as far as I know. Although with today’s history teaching rules, the teachers might have to present that possible view of WWII now.

FYI - The “civil war” nonsense was Russia’s excuse for taking Crimea too. Not sure how anybody is still buying this.









						Don't call it a civil war – Ukraine's conflict is an act of Russian aggression
					

Ukraine is waging a war of self-defence against an international aggressor. We should stop pretending otherwise.




					theconversation.com
				






			https://wapo.st/358jTjy


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> If you’re calling it a civil war, you are believing propaganda. There were Nazi sympathizers in France and other Allied countries during WWII, but nobody tried to label that a civil war as far as I know. Although with today’s history teaching rules, the teachers might have to present that possible view of WWII now.





Are you saying that there isn't a tense regional split in Ukraine right now (and has been for years)?


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Are you saying that there isn't a tense regional split in Ukraine right now (and has been for years)?



Yes. This is manufactured by the Russians because they want to annex Ukraine. They’ve been peddling this narrative for almost a decade now to excuse their invasion of a sovereign Ukraine.


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Are you saying that there isn't a tense regional split in Ukraine right now (and has been for years)?



As far as I’ve had discussions nearly a decade ago with a friend from there who belongs to the russian minority, no there aren’t.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> I might be missing something, but what is the information suggests that the war is inevitable?



190,000 troops
Heated rhetoric
Ambassador expelled
Cities evacuation 
No demands met 
US President saying that Russian President has decided. 

Yep, nothing suggests it.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> 190,000 troops
> Heated rhetoric
> Ambassador expelled
> Cities evacuation
> No demands met
> *US President saying that Russian President has decided.*



Thanks, the way you dropped that "Told ya" yesterday I thought the invasion has already started. Points 1-5 definitely don't meet my criteria for "inevitable". #6 is a closer one, but US president also said it's not inevitable. To me this still looks like a long game of Chicken. Putin's demands had been ridiculous, so why would anybody even expect those being met? 



yaxomoxay said:


> Yep, nothing suggests it.



Didn't you dislike sarcasm?


-----
Russian propaganda is in full swing.  r/Wallstreebets made Reddit front page with a post explaining how Eastern Europeans think Putin had already won the grandstand because the Stockmarket is screwed., LOL. It was such an illogical post it was comical to someone like me who grew up in the former SU around the fall of the Iron Curtain. Even the few Putin sympathizers prefer to adore him from a good distance.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> Thanks, the way you dropped that "Told ya" yesterday I thought the invasion has already started.



It’s a possibility that it has already started. And I hope to be wrong on this one trust me. 


P_X said:


> Points 1-5 definitely don't meet my criteria for "inevitable".




Literally? No. Nothing is inevitable until it actually happens. A meteor might strike and kill all of us, hence no war. But by common sense, and as a judgment call, and looking at the political chessboard I see this war as inevitable. 



P_X said:


> #6 is a closer one, but US president also said it's not inevitable. To me this still looks like a long game of Chicken. Putin's demands had been ridiculous, so why would anybody even expect those being met?



And in your opinion, why were they ridiculous?


P_X said:


> Didn't you dislike sarcasm?



Yes. Guilty as charged. 

Russian propaganda is in full swing.  

On this, we agree.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> And in your opinion, why were they ridiculous?



In my opinion, the most ridiculous demand is that Ukraine promise never to join NATO (or that NATO promises never to let them in). By international law, as a sovereign state, Ukraine has the right to join NATO or any other alliance as they see fit.

Now, if they were negotiating with NATO to say “we don’t want certain weapons systems within X miles of our borders” then you’ve got something. And I believe a diplomatic resolution could include security guarantees such as that.

But I believe Putin (and some other powerful people in Russia) view Ukraine as “their” territory. So the sanctions (or the Ukrainian military response) will have to be quite severe to deter them.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Interesting article from Foreign Affairs. I don’t necessarily espouse some of the most pessimistic points, but it’s certainly food for thought 









						What If Russia Wins?
					

A Kremlin-controlled Ukraine would transform Europe.




					www.foreignaffairs.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> In my opinion, the most ridiculous demand is that Ukraine promise never to join NATO (or that NATO promises never to let them in). By international law, as a sovereign state, Ukraine has the right to join NATO or any other alliance as they see fit.
> 
> Now, if they were negotiating with NATO to say “we don’t want certain weapons systems within X miles of our borders” then you’ve got something. And I believe a diplomatic resolution could include security guarantees such as that.
> 
> But I believe Putin (and some other powerful people in Russia) view Ukraine as “their” territory. So the sanctions (or the Ukrainian military response) will have to be quite severe to deter them.



I agree. That’s why I asked “why”. When someone with strength demands something clearly unreasonable it basically means only one thing: they want to hurt someone.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> It’s a possibility that it has already started. And I hope to be wrong on this one trust me.



using your analogy, that meteor could also be on its way already.


yaxomoxay said:


> Literally? No. Nothing is inevitable until it actually happens. A meteor might strike and kill all of us, hence no war. But by common sense, and as a judgment call, and looking at the political chessboard I see this war as inevitable.



preparation to war ≠ unavoidable
high likelihood of war ≠ unavoidable

It's just me, but I prefer to avoid using dramatic words to predict things that if fail to happen, immediately crumble my credibility. But that's just me.



yaxomoxay said:


> And in your opinion, why were they ridiculous?



Because fulfilling demands that enable an invasion to prevent that very invasion is, well, illogical. Unless the demands were specifically made to remain unmet.




yaxomoxay said:


> Yes. Guilty as charged.



Takes us back to statements and credibility.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> using your analogy, that meteor could also be on its way already.




It probably is. At times I hope it is. 


P_X said:


> preparation to war ≠ unavoidable
> high likelihood of war ≠ unavoidable
> 
> It's just me, but I prefer to avoid using dramatic words to predict things that if fail to happen, immediately crumble my credibility. But that's just me.



1) I am quite confident it will happen.  
2) are we going back to the discussion of the “obviously what I say is my opinion”?


P_X said:


> Because fulfilling demands that enable an invasion to prevent that very invasion is, well, illogical. Unless the demands were specifically made to remain unmet.



Precisely. 



P_X said:


> Takes us back to statements and credibility.



If they were just statements, I’d say you’re right. Here we have a serious diplomatic escalation with a huge military buildup and apparently most troops in attack position. Hence their credibility on the diplomatic side is almost at 0, but the credibility on the military threat is very high.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

P_X said:


> As far as I’ve had discussions nearly a decade ago with a friend from there who belongs to the russian minority, no there aren’t.




This articles seems to back that up.









						Debunking the myth of a divided Ukraine
					

Russia's attempts to promote the false narrative of an artificial and divided Ukraine are a central element of the Kremlin's ongoing campaign of imperial aggression against the country.




					www.atlanticcouncil.org
				




Let it not be said that my views can't be changed or more informed.  However, I still await word from the final authority, Joe Rogan. 

So what's with the reports of the recent shelling in the east?  Completely fabricated or Putin's puppets are more driven than Trump supporters?


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This articles seems to back that up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Debunking the myth of a divided Ukraine
> 
> 
> Russia's attempts to promote the false narrative of an artificial and divided Ukraine are a central element of the Kremlin's ongoing campaign of imperial aggression against the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.atlanticcouncil.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let it not be said that my views can't be changed or more informed.  However, I still await word from the final authority, Joe Rogan.
> 
> So what's with the reports of the recent shelling in the east?  Completely fabricated or Putin's puppets are more driven than Trump supporters?



Something I have a very thorough first-hand experience with is how the russian trollfarms work in eastern Europe. You need to understand that historically a lot of these countries have overlapping/confluent ethnic maps that were often ignored when the borders were established. In 2007 a neonazi website with suspiciously pro-Putin content popped up. The content is considered illegal where I'm from, so they tried to take it down. It quickly became evident that the servers are in Russia, and just checked, still running. Russia runs neonazi websites in the former SU nations that carry the exact same propaganda against the people few miles down these cross-pollinated borders. There's only so far these techniques go however. They can efficiently reduce hatred toward Putin, and stoke some mild proPutin sentiment. What it's insufficient for is to trigger a civil war, or convince people that Russia creeping toward their borders is a good thing.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> It probably is. At times I hope it is.
> 
> 1) I am quite confident it will happen.
> 2) are we going back to the discussion of the “obviously what I say is my opinion”?
> 
> Precisely.
> 
> 
> If they were just statements, I’d say you’re right. Here we have a serious diplomatic escalation with a huge military buildup and apparently most troops in attack position. Hence their credibility on the diplomatic side is almost at 0, but the credibility on the military threat is very high.



Fair enough.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I’m struggling to see what the point is of the government issuing daily new Russia invasion fanfiction. We get it. There are troops meandering around the border.  And then not.  And then again. They could attack any minute. There might be a false flag operation. WE GET IT. Now how about you shut your pie hole and take care of strategy behind the scenes. WTF do you expect me to do about it? If there is an attack absolutely nobody is going to go “Why didn’t you warn me sooner!? I could have prevented this!” Quit attempting to shell game our attention away from our internal issues.



Every time Putin has done something sketchy, he has used the same roadmap (either a false flag or a covert operation that would elicit a reaction in their target, which they then use as an excuse to attack).

You get it (although calling it fan fiction makes me question that, because it is all well documented and you can see it by yourself without going through the US press releases). But many people don't. And every time the Russians have used those methods, they were successful.

Even Russia needs to give some justification for their invasion, no matter how blatantly fabricated it is. By broadcasting Putin's plans out loud, the Western countries are preemptively defusing the false flag or provocation excuses. We also have no idea what kind of other actions they are taking behind the scenes, it would be naive to think all they do is this. At the very least it buys Ukraine some time to improve their defence, send them more weapons, etc.

Bear in mind the most likely direct response from the West will be sanctions, and those can only legitimately be brought on if Russia is unequivocally in the wrong. Remember, there are many political forces in the west that are overtly pro-Putin and will gladly use any excuse they can to look the other way and side with Russia:
Le Pen's FN in France (and Zemmour's spin-off).
Whatever Farage's party is called now
Salvini's Lega Nord in Italy
Abascal's Vox in Spain
Orban in Hungary
Kurz in Austria
Part of the Republican and Democratic parties
And the list goes on...

Some of these parties are in power, some of them have a significant weight in their respective parliaments. All of them –and their media– will readily spread Russia's narrative and need to be preemptively shown what's going on to ensure that they have no choice but to back heavy sanctions.

If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes Putin change his mind and not invade -> win
If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes the sanctions more swift and effective -> better than nothing

The alternative is not saying anything and letting Putin play his usual game, allowing him to stay one step ahead of the West, which will make it harder to convince some politicians to get on board with sanctions, thus making it easier for Russia to invade as the response as a whole will be weaker. If the US and the other Western countries broadcast every single attempt at provoking Ukraine (ie shelling a kindergarten) it becomes much harder for the Western pro-Russian parties to look the other way.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Every time Putin has done something sketchy, he has used the same roadmap (either a false flag or a covert operation that would elicit a reaction in their target, which they then use as an excuse to attack).
> 
> You get it (although calling it fan fiction makes me question that, because it is all well documented and you can see it by yourself without going through the US press releases). But many people don't. And every time the Russians have used those methods, they were successful.
> 
> Even Russia needs to give some justification for their invasion, no matter how blatantly fabricated it is. By broadcasting Putin's plans out loud, the Western countries are preemptively defusing the false flag or provocation excuses. We also have no idea what kind of other actions they are taking behind the scenes, it would be naive to think all they do is this. At the very least it buys Ukraine some time to improve their defence, send them more weapons, etc.
> 
> Bear in mind the most likely direct response from the West will be sanctions, and those can only legitimately be brought on if Russia is unequivocally in the wrong. Remember, there are many political forces in the west that are overtly pro-Putin and will gladly use any excuse they can to look the other way and side with Russia:
> Le Pen's FN in France (and Zemmour's spin-off).
> Whatever Farage's party is called now
> Salvini's Lega Nord in Italy
> Abascal's Vox in Spain
> Orban in Hungary
> Kurz in Austria
> Part of the Republican and Democratic parties
> And the list goes on...
> 
> Some of these parties are in power, some of them have a significant weight in their respective parliaments. All of them –and their media– will readily spread Russia's narrative and need to be preemptively shown what's going on to ensure that they have no choice but to back heavy sanctions.
> 
> If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes Putin change his mind and not invade -> win
> If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes the sanctions more swift and effective -> better than nothing
> 
> The alternative is not saying anything and letting Putin play his usual game, allowing him to stay one step ahead of the West, which will make it harder to convince some politicians to get on board with sanctions, thus making it easier for Russia to invade as the response as a whole will be weaker. If the US and the other Western countries broadcast every single attempt at provoking Ukraine (ie shelling a kindergarten) it becomes much harder for the Western pro-Russian parties to do anything about it.



I think Hungary is an outlier in this list because they were the only country who experienced the Soviet Union directly. I have zero doubt that Orban is Putin's pawn, but selling this war as justified or the idea of Russia becoming Hungary's new neighbor would be an extremely tall order even for him. His voter base fully socialized in the communism and while Orban had brilliantly balanced the nostalgia from communism with concurrent anticommunist rhetoric (for those who don't know, his #1 political opponent, the Socialist Party is a direct successor of the Socialist People's Party). In fact, he invented nothing, just gradually reimplemented the methodology of soft control used in the late days of the SU. This is why he doesn't need to use virtually any violence, because it was so thoroughly beta tested in the previous system. One key factor in his propaganda is leaving out the Russian occupation part of the story and harping on the breach of the nation's sovereignty by the West. His voters might be old, extremely misinformed and cynical, but they still remember the Soviet tanks.


----------



## Thomas Veil

God bless metadata.









						Watch the dubious videos that Russia may use to justify invasion - CNN Video
					

CNN's Nick Paton Walsh reports on misinformation used by pro-Russian separatist groups in Ukraine, as the Russian military amasses near the border.




					www.cnn.com
				




The Russkies tried to urge the population to defend against an “attack” that reportedly happened on Friday. Problem: metadata showed the video of the “attack” had actually been assembled _two days earlier._ That’s some prescience there.

Other problem: was I right to post the story here, or should I have done it in the “What movie are you watching?” thread?


----------



## Thomas Veil

On the more serious side…NBC is reporting that Putin has given the “go” order. 









						Biden agrees ‘in principle’ to meet Putin if Russia does not invade Ukraine
					

The final decision hinges on the outcome of talks between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Thomas Veil said:


> On the more serious side…NBC is reporting that Putin has given the “go” order.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden agrees ‘in principle’ to meet Putin if Russia does not invade Ukraine
> 
> 
> The final decision hinges on the outcome of talks between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com




He still needs some pretext (some even vaguely credible pretext, unless he is so surrounded by sycophants as to think that the risible stuff offered to date in Russia suffices), some pretence at pretext, in order to launch an invasion.

While I have long deplored the practice of "Godwinisation" of threads, on this occasion, I will content myself with the observation, that, even in September 1939, the Germans (who excelled at the dark arts of propaganda, and who had mastered the dissemination of what passed for "fake" news at that time) still felt it necessary to try to give the impression (instantly and rightly derided and dismissed) that they were not the aggressors (you may recall that there was a "fake" invasion of Germany, carried out by individuals attired in Polish Army uniform) when they invaded Poland.


----------



## lizkat

Thomas Veil said:


> On the more serious side…NBC is reporting that Putin has given the “go” order.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden agrees ‘in principle’ to meet Putin if Russia does not invade Ukraine
> 
> 
> The final decision hinges on the outcome of talks between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com




Yah the visual media love prospect of an invasion to fill up those 24/7 blocks of airtime that need eyeballs to get ad revenue rolling.

Sorry to be so cynical but I tend to dislike the TV medium most intensely during whatever is seen as the possible run-up to an imminent invasion of any country by any other country.   At least some of the newspapers of record are still presenting more detail on prospects for diplomacy and averting official conflict.  The problem in the Ukraine situation though is that the eastern provinces have had Russian backed insurgency operating for years now, so "official conflict" is a blurry concept and one that Putin can use to his advantage. 



Scepticalscribe said:


> He still needs some pretext (some even vaguely credible pretext, unless he is so surrounded by sycophants as to think that the risible stuff offered to date in Russia suffices), some pretence at pretext, in order to launch an invasion.
> 
> While I have long deplored the practice of "Godwinisation" of threads, on this occasion, I will content myself with the observation, that, even in September 1939, the Germans (who excelled at the dark arts of propaganda, and who had mastered the dissemination of what passed for "fake" news at that time) still felt it necessary to try to give the impression (instantly and rightly derided and dismissed) that they were not the aggressors (you may recall that there was a "fake" invasion of Germany, carried out by individuals attired in Polish Army uniform) when they invaded Poland.




Yep. Putin has had a long time to ponder how to put this together and make it look like the West was who merited an "offisde" call at the start of broader conflict (past the insurgence in Donbas etc) so that "his side" can be seen as purely defensive.   He's been talking about the "incursions"  --i.e. alliance making, NATO membership--  of the west upon other border states of Russia for the whole time that he's been atop the Russian government.  And he's made a point of building up and supporting the military after the low state it had come to when he was first elected.  So presumably he figures the Russian people are behind him if he strikes out from Belarus soon over whatever pretext he later offers up.

It's a dicey situation.   The cable TV news media drumbeats don't help.  Those guys are so easily led by nose at times like this.


----------



## Deleted member 215

The talk of "imminent invasion" that has been going on since January is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I also think that will be reflected in the coverage. The longer we go without an invasion, the less "imminence" is going to be mentioned. Doesn't mean it won't still happen and catch the public off guard, though. A recent headline I saw struck me as particularly comical: "Biden says Putin will invade, but still hopes diplomacy can prevent it". So, which is it? He will invade or diplomacy can prevent it? Those two can't really co-occur.

There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.


----------



## Cmaier

TBL said:


> The talk of "imminent invasion" that has been going on since January is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I also think that will be reflected in the coverage. The longer we go without an invasion, the less "imminence" is going to be mentioned. Doesn't mean it won't still happen and catch the public off guard, though. A recent headline I saw struck me as particularly comical: "Biden says Putin will invade, but still hopes diplomacy can prevent it". So, which is it? He will invade or diplomacy can prevent it? Those two can't really co-occur.
> 
> There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.



You can say something is going to happen but you hope it won’t.  Nothing contradictory about that.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> The talk of "imminent invasion" that has been going on since January is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I also think that will be reflected in the coverage. The longer we go without an invasion, the less "imminence" is going to be mentioned. Doesn't mean it won't still happen and catch the public off guard, though. A recent headline I saw struck me as particularly comical: "Biden says Putin will invade, but still hopes diplomacy can prevent it". So, which is it? He will invade or diplomacy can prevent it? Those two can't really co-occur.
> 
> There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.




I heard Russia trolled Western media by asking them to provide all Russia's invasion dates for the next year so that their diplomats can plan their vacations.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I heard Russia trolled Western media by asking them to provide all Russia's invasion dates for the next year so that their diplomats can plan their vacations.




There's a lot of trolling going on, yeah.   Russia sees the US as weakened by our relative tolerance of open disagreement in the body politic, and trolls us to the end of exacerbating our status as "a house divided".   Some of the trolling provides laugh lines for all though, as a way of doing an occasional reset -- likely just to keep the Russian trolling from becoming too provocative to escape notice served at levels outside social media.

What Russia doesn't get though is that beyond our disagreements, people living in the USA mostly treasure our rights to disagree...  even if we don't think the other guy should get the last word in any argument or for that matter in any wrangle over pending legislation.

 On Ukraine, I think guys like JD Vance have completely lost the thread.   He is dismissive about Ukraine as even any kind of American concern in his campaign speeches, meant to appeal to the pro-Trump crowd out in the heartland.  Well it's likely true that most Americans are focused on pocketbook and other domestic issues,  but Vance is minimizing significance of where a lot of ordinary Americans in his piece of the USA came from.  They're not "from" Poland or Ukraine or Romania or elsewhere in eastern Europe any more, but a lot of their family is or was,  and the ones living in the USA still think foreign affairs matter, maybe especially where the former USSR is concerned.

Anyone who ever slept with passport under pillow or whose family fled without papers doesn't forget that, or why it was the case, even if they are like the rest of us and can laugh at some of Russia's current laugh-line trolling about Ukraine.


----------



## yaxomoxay

It seems that Biden accepted a summit with Putin. Very dangerous diplomatic move, but probably one that has to be done in hope of stopping the conflict, so
I must commend Biden for trying this even if it could potentially make things worse.


----------



## lizkat

Meanwhile Putin continues to caution the west not to make trouble in eastern Ukraine, even as there are reports that roadside web cameras in Belarus have stopped refreshing images of traffic.






​


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> It seems that Biden accepted a summit with Putin. Very dangerous diplomatic move, but probably one that has to be done in hope of stopping the conflict, so
> I must commend Biden for trying this even if it could potentially make things worse.



It sounds like there may be concerns that Putin may have ambitions beyond Ukraine. He's a scary guy.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> It sounds like there may be concerns that Putin may have ambitions beyond Ukraine. He's a scary guy.



I am pretty sure he does, luckily it will be difficult for him to expand too much. 
However, I can see him creating a federation of nations.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I heard Russia trolled Western media by asking them to provide all Russia's invasion dates for the next year so that their diplomats can plan their vacations.



See, the thing is that this falls under the preparedness paradox, a self-defeating prophecy:

If you successfully prepare for an event so as to avoid it (whether it's a pandemic or in this case an invasion) by taking preventative measures, in retrospect it will appear that it was all blown out of proportion because nothing happened.

So yes, Russian troll farms spread that kind of jokes and memes to sap the West (as they do). For all we know, Russia did plan to invade last Tuesday, but the West made public enough details on the invasion plans to show Putin that they were privy to the detailed plan –which would mean a less effective offensive for Putin, because the element of surprise was lost– and thus he decided to wait. It's not a big win, but it bought  Ukraine another week to prepare, which given what's coming is a lot.

Remember, the public only gets to see a tiny fraction of the information that Western leaders obtain from their IC. They are not fools, and they obviously now work on the assumption that Russia plans on invading no matter what, so they are gaining as much time as possible to prepare their response. If you follow the right people on Twitter, you can see a glimpse of what goes on behind the press announcements, like how they have sent mobile AA weapons to military bases very close to Ukraine's Western border (the only safe border, since Russia now has them surrounded from the South, East and North) or that Canada has kept sending them weapons. There are also videos of Russia moving more and more serious artillery closer to the border in the last 24h.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.







This is how far Putin has drawn units from to place them around Ukraine. Note that it doesn't show the ships that have been placed along the coast, and that this graph is a week old. Also, I believe it doesn't show the Wagner group mercenaries that are likely to be the ones executing the false flag operations, and that have been confirmed to be in the area.

As for the imminence that so annoys you, see my previous post. Whether the actual invasion is imminent or not is irrelevant. That they *can* invade (as in, that they have the capacity to do it) imminently is what matters, because as long as those troops are there, there is a threat.


----------



## SuperMatt

Ukraine has a population of 40 million. Despite claims to the contrary, it is a democracy with a very popular president (he got 73% of the vote… imagine that in America).

If an authoritarian country can just waltz in and take over a democratic one by force, that sets a very dangerous precedent. I bet Taiwan is feeling very nervous right now. Even if NATO doesn’t attack Russia in response, the sanctions need to be extreme, as in full trade embargo, freeze all foreign assets, block all borders extreme. They should cut Russia off from the rest of the world completely.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> It sounds like there may be concerns that Putin may have ambitions beyond Ukraine. He's a scary guy.






yaxomoxay said:


> I am pretty sure he does, luckily it will be difficult for him to expand too much.
> However, I can see him creating a federation of nations.



As heard on NPR, he’s trying to rebuild the USSR.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Eric said:


> It sounds like there may be concerns that Putin may have ambitions beyond Ukraine. He's a scary guy.





Huntn said:


> As heard on NPR, he’s trying to rebuild the USSR.




It goes beyond even that. He wants to be the world's #1 superpower.

To that end, it goes way farther than just territorial gains. Look at how long he's had Russian trolls appealing to the worst of us, stoking racism, ignorance and hate among the most vile, illogical and resentful people in the US. We tend to act as if that started with Trump but I think it goes back at least to the tea party's resentment of Obama. Divide and conquer. He can't _physically_ defeat a country that is more powerful than his and an ocean away, but he _can_ get us to defeat ourselves. And so far it's working.

He's the closest thing we've got to a fucking Bond villain.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> As heard on NPR, he’s trying to rebuild the USSR.



While I don’t disagree, in the world of nuclear  reality, I don’t think it can be done thru military means.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> While I don’t disagree, in the world of nuclear  reality, I don’t think it can be done thru military means.



I don’t know about that. Start regional wars and hope no one pushes the nuclear button, cause _who in their right mind would do that? _until someone pushes it. Which for Putin  means business as usual until it all goes to shit by means of some unexpected calculation.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> I don’t know about that. Start regional wars and hope no one pushes the nuclear button, cause _who in their right mind would do that? _until someone pushes it. Which for Putin  means business as usual until it all goes to shit by means of some unexpected calculation.



It will be very difficult for Putin to push into more countries IMO. Lots will depend on China too. 

One thing that is clear is that the west/NATO better get to the drawing board and prepare a new preventive strategy.


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/21/russia-ukraine-updates/#link-XRK54ZUJL5A6HCUUZO3BBGKMPY
		




> Putin told the meeting the West had offered no concessions to Russia in its key demands for a bar on Ukraine or other Eastern European countries joining NATO.
> He said the Russian Security Council would examine whether to recognize the independence of two Moscow-backed breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine, a move that would signal an end to a seven-year peace deal known as the Minsk agreement.
> Russia has accused Ukraine of intensifying attacks on the regions in recent days, without producing evidence, and Putin on Friday accused Kyiv of committing “genocide” there. Ukraine officials said Monday that Russia was manufacturing disinformation that fighting was going on.
> Putin said it was clear that Ukraine had no intention of implementing the terms of the 2015 Minsk agreement that was designed to return the regions to Ukrainian control.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

He is, but eventually will succeed only partially.

Baltic states out (NATO and EU members, though the Russian "minority" population is enormous).
Georgia out (because of Abkhazia and South Ossetia + is officially a NATO "aspirant", though since 2011).
Ukraine (partially - up to this moment).


----------



## Scepticalscribe

From what I can see, Russia is contemplating formally recognising the "autonomous regions" of Luhansk and Donetsk. 

And - right on cue - (according to RT), separatists in those regions have "made an urgent appeal" to Russia.

Reminds me of similar "appeals" from the Sudetenland........


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Ulenspiegel said:


> He is, but eventually will succeed only partially.
> 
> Baltic states out (NATO and EU members, though the Russian "minority" population is enormous).
> Georgia out (because of Abkhazia and South Ossetia + is officially a NATO "aspirant", though since 2011).
> Ukraine (partially - up to this moment).



Agreed.

The Baltic states are members of both the EU and NATO, and have - and enjoy - far stronger protection under international law, as a consequence, than does Ukraine.

Re their Russian populations, in Lithuania, the Russian population (which is pretty well assimilated, enjoys full citizenship rights, and is not alienated from, or antagonistic to, the Lithuanian state) was around 20% of the population in the mid 1990s; at the time, their (Lithuania's) historic grievance was as much with Poland as with Russia, and the Lithuanian state went to considerable pains to seek to integrate, include and assimilate, their Russian minority, - who welcomed this, and stressed that their ultimate loyalty was to the Lithuanian state which respected their Russian heritage - (and which, granted, wasn't as large as the destabilising percentages of possibly antagonised Russians found in the remaining two Baltic states.  Lithuania's Russians also had the benefit of sane, prudent and intelligent political leaders).

Latvia was different; there, Russian numbers were closer to - and possibly exceeded - around 40%, and they were quite antagonistic to the proposed (western leaning) direction taken by the Latvian state, which, in turn, expressed itself in strongly nationalistic terms.

And, in Estonia, - which had a deeply disaffected Russian population (again, not far off 40%), what was seen as Russian influence - past or present - was passionately loathed.  

These citizenship issues (both Latvia and Estonia had passed citizenship laws deemed challenging by their large Russian minorities - including stiff language tests - the amendment of which constituted conditions for their eventual entry to the EU), were largely resolved with EU entry, but the situation in Ukraine may well put pressure on the political cultures of these countries (by asking questions of the ultimate loyalties of those with Russian cultural - and actual - heritage).

Actually, the Russians were (and are) detested right across the Baltic states, deeply and profoundly loathed; no "heart'n'minds" operation - no matter the "fake news", control of media, bribery, corruption, or sheer military might, will ever persuade the people of the Baltic states that any form of Russian rule is acceptable.

Elsewhere, in the Caucasus, Georgia is - politically - more or less permanently crippled, paralysed, or hamstrung, unless and until, they can accept (which, at the moment, would amount to political suicide) that neither Abkhazia nor South Ossetia wish to return to Georgian rule; (whether they - these breakaway regions - desire Russian overlordship is a separate matter entirely).

For what it is worth, I still see the (eventual) outcome as a divided Ukraine, but now, increasingly, believe that the Russians will attempt to occupy Kyiv, and incorporate it into their "sphere of influence", the putative capital of an eventual east Ukraine.

However, I cannot envisage any situation where Russia would be able to hold west Ukraine; any attempt to do so will be fiercely contested, and the Russians will take - or can expect to take - catastrophic casualties.


----------



## Citysnaps

I've been wondering what trump would have given in/up to Putin if he were still president. 

Thank god he isn't.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

citypix said:


> I've been wondering what trump would have given in/up to Putin if he were still president.
> 
> Thank god he isn't.




My brother asked me the same question last night on the phone when we discussed this matter; he also speculated whether the Covid crisis (along with the fact that Mr Trump has been succeeded by Mr Biden in office) may have served to disrupt any possible proposed, or planned, time-table, for "action" on Ukraine, on the part of Mr Putin.


----------



## Citysnaps

Scepticalscribe said:


> My brother asked me the same question last night on the phone when we discussed this matter; *he also speculated whether the Covid crisis (along with the fact that Mr Trump has been succeeded by Mr Biden in office) may have served to disrupt any possible proposed, or planned, time-table, for "action" on Ukraine, on the part of Mr Putin.*




I wouldn't be surprised.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

This is an old, old playbook:

After an extraordinary meeting of his Security Council, President Vladimir Putin said he was - I love the phrasing, who does he think is fooled by this? - considering a request by two regions of eastern Ukraine held by Russian-backed separatists to be recognised as independent. 

However, while oil prices (which Russia needs nicely high) are rising (as are gas prices - and, remember, Russia exports both, and relies on the export of both to sustain its economy; the west only turned to Russia as a supplier of energy - Cold War concerns notwithstanding - when OPEC raised the price of oil in the early 1970s, giving rise to a need to diversify and secure energy supplies elsewhere rather than rely, solely, on the Middle East), the rouble is taking a bit of a hit.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> This is an old, old playbook:
> 
> After an extraordinary meeting of his Security Council, President Vladimir Putin said he was - I love the phrasing, who does he think is fooled by this? - considering a request by two regions of eastern Ukraine held by Russian-backed separatists to be recognised as independent.
> 
> However, while oil prices (which Russia needs nicely high) are rising (as are gas prices - and, remember, Russia exports both, and relies on the export of both to sustain its economy; the west only turned to Russia as a supplier of energy - Cold War concerns notwithstanding - when OPEC raised the price of oil in the early 1970s, giving rise to a need to diversify and secure energy supplies elsewhere rather than rely, solely, on the Middle East), the rouble is taking a bit of a hit.



If all of Europe boycotts Russian oil, is it fair to say it would have a severe negative impact on the Russian economy?


----------



## yaxomoxay

Talking about foreign policy, today is the 50th anniversary of Nixon’s trip to China.


----------



## Zoidberg

Thomas Veil said:


> He's the closest thing we've got to a fucking Bond villain.



What about Peter Thiel?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> If all of Europe boycotts Russian oil, is it fair to say it would have a severe negative impact on the Russian economy?



Well, yes.  Without a doubt.

However, that won't happen immediately, or, in the short term.  It cannot; the energy networks, infrastructure, supply systems, economies and societies are all too intertwined and too dependent on oil (and gas); immediate substitutes are not available to hand.  Besides, the (domestic) political cost, and subsequent social unrest (cold homes, anyone?) - with soaring energy bills - would be too high in the immediate, short-term.

But, but, but: That is no reason for it not to be planned for in the medium to long term; I, for one, would love to see the Nordstream 2 - and (even though I lie to the left on the political spectrum), the questionable role of (possibly compromised) individuals such as Gerhard Schroder - and Europe's dependence on Nordstream 2 - terminated, and for Europe to diversify its energy sources.

Moreover, with dawning awareness of Green and environmental issues, (and youthful electorates who are attracted to, aware of, and concerned by, environmental matters), this is inevitable; it is just that it won't be immediate.

However, I cannot see an invasion of Ukraine leading to anything other than a marked reduction - driven by both political imperatives, and domestic public opinion - to reduce dependence on any Russian energy source.

That, too, will be inevitable.

And, if indeed Europe needed a further wake-up call, I think the events (or, possible events, potential events planned events) of the past few weeks re Ukraine will have concentrated European minds as to why NATO exists, what its purpose (past and present is) and that it may have a more than useful (and necessary) role to play.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

yaxomoxay said:


> Talking about foreign policy, today is the 50th anniversary of Nixon’s trip to China.




Kissinger's work. 



SuperMatt said:


> If all of Europe boycotts Russian oil, is it fair to say it would have a severe negative impact on the Russian economy?




It would be a double-edged sword. As you will have to deal with the energy products as a whole (oil + natural gas). They go hand in hand in this case.

30% of EU's oil imports and 39% of EU's natural gas imports are from Russia.

And I leave this here as well:

"In 2013 the shares of Russian natural gas in the domestic gas consumption in EU countries were:







 Estonia 100%






 Finland 100%






 Latvia 100%






 Lithuania 100%






 Slovakia 100%






 Bulgaria 97%






 Hungary 83%






 Slovenia 72%






 Greece 66%






 Czech Republic 63%






 Austria 62%






 Poland 57%






 Germany 46%






 Italy 34%






 France 18%






 Netherlands 5%






 Belgium 1.1%"


----------



## Scepticalscribe

The other thing to bear in mind is that Mr Putin has been in power now for just over twenty years.

This means that he has long become quite habituated to political power, to habits and patterns of deference, to having his every need anticipated and met, to exercising the practice of power, to the norms, forms, and habits of power, to living with the patterns of thought (and behaviour) that occur (and develop) in what is - to all intents and purposes - a court (i.e. a court of a king, or a ruler) - surrounded by sycophants, and factions competing for your attention and favour - where you run the risk of being told what you want to hear, rather than what you may need to hear - rather than a coherent system of government in any way answerable to something akin to the rule of law, and the principle of the separation of powers.

Thus, I wonder how many people remain in his immediate circles who have permission - or feel sufficiently strong in themselves or their positions - to (freely, without fear of suffering ill consequence) "speak truth to power".  To ask awkward questions, or point out inconvenient facts?


----------



## yaxomoxay

So Russia now officially recognizes the independence of parts of Ukraine. Basically a declaration or war vs Ukraine. 

God help us all.


----------



## quagmire

Simpsons predict another event…….


----------



## yaxomoxay

quagmire said:


> Simpsons predict another event…….



This one was easy to predict


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> So Russia now officially recognizes the independence of parts of Ukraine. Basically a declaration or war vs Ukraine.
> 
> God help us all.




Yes.

And a permanent division of the country, as the breakaway regions will now call on Russian "aid" and assistance, and seek Russian support - an inevitable part of this playbook - which will be granted.

However, while I cannot see how Russian rule would ever be accepted in the west of Ukraine, (and any such invasion will cost them dearly), equally, I cannot see how Kiev (Kyiv) can restore Ukrainian authority over those breakaway eastern regions.

Nevertheless, I do wonder how many other countries (very few, I should imagine - and the reaction of China will be both revealing and telling) will choose to join Russia in recognising these breakaway regions.   As a measure of Russian influence and power, it should prove instructive.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes.
> 
> And a permanent division of the country, as the breakaway regions will now call on Russian "aid" and assistance, and seek Russian support - an inevitable part of this playbook - which will be granted.
> 
> However, while I cannot see how Russian rule would ever be accepted in the west of Ukraine, (and any such invasion will cost them dearly), equally, I cannot see how Kiev (Kyiv) can restore Ukrainian authority over those breakaway eastern regions.
> 
> Nevertheless, I do wonder how many other countries (very few, I should imagine - and the reaction of China will be both revealing and telling) will choose to join Russia in recognising these breakaway regions.   As a measure of Russian influence and power, it should prove instructive.



Yes, I am very curious about both China and India.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

"Sit and wait" + "_divide et impera"._


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes.
> 
> And a permanent division of the country, as the breakaway regions will now call on Russian "aid" and assistance, and seek Russian support - an inevitable part of this playbook - which will be granted.
> 
> However, while I cannot see how Russian rule would ever be accepted in the west of Ukraine, (and any such invasion will cost them dearly), equally, I cannot see how Kiev (Kyiv) can restore Ukrainian authority over those breakaway eastern regions.
> 
> Nevertheless, I do wonder how many other countries (very few, I should imagine - and the reaction of China will be both revealing and telling) will choose to join Russia in recognising these breakaway regions.   As a measure of Russian influence and power, it should prove instructive.




I understand that this isn’t exactly a civil war situation, but then I don’t understand how you then have these breakaways regions. Breaking away entire regions isn't exactly something just a couple of knuckleheads can pull off....even with Russia's support.


----------



## Citysnaps

Fiona Hill says that Trump emboldened Putin to invade Ukraine by treating the country like a 'playground'
					

Donald Trump's former Russia advisor, Fiona Hill, was critical of his approach to dealing with Russia, saying he was driven by self-interest.




					www.businessinsider.com
				




I always had a ton of respect for Dr. Hill regarding her expertise on national security matters. And especially  her impeachment testimony


----------



## Huntn

citypix said:


> I've been wondering what trump would have given in/up to Putin if he were still president.
> 
> Thank god he isn't.



His question would be_ Can I build Trump Tower Moscow? _


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/21/russia-ukraine-updates/#link-XRK54ZUJL5A6HCUUZO3BBGKMPY



Putin’s a sinister liar so  we know why Trump liked him so much.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I understand that this isn’t exactly a civil war situation, but then I don’t understand how you then have these breakaways regions. Breaking away entire regions isn't exactly something just a couple of knuckleheads can pull off....even with Russia's support.



Nope, he needs to install a puppet government for the region. He’s already been working on that for a while by funding and arming the ”separatist” movements.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Huntn said:


> Putin’s a sinister liar so  we know why Trump liked him so much.




The fact (and I think it is a fact) that Mr Putin is what you describe (not inaccurately) as "a sinister liar" does not detract from - and is not mutually exclusive from - the fact that he is also paranoid, and may also believe some of the stuff that comes from his mouth and mind.

His anger - real rage and raw, vindictive fury - at Ukraine (on Russian TV) this evening strikes me as genuine.

A few posts back, I wrote of how Mr Putin has been in power (uninterrupted and increasing power) for just over twenty years, and some of what may have flowed from this.

One of the things that has (or, may have) flowed from a world where people have been bribed, bullied, excluded, exiled - or, indeed, murdered - if they cross him, (and partly prompted my question of who - if anyone - in his immediate circle feels sufficiently secure - and respected - to be in a position to speak "truth to power"), is that, psychologically, I suspect that he is at a stage, or in a place, where he finds it (increasingly) difficult - in a world where he is surrounded by sycophants - to deal with, or to handle a situation, when people deny him, or when someone says "no" to him.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> The fact (and I think it is a fact) that Mr Putin is what you describe (not inaccurately) as "a sinister liar" does not detract from - and is not mutually exclusive from - the fact that he is also paranoid, and may also believe some of the stuff that comes from his mouth and mind.
> 
> His anger - real rage and raw, vindictive fury - at Ukraine (on Russian TV) this evening strikes me as genuine.
> 
> A few posts back, I wrote of how Mr Putin has been in power (uninterrupted and increasing power) for just over twenty years, and some of what may have flowed from this.
> 
> One of the things that has flowed from a world where people have been bribed, bullied, excluded, exiled - or, indeed, murdered - if they cross him, (and partly prompted my question of who - if anyone - in his immediate circle feels sufficiently secure - and respected - to be in a position to speak "truth to power"), is that, psychologically, I suspect that he is at a stage, or in a place, where he finds it (increasingly) difficult - in a world where he is surrounded by sycophants - to deal with, or to handle a situation, when people deny him, or when someone says "no" to him.



If he takes part of Ukraine but many Russian soldiers die in the effort, he may find himself on the wrong side of a popular uprising, especially given the economic toll sanctions could take on the Russian people.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Nope, he needs to install a puppet government for the region. He’s already been working on that for a while by funding and arming the ”separatist” movements.




Agreed.

They (the separatists) have been supported by Russia (politically, economically, militarily - remember the "little green men"?) for eight years now; this - those facts - is - and are - not new; just the degree of support (taking the form of recognition of the breakaway enclaves).

And, I would imagine that the areas - geographical - in what Mr Putin defines as "Luhansk" and "Donetsk" is considerably larger (as maps would suggest) that the breakaway enclaves currently run by the separatists.

In other words, I would expect what eventually becomes both "Luhansk" and "Donetsk" to have a geographical (and hence, political) expression that covers a lot more space (and ground) than the current expression of these breakaway enclaves.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> If he takes part of Ukraine but many Russian soldiers die in the effort, he may find himself on the wrong side of a popular uprising, especially given the economic toll sanctions could take on the Russian people.




This is what I think may indeed happen.

An attack on the rest of Ukraine will not be without considerable cost - military, economic, political - for Mr Putin (and, by extension, Russia).

Ukraine is a large (and - by post Soviet standards) well populated, well-educated, well off country; they will (in the western half of the country) passionately resist any attempt to restore them to the unwelcome embrace of a "post Soviet" Russia, intent on brutally exercising what it claims are historical prerogatives.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Nope, he needs to install a puppet government for the region. He’s already been working on that for a while by funding and arming the ”separatist” movements.




I am sure he has been, but I'm wondering exactly how big/small this separatist group is.  It wouldn't have gotten this far if it was just a tiny minority.  

And while Putin is a foreign leader, I can't help but to think about the blind unwavering loyalty Trump supporters have for Tump.  Lies and exaggerations about a better future aligned with Russia could be just as intoxicating to some Ukrainians along with promises of high status and compensated positions to those who lead them to victory.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

@Chew Toy McCoy

The ethnic Russian population of Donbas is approximately 40%. The primary language in Donbas is Russian. Russian is the first language of the 75% of Donbas population.

According to the 2014 referendum (not officially recognized by any country) it was claimed that 89% voted in favor of self-rule.


----------



## Zoidberg

Well, this is it now.

I have no doubt that Russia can take over Ukraine, so all we can do now is hope that it costs Putin dearly, and that the feckless leaders in the West, such as Scholz, will finally grow a spine.

Ukraine will now be left with no choice: either take the loss and cede the East (and it would be naive to think that's all Putin wants) so that they can then somehow join NATO in an impossible record time, or start shooting back, which will be used by Russia to take the rest of the country.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Well, this is it now.




"Peace-keepers," who have been invited in by the leaders of the separatists following hastily manufactured "atrocities" (reports of large explosions tonight in Luhansk).



Zoidberg said:


> I have no doubt that Russia can take over Ukraine, so all we can do now is hope that it costs Putin dearly, and that the feckless leaders in the West, such as Scholz, will finally grow a spine.





The problem is that Mr Scholz is all too new to the position, and hasn't yet fully grown into his power and position - and Dr Merkel (who had Mr Putin's measure) was always going to be an extremely difficult act to follow.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> "Peace-keepers," who have been invited in by the leaders of the separatists following hastily manufactured "atrocities" (reports of large explosions tonight in Luhansk).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that Mr Scholz is all too new to the position, and hasn't yet fully grown into his power and position - and Dr Merkel (who had Mr Putin's measure) was always going to be an extremely difficult act to follow.



Ah, always the euphemist, like when you said that Schroeder is allegedly too friendly to Putin's regime. Let's call a spade a spade.

Unfortunately I often have to work in the company of idiots who swallow Russian propaganda hook line and sinker, and my patience is thin when it comes to bad faith and hypocrisy.

Just another reminder that energy independence –and thus, nuclear power–  is a matter of national security.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Ukraine will now be left with no choice: either take the loss and cede the East (and it would be naive to think that's all Putin wants) so that they can then somehow join NATO in an impossible record time, or start shooting back, which will be used by Russia to take the rest of the country.



The east is gone - it is (and has been for years) impossible to recover - and this is what I have meant when I have been writing about the appalling dilemma - the poisoned chalice, if you like - that Mr Putin would engineer to proffer the government in Kyiv - and the subsequent possible (now probable to inevitable) emergence of "two Ukraines" ever since this thread started.

That is the tragedy for Ukraine: They will be obliged to accept the loss of the east as the price of being allowed to embrace the west: Territorial integrity or national sovereignty, but not both.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Ah, always the euphemist, like when you said that Schroeder is allegedly too friendly to Putin's regime. Let's call a spade a spade.
> 
> Unfortunately I often have to work in the company of idiots who swallow Russian propaganda hook line and sinker, and my patience is thin when it comes to bad faith and hypocrisy.
> 
> Just another reminder that power supply –and thus, nuclear power–  is a matter of national security.



Well, in such a context, inverted commas usefully serve - to me - as an equivalent (one that is heavy on the irony, granted) of an intellectual or political health warning.

In any case, there is a distinction to be drawn, a marked difference (to my mind, at least) between what I would like to see happen, and what I actually think will happen.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Ulenspiegel said:


> @Chew Toy McCoy
> 
> The ethnic Russian population of Donbas is approximately 40%. The primary language in Donbas is Russian. Russian is the first language of the 75% of Donbas population.
> 
> According to the 2014 referendum (not officially recognized by any country) it was claimed that 89% voted in favor of self-rule.




Thanks for that info.  On the second part, are you saying the break-away regions voted for self-rule separate from the rest of Ukraine?


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Well, in such a context, inverted commas usefully serve - to me - as an equivalent (one that is heavy on the irony, granted) of an intellectual or political health warning.
> 
> In any case, there is a distinction to be drawn, a marked difference (to my mind, at least) between what I would like to see happen, and what I actually think will happen.



Yes, there's no place for wishful thinking. The sanctions will be too weak, and have too many loopholes to be effective, and by the time Russia is kicked from SWIFT, they will have finalised their alternative payment system.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Thanks for that info.  On the second part, are you saying the break-away regions voted for self-rule separate from the rest of Ukraine?



Not really. They've held elections but like all Russian elections, they are for show. In their attempt to manufacture legitimacy, Crimea had a farcical referendum shortly after the invasion, so we can expect the newly created "republics" will stage their own as well, the outcome of which will be that they all want to join Russia.

It's understandably hard to vote against someone when they quite literally hold a gun to your child's head.


----------



## User.45

All seems to be coming together and Putin had finally put his cards on the deck.
I think Putin originally wanted a Blitzkrieg, but the NATO and Ukraine were left way more keyed than what he expected.
Ukrainians were conditioned for almost a decade now for this moment and are ready for guerrilla warfare which is essentially never worthwhile for the invading forces (unless the goal is sale of arms...). So this conflict cannot be won by Putin through full on war. On the other hand it doesn't matter for him whether his forces chill out around Ukraine for days or months. Since half the Russian forces are around Ukraine, it's clear that Putin is not up for opening up fronts beyond Ukraine.

So Putin tries to win the conflict by disintegrating its neighbors with a significant Russian minority. Well, this is impressive tactic.

But that takes me back to why I disagree with @yaxomoxay so vehemently. Putin's window for Blitzkrieg has long closed, and now he can gain nothing with a full on military conflict, thus we won't have that. 

On the other hand WHODATHUNK that energy independence is not only a climate change thingy, but a key to maintain national security.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> But that takes me back to why I disagree with @yaxomoxay so vehemently. Putin's window for Blitzkrieg has long closed, and now he can gain nothing with a full on military conflict, thus we won't have that.



Time will tell, but I hope you’re right.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

The other thing that interests me - and which nobody has asked (let alone answered) is why now?

What is driving Mr Putin (domestically or otherwise) to take this action just now?

To my mind, this is something that has been very much on the cards (as in a very possible course of political action) ever since 2014, and, for some of us, (for, I vividly recall and remember discussing, war-gaming, exploring, pondering, mulling over, debating, teasing out, thrashing out, these particular matters with a pair of very able, very, very bright, subtle, informed, intelligent and very interesting Estonian diplomats over a number of informal meetings, long lunches included - we were all serving with various EU missions - in Tbilisi, Georgia, as long ago as 2010), this is something we thought might (or could - or would) occur, ever since at least a decade ago.

We concluded that Georgia (and Moldova) were, in a way, test runs, or dress rehearsals, of the tools in a (Russian) political tool box whereby one placed, or exerted, impossible pressure on the internal divisions of a country in order to permanently sever, split, splinter (and thereby permanently dismember and weaken) it, leaving it with unpalatable political dilemmas.

And we concuded that all of this was going to end in - and take place in - Ukraine, that all roads led to Ukraine, that Ukraine is what really matters.

So, why now?


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> The other thing that interests me - and which nobody has asked (let alone answered) is why now?
> 
> What is driving Mr Putin (domestically or otherwise) to take this action just now?
> 
> To my mind, this is something that has been very much on the cards (as in a very possible course of political action) ever since 2014, and, for some of us (I remember discussing, war-gaming, exploring, pondering, mulling over, debating, teasing out, thrashing out, these particular matters with a pair of very able, very, very bright, subtle, informed, intelligent and very interesting Estonian diplomats over a number of informal meetings, long lunches included - we were all serving with various EU missions - in Tbilisi, Georgia, as long ago as, 2010), this is something we thought might (or could - or would) occur, ever since at least a decade ago.
> 
> So, why now?



Fair question. I'm cynical, and I don't think he really cares about Ukraine. If anything, it's going to cost them, but Putin is a shit-stirrer: he must create crises to keep Western countries chasing their tails.

A few hypotheses in no particular order:
- If their propaganda manages to paint this as Biden's doing, it will help the GOP win big in the mid-terms, which is pretty much a guarantee that not much will get done until 2025.
- Macron is running for reelection in a few months.
- He uses chaos as a strategy (like in drunken boxing, it's very hard to anticipate his actions when they don't follow any normal logic).
- Something else we don't know yet. Maybe if Ukraine goes well for Russia, they count on China to put pressure on Taiwan, which would fuck up a lot things.
- Other former soviet countries might grow restless soon, and he wants to make it clear that any move towards the EU or NATO will be crushed.
- It simply takes us longer to put the pieces back together, than it takes him to break it and maybe that's enough for him.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Fair question. I'm cynical, and I don't think he really cares about Ukraine. If anything, it's going to cost them, but Putin is a shit-stirrer: he must create crises to keep Western countries chasing their tails.



Excellent and thoughtful post.

However, where I differ with you (from you?) is that - for all of his vicious, violent capacity for sadistic cruelty (which is considerable) - unfortunately, I do think that Mr Putin cares about Ukraine.

In fact, on this subject, I think that he is irrational, beyond reason, and wildly emotional (and yes, vicious, violent and vindictive), armoured by what he thinks are historic facts, yet fuelled by nurtured political grievances.

In any case, I have been saying - ever since 2010 - to anyone who would listen to me - is that I think that Russia will go to the wire on Ukraine (in a way that they would not for any other place in the post Soviet space). 

That is what I have long thought would happen (and had advised my superiors, and the people I reported to, accordingly).

Now, as to what I would like to see happen: Well, on Twitter, - @EdwardGLuce - Edward Luce (of the Financial Times - in the past, I have attended talks he has given) wrote tonight: "Cannot be stated strongly enough: If the west - chiefly America, but also Britain - doesn't burn its financial ties to Russia's oligarchy then Putin will prevail. This means taking on Wall Street, the City, law firms realtors, the prep schools and western laundering outfits."


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> The other thing that interests me - and which nobody has asked (let alone answered) is why now?
> 
> What is driving Mr Putin (domestically or otherwise) to take this action just now?
> 
> To my mind, this is something that has been very much on the cards (as in a very possible course of political action) ever since 2014, and, for some of us, (for, I vividly recall and remember discussing, war-gaming, exploring, pondering, mulling over, debating, teasing out, thrashing out, these particular matters with a pair of very able, very, very bright, subtle, informed, intelligent and very interesting Estonian diplomats over a number of informal meetings, long lunches included - we were all serving with various EU missions - in Tbilisi, Georgia, as long ago as 2010), this is something we thought might (or could - or would) occur, ever since at least a decade ago.
> 
> So, why now?




Perhaps part of it is after we left Afghanistan it became obvious pretty quickly that the American people have zero interest in entering a new foreign conflict.  He might have thought regardless of who is President the US would be slow to get involved.  As the saying goes, too soon.


----------



## lizkat

Zoidberg said:


> What about Peter Thiel?




Yeah, for sure.   Thiel and his piles of money are way more than problematic in politics,  and he's smarter than Trump, whom he ostensibly supports  -- but only while the guy is still useful for having some followers, which is the same path his pal Bannon has taken, although the two of them (I think) seem to have somewhat different goals.  Bannon's about burning everything down and starting over.   But Thiel's more about how government should either get out of the way or let monopolies do their thing because they're efficient and profitable and so he keeps piling dough into malleable pro-Trump candidates who are essentially authoritarian followers.   The guy comes off as a proto-fascist although he has denied that over and over.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I understand that this isn’t exactly a civil war situation, but then I don’t understand how you then have these breakaways regions. Breaking away entire regions isn't exactly something just a couple of knuckleheads can pull off....even with Russia's support.




There's a long, long history of competing influences on eastern and western Ukraine (the western part 'belonged' to  Poland between 1919 and 1939, i.e., at Versailles in 1919 there was no provision for a separate Ukraine),   and there's also a long and tragic history of Russian and later Soviet efforts to suppress entirely the very idea of Ukraine as a geopolitical entity with its own languages, cultures,  intellectuals in control of its own universities, municipal bureaucrats to administer the urban areas and so forth.

Anne Applebaum's new book (publication of which is actually coincidental as far as this current situation in Ukraine is concerned) is titled _*Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine.   *_The book was years in the making, was heaviiy researched with assistance from Ukrainian nationals, and includes material from archives made public in Ukraine only after the dissolution of the USSR.  Her work is focused primarily on what exactly happened during the horrendous USSR-driven famine -- _the Holodomor_-- in Ukraine during 1932-33, when 3.9 million Ukrainian peasants died of starvation (while the USSR went about methodically destroying Ukraine's artistic and intellectual elite) but she also provides a lot of context regarding Ukraine and earlier history in eastern Europe and Russia. In the Soviet era in Ukraine, Russian was the official language, Ukrainian history was not taught, the impact of the 1932-33 famine in Ukraine was officially denied, even some census records were altered in that regard. The interesting thing is that now the archives on history of the Soviet era in Ukraine are the most open (declassified) ones in all of Europe...

Anyway sure looks now like Putin's trying to pick up where Stalin left off, despite his propagandizing.


----------



## Zoidberg

As a side note, in terms of timing, as a whole I'm unironically glad the Western countries have the leaders they have now, it could have been much worse:
Trump was actively working to sap Ukraine's resources (as well as NATO).
Johnson is a terrible leader, and as beholden as he is to his Russian donors, I think Corbyn would have been even worse. He's a fence sitter and he seems to have some weird romanticised vision of Russia and he would have if not sided with them, at the very least taken the same weak stance as Germany.
Spain and France both have leaders that are pushing back against pro-Russian populist fascist parties who'd love nothing more than use this crisis to split the EU. Likewise, in Italy at least it's Draghi and not openly pro-Russian Salvini.

Edit: Germany has just put Nord Stream 2 on hold, great! Now all they have to do is undo their nuclear power plants phase out. I know it's not going to happen, but I'll never get over how stupid it was. It was terrible both for their energy independence and for the environment to shut them down without a viable alternative.


----------



## yaxomoxay

So, now that Russian troops are in east Ukraine, Ukraine will need to react. Which means that Russia will use the attack on Russian troops on “Russian” territory as the excuse to reach Kiev. That’s my guess.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> So, now that Russian troops are in east Ukraine, Ukraine will need to react. Which means that Russia will use the attack on Russian troops on “Russian” territory as the excuse to reach Kiev. That’s my guess.




Yes, this time, I think that the Russians have a war-game, or plan, which includes the seizure of, and occupation of, Kiev (Kyiv).


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

The most insulting part is everybody knows exactly what he is up to but this is what “polite society” does to justify fucking over vast amounts of people in regards to their freedom, economics, and lives. World leaders. Corporations. Banks. Fuck them all.


----------



## Deleted member 215

I don’t know. I don’t anticipate much of a response from Ukraine (for now). They know they will lose and they know no one is coming to their aid.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> ......
> 
> Edit: *Germany has just put Nord Stream 2 on hold, great*! Now all they have to do is undo their nuclear power plants phase out. I know it's not going to happen, but I'll never get over how stupid it was. It was terrible both for their energy independence and for the environment to shut them down without a viable alternative.



Excellent news and a long overdue decision re Nord Stream 2.

Re nuclear power, that is a separate discussion, but the Green movement has been culturally important - and influential - in (what was then West) Germany since the 1980s, - and Green attitudes and politics are very deeply rooted there - that, plus the clear inability of the nuclear movement to own - admit, act upon, and learn from - sundry nuclear disasters has meant that persuading public opinion (and the election results that derive from that) that nuclear power might have a positive aspect is an exceptionally tough sell.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> I don’t know. I don’t anticipate much of a response from Ukraine (for now). They know they will lose and they know no one is coming to their aid.



So - honest question - you think that Russia will march to Kiev without resistance?


----------



## Deleted member 215

No. I said "for now" because I don't think Ukraine will fight Russian troops in the "separatist" regions, if that's as far as Russia goes. A march on Kiev is something else. And I think there might actually be a military response from the West in that scenario.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> No. I said "for now" because I don't think Ukraine will fight Russian troops in the "separatist" regions, if that's as far as Russia goes. A march on Kiev is something else. And I think there might actually be a military response from the West in that scenario.



Ok I understand what you’re saying. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> No. I said "for now" because I don't think Ukraine will fight Russian troops in the "separatist" regions, if that's as far as Russia goes. A march on Kiev is something else. And I think there might actually be a military response from the West in that scenario.




Does anybody honestly believe Putin is going to go “That’s all I wanted. I’m done now. Thanks for accommodating me.”? There’s a good chance he’s already calculated the impacts of sanctions. For people like Putin and Trump having a civil or world war on their watch is part of the their legacy bucket list. I believe Trump even made some kind of statement saying he’ll be dead by the time any potential major negative effects from his polices are felt. So why should he care. I think it’s fair to say that Trump cares more about the legacy of the Trump brand than any suffering his kids and grandkids might have to endure. Similarly I think Putin would be more than happy to be considered on par with Stalin in world history including all the negatives (are there any actual positives?).


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Excellent news and a long overdue decision re Nord Stream 2.
> 
> Re nuclear power, that is a separate discussion, but the Green movement has been culturally important - and influential - in (what was then West) Germany since the 1980s, - and Green attitudes and politics are very deeply rooted there - that, plus the clear inability of the nuclear movement to own - admit, act upon, and learn from - sundry nuclear disasters has meant that persuading public opinion (and the election results that derive from that) that nuclear power might have a positive aspect is an exceptionally tough sell.



Yes, I am very much aware of that view of theirs based on misinformation and outdated technology, just like  how the French love their homeopathy. It’s one of those things…

I’ve voted for green parties more than once because I sympathise with many of their ideas, but many of them have long suffered from a serious lack of scientific understanding and –dare I say– a certain… disconnect from reality. I want them to have some political weight, but I wouldn’t want them in power.



TBL said:


> No. I said "for now" because I don't think Ukraine will fight Russian troops in the "separatist" regions, if that's as far as Russia goes. A march on Kiev is something else. And I think there might actually be a military response from the West in that scenario.



Unlikely, as they have all said they would support Ukraine, but won’t get involved directly (which is the right course of action, imo: Ukraine already has a sizable military, but it is not well equipped. Given a sufficient supply of modern weapons they could give the Russians a tough time).


----------



## Huntn

What does it take to be admitted into NATO?  (answered below) Does Ukraine qualify?
Get’m joined up…a big chunk of land.


​








						NATO: What Does It Take To Join?
					

NATO candidate countries are stepping up efforts to fulfill admission criteria in the runup to the alliance's summit later this year in Prague, when new members are expected to be invited to join the bloc. Each candidate state must meet military, political, economic, and legal requirements that...




					www.rferl.org
				












						Background: How to become a NATO member
					

What is a Membership Action Plan?




					www.unian.info
				




*List of 30 member states:
NATO= blue*










						List of NATO Member States
					

At present, NATO Member States comprises 30 countries from the original 12 countries that signed the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949. Check the




					www.jagranjosh.com
				






​


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Does anybody honestly believe Putin is going to go “That’s all I wanted. I’m done now. Thanks for accommodating me.”? There’s a good chance he’s already calculated the impacts of sanctions. For people like Putin and Trump having a civil or world war on their watch is part of the their legacy bucket list. I believe Trump even made some kind of statement saying he’ll be dead by the time any potential major negative effects from his polices are felt. So why should he care. I think it’s fair to say that Trump cares more about the legacy of the Trump brand than any suffering his kids and grandkids might have to endure. Similarly I think Putin would be more than happy to be considered on par with Stalin in world history including all the negatives (are there any actual positives?).



Bring Ukraine under the NATO umbrella.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> The most insulting part is everybody knows exactly what he is up to but this is what “polite society” does to justify fucking over vast amounts of people in regards to their freedom, economics, and lives. World leaders. Corporations. Banks. Fuck them all.




That's why it's time for "sanctions" to give way to really cleaning house in the west:  banks as money launderers, the petrol lobbies, the shell company tax evasion games and on and on.    "Following the money" really gives only a toes-deep sense of the vast wash of illicit wealth transfer and attempts to conceal it.









						Global banks defy U.S. crackdowns by serving oligarchs, criminals and terrorists - ICIJ
					

The FinCEN Files show trillions in tainted dollars flow freely through major banks, swamping a broken enforcement system.




					www.icij.org
				




But so long as "all due care for greed" remains the top model, we're not going to see a deep level of housecleaning.  It's past time for more of the world to consider alternatives that economists have been tossing around for decades.

Lately I see that the right has taken up a new talking point, namely that there's no such thing as "unfettered capitalism" and so the left is clearly barking up an imaginary tree.   Sounds to me instead that some greedy folks are worried, and that's good because we're running out of time on this planet to accommodate greed and the inevitable kleptocrats (and related supportive industries) it has spawned all around the world.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Does anybody honestly believe Putin is going to go “That’s all I wanted. I’m done now. Thanks for accommodating me.”? There’s a good chance he’s already calculated the impacts of sanctions. For people like Putin and Trump having a civil or world war on their watch is part of the their legacy bucket list. I believe Trump even made some kind of statement saying he’ll be dead by the time any potential major negative effects from his polices are felt. So why should he care. I think it’s fair to say that Trump cares more about the legacy of the Trump brand than any suffering his kids and grandkids might have to endure. Similarly I think Putin would be more than happy to be considered on par with Stalin in world history including all the negatives (are there any actual positives?).




I don't know. Putin has done this "separatist" nonsense several times now, in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea*, and now Donetsk/Luhansk. I'm not convinced a full-scale war is coming. I think he could continue this pattern for a while, as could a successor. 

*Crimea being the only example of actual annexation, motivated by the strategic benefits of the Black Sea ports.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> I don't know. Putin has done this "separatist" nonsense several times now, in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea*, and now Donetsk/Luhansk. I'm not convinced a full-scale war is coming. I think he could continue this pattern for a while, as could a successor.
> 
> *Crimea being the only example of actual annexation, motivated by the strategic benefits of the Black Sea ports.




That may be the case be we aren’t going to be able to wag our finger and sanction him to knock it off. It’s become apparent that the world’s rich and powerful have insulated themselves against the rest of the world’s problems while doing a pretty damn good job of assuring we’ll turn the guns on each other instead of them. Their biggest concern is their favorite yacht craftsman might get killed in a skirmish. There are plenty of people who think we should turn our guns on them if it comes to that but the global unhinged are intellectually lazy and would rather shoot their neighbor.


----------



## lizkat

TBL said:


> I don't know. Putin has done this "separatist" nonsense several times now, in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea*, and now Donetsk/Luhansk. I'm not convinced a full-scale war is coming. I think he could continue this pattern for a while, as could a successor.
> 
> *Crimea being the only example of actual annexation, motivated by the strategic benefits of the Black Sea ports.





Ukraine's alignment has been the reddest of all of Putin's red lines though,  in the sense of eastern European nations leaning west,  or "breakaway" pieces of Russia proper or the former USSR agitating for independence after the initial dissolution of the Soviet Union. 

Ukraine to Russia is the equivalent of Cuba to the USA,  in the sense that we were waaaaay more than just uncomfortable with the idea of Russian missiles 90 miles off our coast back in the 60s. Putin's nightmare is the idea that NATO weaponry (US weaponry) could someday end up sitting on an actual land border of Russia.  

Look at poor Belarus now.  Despite citizens' dissatisfaction with the rigged re-election of the autocrat still now running their country,  Belarus under Lukashenko has essentially signed away sovereign status at this point in "giving permission" for Russian troops to remain in that country at the Ukraine border.   Meanwhile Lukashenko is not even acknowledged by some eastern European countries as the current president of Belarus thanks to the depth of corruption of the 2020 election; in fact the opposition has been given residence and protected status in Lithuania.  So Belarus overall remains in a volatile condition. Putin banks on its weakness (and the existence of a half-baked Belarus-Russia supranational confederation constructed in the mid-90s) to have his way on Belarusian turf right now.

It's true that Ukraine is not Belarus and that any move Putin makes to acquire control over western Ukraine will be met by force from Ukraine (and at least covert western assistance). And, the states to the west remember the USSR...

And it is geographic location of Ukraine relative to nearby NATO member states iin eastern Europe  that drives Putin nuts.  He hails from a time when the USSR self-described as empire restored, and his own bailwick as a KGB officer was all the way over in then East Germany's Dresden.  He's not likely to quit pressuring to get all of Ukraine under more direct influence of Russia.  Apparently now he's got tired of being ignored on the subject of his perceived right to determine the lean of a bunch of independent nations in eastern Europe.  The fear there is that if the West averts its eyes now,  Ukraine won't be the end of Russia's efforts to redraw post- cold war maps.


----------



## Citysnaps

BREAKING (Borowitz): Putin says he deserves Ukraine as consolation for losing the White House.

I say give him Mar-a-Lago and call it even Steven.


----------



## MarkusL

Scepticalscribe said:


> Excellent news and a long overdue decision re Nord Stream 2.
> 
> Re nuclear power, that is a separate discussion, but the Green movement has been culturally important - and influential - in (what was then West) Germany since the 1980s, - and Green attitudes and politics are very deeply rooted there - that, plus the clear inability of the nuclear movement to own - admit, act upon, and learn from - sundry nuclear disasters has meant that persuading public opinion (and the election results that derive from that) that nuclear power might have a positive aspect is an exceptionally tough sell.




And another problematic circumstance is that half the world's uranium mining is controlled by Russia and its neighboring puppet regimes. I'm sure some countries can solve their expansion of nuclear power with the help of Canada and Australia, but not everyone can. European politicians have a tendency to define energy independence as "replacing Russian gas with Russian and Kazakh uranium" but somehow only half of that plan ends up on their campaign signs.

As far as I can tell the "sanctions" against Russia were mostly a dud, and I think our energy dependence is the explanation for that. It's that thing we can't import from just anywhere on Earth, so we let Russia play its game in eastern Europe while we pretend to care.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60125659


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Does anybody honestly believe Putin is going to go “That’s all I wanted. I’m done now. Thanks for accommodating me.”? There’s a good chance he’s already calculated the impacts of sanctions.



the question is who is going to help Russia, and how?

Find the answer to the questions above and we’ll know how the future will shape.


----------



## yaxomoxay

citypix said:


> BREAKING (Borowitz): Putin says he deserves Ukraine as consolation for losing the White House.
> 
> I say give him Mar-a-Lago and call it even Steven.



Ok I LOL’d at this one. Well played.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> Bring Ukraine under the NATO umbrella.



Are you willing to send 100,000 Americans and 100,000 Europeans to die for Ukraine?

People don’t realize that this is the meaning of being in NATO. It means that once the party is attacked, the other countries will defend at *all costs*. And this means hundreds of thousands of deaths and the risk of escalation to global war.

I certainly understand the “deterrence” argument (which is indeed true) but deterrence works only as long as the answer to my questions above is a clear, definite “yes”. Considering how the Americans and Europeans acted, I am not sure they’d be willing to send troops to die in Ukraine, possibly in a long war, making the threat - and the treaty itself - moot.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> Are you willing to send 100,000 Americans and 100,000 Europeans to die for Ukraine?
> 
> People don’t realize that this is the meaning of being in NATO. It means that once the party is attacked, the other countries will defend at *all costs*. And this means hundreds of thousands of deaths and the risk of escalation to global war.
> 
> I certainly understand the “deterrence” argument (which is indeed true) but deterrence works only as long as the answer to my questions above is a clear, definite “yes”. Considering how the Americans and Europeans acted, I am not sure they’d be willing to send troops to die in Ukraine, possibly in a long war, making the threat - and the treaty itself - moot.




Ukraine landing in NATO any time soon is not going to happen.  It really is too provocative for the times we live in right now.   But NATO defense of a west-leaning neighbor is far more likely, no matter the form it may take as officially described to the general public.


----------



## yaxomoxay

lizkat said:


> Ukraine landing in NATO any time soon is not going to happen.  It really is too provocative for the times we live in right now.   But NATO defense of a west-leaning neighbor is far more likely, no matter the form it may take as officially described to the general public.



I totally agree with this assessment.


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> Are you willing to send 100,000 Americans and 100,000 Europeans to die for Ukraine?
> 
> People don’t realize that this is the meaning of being in NATO. It means that once the party is attacked, the other countries will defend at *all costs*. And this means hundreds of thousands of deaths and the risk of escalation to global war.
> 
> I certainly understand the “deterrence” argument (which is indeed true) but deterrence works only as long as the answer to my questions above is a clear, definite “yes”. Considering how the Americans and Europeans acted, I am not sure they’d be willing to send troops to die in Ukraine, possibly in a long war, making the threat - and the treaty itself - moot.



Let's see if/where it stops, I think there's some careful calculations that had to be made here. On one hand he invades and annexes Ukraine, we all sit back and let it happen (and by all appearances this will be the case) and on the other he continues to expand to other sovereign nations and we're behind the 8 ball. In some ways Putin has Hitler-like ambitions and it should be of concern to us all.


----------



## DT

Well, the Orange Fuckwit thinks it's an outstanding idea:



> "I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, 'This is genius,'" Trump recalled. "Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine -- Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful."
> 
> "I said, 'How smart is that?'" the former U.S. president continued. "And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That’s the strongest peace force… We could use that on our southern border. That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen. There were more army tanks than I’ve ever seen. They’re gonna keep peace all right. No, but think of it. Here’s a guy who’s very savvy."
> 
> Trump added: "But here’s a guy that says, you know, 'I’m gonna declare a big portion of Ukraine independent,' he used the word 'independent' and 'we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.' You gotta say that’s pretty savvy. And you know what the response was from Biden? There was no response. They didn’t have one for that. No, it’s very sad. Very sad."












						Trump praises Putin's 'genius' plan to invade Ukraine: 'You gotta say that’s pretty savvy'
					

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday called Vladimir Putin a "genius" after the Russian president made moves to take over parts of Ukraine.Trump made the remarks during an interview with conservative podcaster Buck Sexton."I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## Eric

DT said:


> Well, the Orange Fuckwit thinks it's an outstanding idea:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump praises Putin's 'genius' plan to invade Ukraine: 'You gotta say that’s pretty savvy'
> 
> 
> Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday called Vladimir Putin a "genius" after the Russian president made moves to take over parts of Ukraine.Trump made the remarks during an interview with conservative podcaster Buck Sexton."I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rawstory.com



As I stated before, at the very least Trump would've never agreed to sanctions, at worst he would've aided Russia.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> Let's see if/where it stops, I think there's some careful calculations that had to be made here. On one hand he invades and annexes Ukraine, we all sit back and let it happen (and by all appearances this will be the case) and on the other he continues to expand to other sovereign nations and we're behind the 8 ball. In some ways Putin has Hitler-like ambitions and it should be of concern to us all.




Putin's explanation will be that Ukrainians (from the west) invaded "his" expanded Russia, if he ventures past the eastern provinces or attacks Kyiv.



DT said:


> Well, the Orange Fuckwit thinks it's an outstanding idea




Now there's a surprise, eh?    The romance continues.   I say drop the two of them off in Vilnius and let the locals deal with them, keeping in mind there is not now and never will be a love fest between the denizens of Lithuania and the former USSR...


----------



## MEJHarrison

DT said:


> Well, the Orange Fuckwit thinks it's an outstanding idea:




Damn, it's been so long that I've read something from him, that I almost lost the ability to follow his "train of thought".  As soon as you stop exercising those muscles, you go downhill quick.  It took a couple times, but I think I've finally grasped it.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Huntn said:


> What does it take to be admitted into NATO?  (answered below) Does Ukraine qualify?
> Get’m joined up…a big chunk of land.





Huntn said:


> Bring Ukraine under the NATO umbrella.




From the link you provided, Huntn, it appears the answer to "What does it take to join NATO?" is "It depends." Granted, an extreme situation like this one provides impetus to the idea, but the other factors--military readiness, stable government, etc.--are why it's usually a slow process. That, and the bureaucracy of a system that won't meet again until November. 

I honestly don't know if it's too late now for Ukraine membership. If NATO was going to do it, they may have missed the window. What if they finally grant that membership about the same time Putin's tanks are rolling up to Ukraine's _western_ border?



lizkat said:


> Ukraine's alignment has been the reddest of all of Putin's red lines though,  in the sense of eastern European nations leaning west,  or "breakaway" pieces of Russia proper or the former USSR agitating for independence after the initial dissolution of the Soviet Union.
> 
> Ukraine to Russia is the equivalent of Cuba to the USA,  in the sense that we were waaaaay more than just uncomfortable with the idea of Russian missiles 90 miles off our coast back in the 60s. Putin's nightmare is the idea that NATO weaponry (US weaponry) could someday end up sitting on an actual land border of Russia.




I don't know what Putin is thinking here. What if he does succeed in taking the entire country? Does he honestly think that once he's that close to Europe, NATO _won't_ place missiles in Poland, Lithuania and other vulnerable countries?



DT said:


> Well, the Orange Fuckwit thinks it's an outstanding idea:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump praises Putin's 'genius' plan to invade Ukraine: 'You gotta say that’s pretty savvy'
> 
> 
> Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday called Vladimir Putin a "genius" after the Russian president made moves to take over parts of Ukraine.Trump made the remarks during an interview with conservative podcaster Buck Sexton."I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rawstory.com




Dear God. Thank god he's not president anymore. He'd be trying to find a way to make this Hunter Biden's fault.


----------



## Huntn

Ukraine crisis: US announces sanctions against Russia and moves hundreds of troops to protect NATO allies
					

Mr Biden told reporters that Russian troops being ordered to eastern Ukraine after Vladimir Putin recognised the independence of two separatist regions marked the "beginning of an invasion".




					news.sky.com
				




_Joe Biden has announced the first wave of US sanctions against Russia in response to Moscow's actions in Ukraine.

The president said Russian troop deployments in eastern Ukraine marked the "beginning of an invasion".

He warned Moscow that it would "pay an even steeper price if it continues its aggression".
Mr Biden said Russian leader Vladimir Putin was "setting up a rationale to take more territory by force".

"I'm going to begin to impose sanctions in response, far beyond the steps we and our allies and partners implemented in
2014."

The latest sanctions target Russian bank VEB and its military bank, and sovereign debt.

"We have cut off Russia's government from Western financing. It can no longer raise money from the West," he told reporters at the White House_


----------



## Huntn

DT said:


> Well, the Orange Fuckwit thinks it's an outstanding idea:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump praises Putin's 'genius' plan to invade Ukraine: 'You gotta say that’s pretty savvy'
> 
> 
> Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday called Vladimir Putin a "genius" after the Russian president made moves to take over parts of Ukraine.Trump made the remarks during an interview with conservative podcaster Buck Sexton."I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rawstory.com



He doesn’t even hide it, the shit needs to be behind bars awaiting trial. Now think about the state of NATO if this Mother Fucker was still in charge of the US military. We’d probably have left or been kicked out of NATO by now.  

I wonder what the Faux-patriots are saying?


----------



## Huntn

Thomas Veil said:


> From the link you provided, Huntn, it appears the answer to "What does it take to join NATO?" is "It depends." Granted, an extreme situation like this one provides impetus to the idea, but the other factors--military readiness, stable government, etc.--are why it's usually a slow process. That, and the bureaucracy of a system that won't meet again until November.
> 
> I honestly don't know if it's too late now for Ukraine membership. If NATO was going to do it, they may have missed the window. What if they finally grant that membership about the same time Putin's tanks are rolling up to Ukraine's _western_ border?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know what Putin is thinking here. What if he does succeed in taking the entire country? Does he honestly think that once he's that close to Europe, NATO _won't_ place missiles in Poland, Lithuania and other vulnerable countries?
> 
> 
> 
> Dear God. Thank god he's not president anymore. He'd be trying to find a way to make this Hunter Biden's fault.



If the current target is the “quote breakaway provinces”, it would be doable if NATO is ready to move it’s forces into Western Ukraine and accept the possibility with  a shooting war. As I’ve said before as this is Europe‘s back yard, I’d defer to Europe continental NATO members to decide at what point do they want to stop Creep’n Putin.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> Ukraine landing in NATO any time soon is not going to happen.  It really is too provocative for the times we live in right now.   But NATO defense of a west-leaning neighbor is far more likely, no matter the form it may take as officially described to the general public.



Exactly.

And, @Huntn, add to that the fact that Ukraine's borders/boundaries/frontiers are now contested (and have been since 2014) - NATO will not accept applications for membership from countries with contested or disputed bondaries (it cannot, because contested boundaries, or borders, may lead to civil conflict or civil war) - means that this will not happen - it cannot happen - at any time in the near future.

However, if the permanent division of Ukraine - into two Ukraines - occurs as a result of this, - then, an application from the west of the country could be viewed benignly, although Russia would vehemently resist such an outcome.



lizkat said:


> Putin's explanation will be that Ukrainians (from the west) invaded "his" expanded Russia, if he ventures past the eastern provinces or attacks Kyiv.




Yes, that - again, this is almost painfully predictable.

And the fact that the media is now well muzzled (again) in Russia (destroying one of the genuinely positive effects of the glasnost and perestroika reforms of the 1980s and early to mid 1990s, which had left Russia with an excellent, thoughtful, and well-informed media) means that this nonsense will not be challenged in any way in the public sphere or public space.


lizkat said:


> Now there's a surprise, eh?    The romance continues.   I say drop the two of them off in Vilnius and let the locals deal with them, keeping in mind there is not now and never will be a love fest between the denizens of Lithuania and the former USSR...
> 
> View attachment 11864




This is so, so, true.

In the early 1990s, I spent a term - just over four months - in the Baltic states - mainly in Vilnius, Lithuania, as my hosts were Vilnius University, on an EU funded travelling fellowship.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> He doesn’t even hide it, the shit needs to be behind bars awaiting trial. Now think about the state of NATO if this Mother Fucker was still in charge of the US military. We’d probably have left or been kicked out of NATO by now.
> 
> I wonder what the Faux-patriots are saying?





Let's not forget he can and probably will run again in 2024.  Great news for Putin.  

As far as Trump patriots, this was listed as another possible reason Putin decided to act now.  Under Trump there's a sizable percentage of the population that is fine with this type thing.  Putin is just a strong leader doing what is best for his country.  That's pretty much the pass every authoritarian leader is given by those who worship that system.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Let's not forget he can and probably will run again in 2024.  Great news for Putin.
> 
> As far as Trump patriots, this was listed as another possible reason Putin decided to act now.  Under Trump there's a sizable percentage of the population that is fine with this type thing.  Putin is just a strong leader doing what is best for his country.  That's pretty much the pass every authoritarian leader is given by those who worship that system.



I continue to hope that the miscreant will be in too much legal jeopardy to run again. Trump’s ”number one cowboy”  is being turned on, by the GOP establishment In Texas. Hopefully his days and Shit Head’s are numbered. 









						Texas GOP revolts against Trump’s favorite cowboy
					

Once a top Trump choice to head the USDA, Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller is facing turbulence in the March 1 primary.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> I continue to hope that the miscreant will be in too much legal jeopardy to run again. Trump’s ”number one cowboy”  is being turned on, by the GOP establishment In Texas. Hopefully his days and Shit Head’s are numbered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Texas GOP revolts against Trump’s favorite cowboy
> 
> 
> Once a top Trump choice to head the USDA, Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller is facing turbulence in the March 1 primary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com




At this point Trump is running against himself and there's a good chance that will be the cause of him losing.  Otherwise we're all going to be sitting in reeducation camps passing secret "But Manchin and Sinima" letters.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> At this point Trump is running against himself and there's a good chance that will be the cause of him losing.  Otherwise we're all going to be sitting in reeducation camps passing secret "But Manchin and Sinima" letters.



Well, even in the United states, I cannot see anyone (not even Mr Trump) successfuly campaigning on the slogan "Putin is a genius".


----------



## Thomas Veil

Huntn said:


> Ukraine crisis: US announces sanctions against Russia and moves hundreds of troops to protect NATO allies
> 
> 
> Mr Biden told reporters that Russian troops being ordered to eastern Ukraine after Vladimir Putin recognised the independence of two separatist regions marked the "beginning of an invasion".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Joe Biden has announced the first wave of US sanctions against Russia in response to Moscow's actions in Ukraine.
> 
> The president said Russian troop deployments in eastern Ukraine marked the "beginning of an invasion".
> 
> He warned Moscow that it would "pay an even steeper price if it continues its aggression".
> Mr Biden said Russian leader Vladimir Putin was "setting up a rationale to take more territory by force".
> 
> "I'm going to begin to impose sanctions in response, far beyond the steps we and our allies and partners implemented in
> 2014."
> 
> The latest sanctions target Russian bank VEB and its military bank, and sovereign debt.
> 
> "We have cut off Russia's government from Western financing. It can no longer raise money from the West," he told reporters at the White House_



By the way, I thought (except for his proclivity for hesitating/stuttering), Biden did fine today. Stern but not angry. All business.

I wondered what sanctions the West was still holding in abeyance, and found this:

_What other sanctions could Russia face?_​_Western nations have threatened Russia with harsh sanctions if it invades Ukraine._​​_*Excluding Russia from Swift*_​_One measure would be to exclude Russia from the global financial messaging service Swift, which is used by thousands of financial institutions worldwide. _​_This would make it very hard for Russian banks to do business overseas. _​_However, this would have an economic cost for countries like the US and Germany, whose banks have close links with Russia. _​​_The White House says it is unlikely to be unleashed as an immediate response to an invasion._​​*Banning Russia from using the US dollar*​_The US could ban Russia from financial transactions involving US dollars. Any Western firm that allowed a Russian institution to deal in dollars would face penalties. _​_This could have a huge impact on Russia's economy as most of its oil and gas sales are settled in dollars. It could cripple Russia's foreign trade in other sectors. _​_However, it would mean Russia's oil and gas exports would slump, and that would affect European countries which are dependent on Russian gas._​​_*Block the banks*_​_The US could blacklist Russian banks, making it almost impossible for it to conduct international transactions._​_Moscow would have to bail out the banks and do what it could to avoid inflation rising and incomes falling. _​_However, this would hurt western investors with money in those banks. _​_Besides, Russia has reserves of over $630bn (£464bn) in its central bank to guard against such economic shocks._​​_*Blocking the export of hi-tech to Russia*_​_The West could restrict the export of key hi-tech commodities to Russia. _​_The US, for example, could stop companies selling goods such as semiconductor microchips. These are used in everything from cars to smart phones. _​_This would affect not just Russia's defence and aerospace sectors, but whole swathes of its economy._​_However, it could hurt the business of companies which export the technology. _​​_*Energy restrictions*_​_Russia's economy is hugely dependent on selling gas and oil overseas and Western nations could refuse to buy oil and gas from the big Russian energy giants such as Gazprom or Rosneft. _​_Again, however, this could bring higher gas prices and fuel shortages to Europe. Germany, for example, relies on Russia for one-third of its gas supplies._​​_*Limiting Russian access to London's financial institutions *_​_Such is the scale of Russian money in banks and property in the UK that the capital has been dubbed "Londongrad". _​_The UK government claims it is tackling this problem with "unexplained wealth orders", which require people to say where their cash has come from. _​_But only a handful of these orders have ever been used._​​








						What are the sanctions on Russia and are they hurting its economy?
					

Western nations have imposed severe sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.



					www.bbc.com
				




There are also other possibilities such as travel bans.


----------



## NT1440

yaxomoxay said:


> It seems that Biden accepted a summit with Putin. Very dangerous diplomatic move, but probably one that has to be done in hope of stopping the conflict, so
> I must commend Biden for trying this even if it could potentially make things worse.



How in the world could sitting down between two leaders make things worse?

Given all the alternatives screeching from the media like preemptive sanctions (a financial act of war), what possible harm could come from talks? Talks are how conflicts ease, period.


Huntn said:


> He doesn’t even hide it, the shit needs to be behind bars awaiting trial. Now think about the state of NATO if this Mother Fucker was still in charge of the US military. We’d probably have left or been kicked out of NATO by now.
> 
> I wonder what the Faux-patriots are saying?



Putting Trump aside (given he belongs in The Hague alongside every modern US president)….

NATO’s expansion, ever marching missile defense systems towards Russia’s borders (hence destroying any security assurances Russia has) is THE driver of the situation we’re in today.

This all stems from the coup of 2014, and it’s MADDENING to see that nobody remembers how that happened. We were caught red handed and yet again the US and it’s vassal states pretend it never happened.

I’m at the point of giving up hope that anyone has the wherewithal to counter 8 years of lies and propaganda. Victoria Nuland is back at it again and even the “liberals” are once again supporting the neoconservative policies that haven’t been altered at all since Bush II.

“Not one inch” my fucking ass.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Thomas Veil said:


> By the way, I thought (except for his proclivity for hesitating/stuttering), Biden did fine today. Stern but not angry. All business.
> 
> I wondered what sanctions the West was still holding in abeyance, and found this:
> 
> _What other sanctions could Russia face?_​_Western nations have threatened Russia with harsh sanctions if it invades Ukraine._​​_*Excluding Russia from Swift*_​_One measure would be to exclude Russia from the global financial messaging service Swift, which is used by thousands of financial institutions worldwide. _​_This would make it very hard for Russian banks to do business overseas. _​_However, this would have an economic cost for countries like the US and Germany, whose banks have close links with Russia. _​​_The White House says it is unlikely to be unleashed as an immediate response to an invasion._​​*Banning Russia from using the US dollar*​_The US could ban Russia from financial transactions involving US dollars. Any Western firm that allowed a Russian institution to deal in dollars would face penalties. _​_This could have a huge impact on Russia's economy as most of its oil and gas sales are settled in dollars. It could cripple Russia's foreign trade in other sectors. _​_However, it would mean Russia's oil and gas exports would slump, and that would affect European countries which are dependent on Russian gas._​​_*Block the banks*_​_The US could blacklist Russian banks, making it almost impossible for it to conduct international transactions._​_Moscow would have to bail out the banks and do what it could to avoid inflation rising and incomes falling. _​_However, this would hurt western investors with money in those banks. _​_Besides, Russia has reserves of over $630bn (£464bn) in its central bank to guard against such economic shocks._​​_*Blocking the export of hi-tech to Russia*_​_The West could restrict the export of key hi-tech commodities to Russia. _​_The US, for example, could stop companies selling goods such as semiconductor microchips. These are used in everything from cars to smart phones. _​_This would affect not just Russia's defence and aerospace sectors, but whole swathes of its economy._​_However, it could hurt the business of companies which export the technology. _​​_*Energy restrictions*_​_Russia's economy is hugely dependent on selling gas and oil overseas and Western nations could refuse to buy oil and gas from the big Russian energy giants such as Gazprom or Rosneft. _​_Again, however, this could bring higher gas prices and fuel shortages to Europe. Germany, for example, relies on Russia for one-third of its gas supplies._​​​
> _*Limiting Russian access to London's financial institutions *_​_Such is the scale of Russian money in banks and property in the UK that the capital has been dubbed "Londongrad". _​_The UK government claims it is tackling this problem with "unexplained wealth orders", which require people to say where their cash has come from. _​_But only a handful of these orders have ever been used._​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the sanctions on Russia and are they hurting its economy?
> 
> 
> Western nations have imposed severe sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are also other possibilities such as travel bans.




I like how that list all ends with (paraphrased) “However, we can’t upset big business.” The only thing we can guarantee is they’ll jack up gas prices in an already completely manipulated market. The fossil fuel industry just can’t get a break.

Not that it's his fault but the public has already been screaming "When is Biden going to do something about gas prices?!?!"  Well, he did something.  Raised them.  As the perception will go.  Good thing the dems have been knocking it out of the park on every other issue.  Otherwise they might be in danger of losing power.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I'm not in the headspace to do a full analysis on this one, but for now I'll just say they really had to dig deep to find an outrage angle on this.









						Flashback: Romney calling Russia 'our number one geopolitical foe' prompted media onslaught in 2012
					

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was roasted in the media in 2012 for saying Russia was the nation's top geopolitical foe.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

NT1440 said:


> How in the world could sitting down between two leaders make things worse?



I’ll explain. 
One of the most used tactics in diplomacy - and negotiation in general - is to not have the ultimate decision makers sitting at the table until virtually all the decisions are agreed upon. This is why in 99% of the cases it will be a foreign minister (or the SecState) the one that visits his counterpart and then the leader of the other country or entity; often the counterpart will ask for something and the foreign minister will say “I can’t commit to this until I hear from my superior, but let’s have our people work on this”. This attitude is to prevent a) surprises b) unreasonable demands c) misunderstandings, most importantly d) new decisions. 

This is why you have meetings at that level over and over, and that’s why it’s so difficult to organize meetings between leaders. This is why you have Casterlagh and Metternich in Vienna and not the respective leaders. This is why you have Kissinger meeting Zhou Enlai before Nixon even stepped on the AF1 to go to China and that’s why Nixon kept distance from Ho Chi Min despite all the diplomatic wheels that were  turning behind the scenes. This is also why the US asked for some sort of ground rules before accepting a meeting with Putin. 

Bringing Biden - or any other POTUS - at the table when the counterpart has the finger on the trigger between war and peace is very dangerous. It opens the POTUS to all sort of dangers, especially if at the other side of the table you have a smart and cunning individual like Putin. The Russian leader might force Biden into a position in which he (Biden) has to give concessions that sound reasonable, or basically green light the war. Hence, the danger. 

So yes, very bad stuff can happen when leaders meet, depending on the circumstances. I think that Biden played this specific issue very well. 

Point of note: this also happens when you buy a car from a dealership (the agent will talk to the superior but will not let you do so), or in hostage situations (negotiator will talk but not the decision maker).


----------



## Zoidberg

NT1440 said:


> How in the world could sitting down between two leaders make things worse?
> 
> Given all the alternatives screeching from the media like preemptive sanctions (a financial act of war), what possible harm could come from talks? Talks are how conflicts ease, period.
> 
> Putting Trump aside (given he belongs in The Hague alongside every modern US president)….
> 
> NATO’s expansion, ever marching missile defense systems towards Russia’s borders (hence destroying any security assurances Russia has) is THE driver of the situation we’re in today.
> 
> This all stems from the coup of 2014, and it’s MADDENING to see that nobody remembers how that happened. We were caught red handed and yet again the US and it’s vassal states pretend it never happened.
> 
> I’m at the point of giving up hope that anyone has the wherewithal to counter 8 years of lies and propaganda. Victoria Nuland is back at it again and even the “liberals” are once again supporting the neoconservative policies that haven’t been altered at all since Bush II.
> 
> “Not one inch” my fucking ass.



I'm not sure whether you're serious, or if it's sarcastic. If serious, wow.


----------



## NT1440

yaxomoxay said:


> I’ll explain.
> One of the most used tactics in diplomacy - and negotiation in general - is to not have the ultimate decision makers sitting at the table until virtually all the decisions are agreed upon. This is why in 99% of the cases it will be a foreign minister (or the SecState) the one that visits his counterpart and then the leader of the other country or entity; often the counterpart will ask for something and the foreign minister will say “I can’t commit to this until I hear from my superior, but let’s have our people work on this”. This attitude is to prevent a) surprises b) unreasonable demands c) misunderstandings, most importantly d) new decisions.
> 
> This is why you have meetings at that level over and over, and that’s why it’s so difficult to organize meetings between leaders. This is why you have Casterlagh and Metternich in Vienna and not the respective leaders. This is why you have Kissinger meeting Zhou Enlai before Nixon even stepped on the AF1 to go to China and that’s why Nixon kept distance from Ho Chi Min despite all the diplomatic wheels that were  turning behind the scenes. This is also why the US asked for some sort of ground rules before accepting a meeting with Putin.
> 
> Bringing Biden - or any other POTUS - at the table when the counterpart has the finger on the trigger between war and peace is very dangerous. It opens the POTUS to all sort of dangers, especially if at the other side of the table you have a smart and cunning individual like Putin. The Russian leader might force Biden into a position in which he (Biden) has to give concessions that sound reasonable, or basically green light the war. Hence, the danger.
> 
> So yes, very bad stuff can happen when leaders meet, depending on the circumstances. I think that Biden played this specific issue very well.
> 
> Point of note: this also happens when you buy a car from a dealership (the agent will talk to the superior but will not let you do so), or in hostage situations (negotiator will talk but not the decision maker).



…Blinken was already planning (now canceled) on meeting with Lavrov. Stating that the heads of state have agreed to a meeting doesn’t prevent the background diplomacy that happens every single day from happening. 

We’re both nuclear powers, we’re in constant communication every day even at lower level ranks in the State Department and the military. That’s….the basic functioning of a national state’s literally day to day…


----------



## yaxomoxay

NT1440 said:


> …Blinken was already planning (now canceled) on meeting with Lavrov. Stating that the heads of state have agreed to a meeting doesn’t prevent the background diplomacy that happens every single day from happening.



The Blinken-Lavrov meeting has nothing to do with my original comment and your reply to it. Diplomatic talk (formal, informal, cultural) will not stop.


NT1440 said:


> We’re both nuclear powers, we’re in constant communication every day even at lower level ranks in the State Department and the military. That’s….the basic functioning of a national state’s literally day to day…



Which has very little to do with a meeting between two world leaders. Non-decision makers will work together. Decision-makers will not sit at the table without predetermined decisions,  ground rules, and very specific topic boundaries especially in a moment of high tension. Let’s be real for one second please.


----------



## NT1440

Zoidberg said:


> I'm not sure whether you're serious, or if it's sarcastic. If serious, wow.



I’m completely serious. I’ve been watching this space since 2012 or so when I started paying attention to the (then current) Obama administration’s actual policy moves instead of their language. 

Robert Perry was cutting through the propaganda at the time. For those who don’t know this is the man that broke the Iran Contra story when the media at the time was openly calling it a conspiracy theory. I’ll take the word of a proven pest-to-power journalist over the narratives our corporate consent-manufacturers “news” outlets. 








						ROBERT PARRY: Who's Telling the 'Big Lie' on Ukraine?
					

The U.S. group think still driving the Ukraine crisis began at least eight years ago, as detailed in this article by Robert Parry on Sept. 2, 2014.  Exclusive: Official Washington draws the Ukraine crisis in black-and-white colors with Putin the bad guy and the U.S.-backed leaders in Kiev the good




					consortiumnews.com
				




Honestly though, 2014 was recent history, there’s no reason people can’t remember Victoria “regime change” Nuland getting caught red handed carrying on the neocon agenda (her husband is one of the Kagan’s, who are behind the agenda put forth in response to 9/11).


----------



## Deleted member 215

Zoidberg said:


> I'm not sure whether you're serious, or if it's sarcastic. If serious, wow.




I love it. He's like the only actual leftist here and it's interesting to  hear that perspective. Not saying I agree with it (or even know enough about this subject to say whether I agree with it), but I appreciate hearing it. If you have a counter-argument, by all means.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> I love it. He's like the only actual leftist here and it's interesting to  hear that perspective. Not saying I agree with it (or even know enough about this subject to say whether I agree with it), but I appreciate hearing it. If you have a counter-argument, by all means.



Define "leftist". Because I have trouble matching the traditional "leftist" values with someone who sides with strongmen and sees Western democracies (flawed as they are) as the aggressor in this situation.

Let me guess, their line of argument is "CIA is bad", "Tuskegee experiment", and "Russia saved the world from the Nazis in WW2".

The kind of black and white thinking that readily jumps from "US imperialism is bad" to "... therefore anyone and anything that goes against the US must be good", but they see nothing wrong in elected officials wearing $500000 watches.


----------



## NT1440

Zoidberg said:


> Define "leftist". Because I have trouble matching the traditional "leftist" values with someone who sides with strongmen and see Western democracies (flawed as they are) the aggressor in this situation.



Good lord. I’m “siding” with someone for pointing out that the entire core of the issue today is based on lies of the recent past?

Apparently I sided with Hussein. Apparently Ghaddafi too. Assad as well.

Either get an actual argument or don’t discuss it at all. Pinning me as a Putin supporter? Come on. It’s been over half a century since the McCarthy era.

I’m against capitalism and imperialism. I’ve got lots of other opinions too, but I believe that makes me a “leftist” by most definitions that haven’t been diluted by todays modern era (democrats by definition cannot be leftists as they explicitly support the capitalist structure).

You can disagree with my stance, but I’m at least providing something to this discussion (I even brought links!). Do you have anything to say to my actual posts or were you here for drive by insults?

I see you edited it to include more assumptions. FYI a $500K is an abomination. No one person should have wealth enough to even consider purchasing one.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> ... Which has very little to do with a meeting between two world leaders. Non-decision makers will work together. Decision-makers will not sit at the table without predetermined decisions, ground rules, and very specific topic boundaries especially in a moment of high tension. Let’s be real for one second please.




Yes.  Putin's already working off a well honed script that he's had in the works for a very long time.   At a table with that guy right now, Biden would be stuck trying to ad lib on behalf of "western interests" including the whole unwieldy combo of Ukraine, the EU and NATO, officials in which entities do not all see eye to eye on best way forward vis a vis what Putin's been doing,  So that shouldn't happen and is indeed dangerous.

Other diplomats, even other western heads of state are more free to continue discussing options and alternatives to outright war between Ukraine proper and Russia, which conflict cannot not end well for anyone, not to say that Putin seizing eastern Ukraine is acceptable either. 

I won't gainsay some of what @NT1440  is saying about assorted events of 2014, but  none of that justifies the script that Putin's trying to run here.  He's literally trying to roll back the dissolution of the USSR and is starting with the most vulnerable near neighbors, Belarus and Ukraine. 

Ironic that Belarus was an early declarer of independence as the Soviet Union collapsed.  Regardless of its problems since then with autocracy and corruption, its citizens have always been wary of Russia's attempts to co-opt its sovereignty through local federations and treaties.   But now their country has essentially been occupied by Russia,  with Putin's Russian "peacekeepers"  parked at the border with Ukraine.  All without a shot being fired at a Belarus citizen by a Russian soldier.


----------



## SuperMatt

NT1440 said:


> Good lord. I’m “siding” with someone for pointing out that the entire core of the issue today is based on lies of the recent past?
> 
> Apparently I sided with Hussein. Apparently Ghaddafi too. Assad as well.
> 
> Either get an actual argument or don’t discuss it at all. Pinning me as a Putin supporter? Come on. It’s been over half a century since the McCarthy era.
> 
> I’m against capitalism and imperialism. I’ve got lots of other opinions too, but I believe that makes me a “leftist” by most definitions that haven’t been diluted by todays modern era (democrats by definition cannot be leftists as they explicitly support the capitalist structure).
> 
> You can disagree with my stance, but I’m at least providing something to this discussion (I even brought links!). Do you have anything to say to my actual posts or were you here for drive by insults?
> 
> I see you edited it to include more assumptions. FYI a $500K is an abomination. No one person should have wealth enough to even consider purchasing one.



I found the article you posted interesting. However, 8 years after the author’s statement about Russia not invading… Russians actually ARE massing tanks and artillery and preparing for invasion.

In addition, the west didn’t actually do much after all when it came to Ukraine in 2014, despite the author’s worries that they would.

As for imperialism, I feel like Putin’s plan is to return to the days of the Soviet Empire. He has stated publicly that he found the demise of the USSR to be one of the greatest tragedies in history. (or was it THE greatest tragedy?)

I don’t think anybody from the west is asking to go to war over this.

Finally, I am not familiar with the “neocon agenda” - can you tell me what you mean by that?


----------



## Zoidberg

NT1440 said:


> Good lord. I’m “siding” with someone for pointing out that the entire core of the issue today is based on lies of the recent past?
> 
> Apparently I sided with Hussein. Apparently Ghaddafi too. Assad as well.
> 
> Either get an actual argument or don’t discuss it at all. Pinning me as a Putin supporter? Come on. It’s been over half a century since the McCarthy era.
> 
> I’m against capitalism and imperialism. I’ve got lots of other opinions too, but I believe that makes me a “leftist” by most definitions that haven’t been diluted by todays modern era (democrats by definition cannot be leftists as they explicitly support the capitalist structure).
> 
> You can disagree with my stance, but I’m at least providing something to this discussion (I even brought links!). Do you have anything to say to my actual posts or were you here for drive by insults?



I haven't insulted anyone. I'm just looking at the plain facts, and I am of the opinion that once in a while, in every thought process, it's good to stop and do a sanity check. Such sanity checks could for instance be asking yourself "what are the chances of a strongman who has been in power for 20+ years and has squashed all its opposition and free press is actually doing the right thing?".

I was against my country invading Iraq in 2003 under false pretences, just like I am against Russia invading Ukraine under false pretences. 
You call the 2014 events "a coup". Why? I'll assume you're lucky to have always lived in a country where your vote is counted and you don't realise that not everyone has the privilege of having fair elections. Sometimes the whole system is rigged and there's no other way to improve things.

As for your links, the one you linked to, honestly is utter hogwash, denying Ukrainians the very right to decide for themselves as if they were children who don't know any better. Admission to NATO is not forced, each and everyone of its members CHOSE to be in it. Have you stopped to consider why so many former soviet vassal states were so eager to join?

There's little doubt in my mind that when someone puts their political ideology –in your case, anti-imperialism, although I suspect is plain old contrarianism– ahead of basic human rights, you're in the wrong.


----------



## Zoidberg

SuperMatt said:


> I found the article you posted interesting. However, 8 years after the author’s statement about Russia not invading… Russians actually ARE massing tanks and artillery and preparing for invasion.
> 
> In addition, the west didn’t actually do much after all when it came to Ukraine in 2014, despite the author’s worries that they would.
> 
> As for imperialism, I feel like Putin’s plan is to return to the days of the Soviet Empire. He has stated publicly that he found the demise of the USSR to be one of the greatest tragedies in history. (or was it THE greatest tragedy?)
> 
> I don’t think anybody from the west is asking to go to war over this.
> 
> Finally, I am not familiar with the “neocon agenda” - can you tell me what you mean by that?



There's always a myriad of blogs like that, It's basically like Infowars in terms of integrity, just for a different public. They claim to have been founded as left-wing think tanks, but keep reading and clicking through that rabbit hole and oddly enough you invariably end up reading about how the US imperialism is bad, the EU is bad, and Russia is the victim. A good example of that is Reseau Voltaire.

It's basically agitprop.


----------



## NT1440

SuperMatt said:


> I found the article you posted interesting. However, 8 years later, Russians actually ARE massing tanks and artillery and preparing for invasion.
> 
> In addition, the west didn’t actually do much after all when it came to Ukraine in 2014, despite the author’s worries that they would.
> 
> As for imperialism, I feel like Putin’s plan is to return to the days of the Soviet Empire. He has stated publicly that he found the demise of the USSR to be one of the greatest tragedies in history. (or was it THE greatest tragedy?)
> 
> I don’t think anybody from the west is asking to go to war over this.
> 
> Finally, I am not familiar with the “neocon agenda” - can you tell me what you mean by that?



The civil war which has killed thousands is a direct result of 2014. The American people by and large have no idea that Ukraine has been bombing it’s own people since they voted to leave Ukraine (I don’t know if Ukraine’s government structure actually allows for it, but they did vote that was in the Russian speaking territories we’re talking about today). 

I can’t fathom where people get this idea of the return of the USSR. Russia simply doesn’t have that capacity, never will. I get it’s a good cartoon plot, but the material conditions of reality means it’s simply not possible. Putin isn’t a cartoon villain (though there are plenty who earnestly believe he is, but you can usually weed them out because they also believe he’s somehow the worlds richest man too…secretly). He’s just as evil as every head of state of every other country.

Rumsfeld, Cheney, the Kagans, Wolfowitz, etc. The network of think tanks that drafted what would become America’s foreign policy of aggression after 9/11 has come to be, and nothing has changed other than tactics regardless of what administration has come since. PNAC laid it out explicitly, and all their offshoots since needing to rebrand are still firmly seated in public and private power. I paid attention to the ghouls after they departed the Bush White House, they’re all still very much shaping elite perception of how to manage the Empire. Do a search for “total spectrum dominance” to get a basic understanding of the capabilities America has been yearning for.


----------



## Zoidberg

NT1440 said:


> He’s just as evil as every head of state of every other country.



Tell me you've had a cushy life and have never known oppression, without telling me you've had a cushy life and never known oppression.


----------



## NT1440

Zoidberg said:


> I haven't insulted anyone. I'm just looking at the plain facts, and I am of the opinion that once in a while, in every thought process, it's good to stop and do a sanity check. Such sanity checks could for instance be asking yourself "what are the chances of a strongman who has been in power for 20+ years and has squashed all its opposition and free press is actually doing the right thing?".
> 
> I was against my country invading Iraq in 2003 under false pretences, just like I am against Russia invading Ukraine under false pretences.
> You call the 2014 events "a coup". Why? I'll assume you're lucky to have always lived in a country where your vote is counted and you don't realise that not everyone has the privilege of having fair elections. Sometimes the whole system is rigged and there's no other way to improve things.
> 
> As for your links, the one you linked to, honestly is utter hogwash, denying Ukrainians the very right to decide for themselves as if they were children who don't know any better. Admission to NATO is not forced, each and everyone of its members CHOSE to be in it. Have you stopped to consider why so many former soviet vassal states were so eager to join?
> 
> There's little doubt in my mind that when someone puts their political ideology –in your case, anti-imperialism, although I suspect is plain old contrarianism– ahead of basic human rights, you're in the wrong.



I live in America. My vote has never counted.

Basic human rights? We’re actively starving 20 million people in Afghanistan. We could turn off the bloodshed tomorrow in Yemen if we cut off intelligence and refueling support for the Saudis. Puerto Rico is still explicitly treated as a colony as we impose privatization of the electric grid which we STILL haven’t fixed. 2000+ cities and towns have higher lead levels than Flint did when it was all over the news. There are more empty homes in the country than homeless people. The US is the only non-signatory of the declaration of children’s rights. We assassinated Haiti’s president recently. This country lets tens of thousands of people die every year by being the ONLY industrialized nation  on the planet that doesn’t have any form of universal healthcare at the behest of capital interests.

I don’t want to hear a damn thing about not believing in Human Rights, in my eyes my country is THE biggest abuser of human rights on the planet given the power we wield.

I’m not contrarian, I have very specific views and reasons for them.

Can we get to an actual discussion or are my interactions with you here simply going to be…this?


----------



## NT1440

Zoidberg said:


> There's always a myriad of blogs like that, It's basically like Infowars in terms of integrity, just for a different public. They claim to have been founded as left-wing think tanks, but keep reading and clicking through that rabbit hole and oddly enough you invariably end up reading about how the US imperialism is bad, the EU is bad, and Russia is the victim. A good example of that is Reseau Voltaire.
> 
> It's basically agitprop.



…ConsortiumNews is the longest running independent online news source in the country. Robert Perry made a career of exposing the lies of the powerful (Iran Contra) and he didn’t back down until the day he died. Chris Hedges, John Pilger, John Karaoku, etc. sit on the board of directors. The site has won numerous investigative awards. The site has a 20+ year track record and has always spoken truth to power regardless of which “team” has been in the White House. 

I’m done with you. I’m some random guy on the internet who’s speaking my opinion. It’s not worth my mental health to get worked up over this, I just wish this was an actual conversation instead of assumptions on where I’m coming from. Contrarian isn’t it, I have principles that I hold firm, that’s it.


----------



## SuperMatt

NT1440 said:


> The civil war which has killed thousands is a direct result of 2014. The American people by and large have no idea that Ukraine has been bombing it’s own people since they voted to leave Ukraine (I don’t know if Ukraine’s government structure actually allows for it, but they did vote that was in the Russian speaking territories we’re talking about today).
> 
> I can’t fathom where people get this idea of the return of the USSR. Russia simply doesn’t have that capacity, never will. I get it’s a good cartoon plot, but the material conditions of reality means it’s simply not possible. Putin isn’t a cartoon villain (though there are plenty who earnestly believe he is, but you can usually weed them out because they also believe he’s somehow the worlds richest man too…secretly). He’s just as evil as every head of state of every other country.
> 
> Rumsfeld, Cheney, the Kagans, Wolfowitz, etc. The network of think tanks that drafted what would become America’s foreign policy of aggression after 9/11 has come to be, and nothing has changed other than tactics regardless of what administration has come since. PNAC laid it out explicitly, and all their offshoots since needing to rebrand are still firmly seated in public and private power. I paid attention to the ghouls after they departed the Bush White House, they’re all still very much shaping elite perception of how to manage the Empire. Do a search for “total spectrum dominance” to get a basic understanding of the capabilities America has been yearning for.



Where do “people” get the idea of the return of the USSR? I’d say straight from the horse’s mouth:



> “First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” Putin said. “As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory.



I also don’t believe the idea that all world leaders are ”just as evil” as each other. That makes no sense; they are all different.

As for Rumsfeld and Cheney, they were horrible. I don’t believe they are still pulling the strings though (especially Rumsfeld)…


----------



## Zoidberg

NT1440 said:


> I live in America. My vote has never counted.
> 
> Basic human rights? We’re actively starving 20 million people in Afghanistan. We could turn off the bloodshed tomorrow in Yemen if we cut off intelligence and refueling support for the Saudis. Puerto Rico is still explicitly treated as a colony as we impose privatization of the electric grid which we STILL haven’t fixed. 2000+ cities and towns have higher lead levels than Flint did when it was all over the news. There are more empty homes in the country than homeless people. The US is the only non-signatory of the declaration of children’s rights. We assassinated Haiti’s president recently. This country lets tens of thousands of people die every year by being the ONLY industrialized nation  on the planet that doesn’t have any form of universal healthcare at the behest of capital interests.
> 
> I want want to hear a damn thing about not believing in Human Rights, in my eyes my country is THE biggest abuser of human rights on the planet given the power we wield.
> 
> I’m not contrarian, I have very specific views and reasons for them.
> 
> Can we get to an actual discussion or are my interactions with you here simply going to be…this?



Yeah, sure. I just expect a modicum of good faith, but apparently you genuinely believe in your conspiracy theories, so I guess that counts as good faith?

If I may, it would do you some good to travel for a bit and see how bad things are for people who really have it bad. It made me put things in context and taught me to appreciate how fucking lucky I am, and you seriously need some of that.


----------



## NT1440

SuperMatt said:


> Where do “people” get the idea of the return of the USSR? I’d say straight from the horse’s mouth:
> 
> 
> I also don’t believe the idea that all world leaders are ”just as evil” as each other. That makes no sense; they are all different.
> 
> As for Rumsfeld and Cheney, they were horrible. I don’t believe they are still pulling the strings though (especially Rumsfeld)…



The fall of the USSR created the first Unipolar world in modern history. With no great power to keep it in check the US more or less  calls the shots. 

It’s a geopolitical analysis being treated like a mission statement. 


Regarding the neocons. Victoria Nuland is now in charge of the Ukraine situation. She’s the wife of Robert Kagan. She was the National Security Advisor to Duck Cheney. Do some digging there if you’re interested. Power isn’t individuals, it’s the networks they are part of. Take a look at where all the key members of PNAC and their staffs have gone since 2000. You’ll find these people still hold huge influence peddling positions in just about every field related to military think tanks, MIC corporations and their PR firms, and organizations like the Federalist Society and the Council on Foreign Affairs.


----------



## Zoidberg

NT1440 said:


> …ConsortiumNews is the longest running independent online news source in the country. Robert Perry made a career of exposing the lies of the powerful (Iran Contra) and he didn’t back down until the day he died. Chris Hedges, John Pilger, John Karaoku, etc. sit on the board of directors. The site has won numerous investigative awards. The site has a 20+ year track record and has always spoken truth to power regardless of which “team” has been in the White House.



The guy whose article you linked to has been dead for years, and they still push out his posts like it's some kind of Weekend at Bernie's. The thing with the dead is that they can't complain that their words are taken out of context. Perhaps Perry would have edited his article or wrote an addendum, considering that Russia has indeed ended up invading Ukraine, after the Ukrainians eventually democratically chose their own path away from Russia.


----------



## NT1440

Zoidberg said:


> Yeah, sure. I just expect a modicum of good faith, but apparently you genuinely believe in your conspiracy theories, so I guess that counts as good faith?
> 
> If I may, it would do you some good to travel for a bit and see how bad things are for people who really have it bad. It made me put things in context and taught me to appreciate how fucking lucky I am, and you seriously need some of that.



How is me not living in genuine poverty and being lucky for it an excuse for millions dying in my own lifetime from no healthcare? I understand the privilege of living in the belly of the Empire…how does that negate it being an empire?

I rebuild homes all over the east coast and south after disasters. I’ve seen abject poverty. I understand that I live comfortably in comparison. Instead of saying “thank god I’m comfortable” (though a couple thousand dollar medical bill would ruin me, so I’m not we’ll off by any means), I’m just more outraged that things have to be this way in the first place. Hence my anti-capitalism worldview.


----------



## SuperMatt

NT1440 said:


> The fall of the USSR created the first Unipolar world in modern history. With no great power to keep it in check the US more or less  calls the shots.



First, this reads as if you think the Cold War was preferable to the current status quo.

On the second, aren’t you forgetting about China?


----------



## NT1440

SuperMatt said:


> First, this reads as if you think the Cold War was preferable to the current status quo.
> 
> On the second, aren’t you forgetting about China?



No, I think the Cold War was completely unnecessary from the very get go.

A unipolar world is dangerous. A multipolar world at least provides *some* checks and balances. That’s a very broad statement I know, but I’ve already spent way too much time on here tonight.

Thank you, Matt, for at least engaging with me in an actual dialogue. I know my views aren’t popular to most, but I have very specific reasons and years of reading/studying that go into them. Thanks for lending me the space to elaborate in good faith on them.


----------



## Deleted member 215

^My views are becoming more like yours as I get older (contradicting the popular maxim that one gets more conservative as they age). I'm not quite there on being anti-capitalist (I guess I still think one can work within the capitalist system to solve problems) but my foreign policy views are similar to yours. So I enjoy hearing this perspective. (I also hear it from podcasts like Chapo and Citations Needed).


----------



## NT1440

TBL said:


> ^My views are becoming more like yours as I get older (contradicting the popular maxim that one gets more conservative as they age). I'm not quite there on being anti-capitalist (I guess I still think one can work within the capitalist system to solve problems) but my foreign policy views are similar to yours. So I enjoy hearing this perspective. (I also hear it from podcasts like Chapo and Citations Needed).



Citations Needed is great for cutting through media tropes/narratives.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Delete


----------



## User.45

NT1440 said:


> How is me not living in genuine poverty and being lucky for it an excuse for millions dying in my own lifetime from no healthcare? I understand the privilege of living in the belly of the Empire…how does that negate it being an empire?



Yet your ideas of universal healthcare are more than misguided. I'm still baffled by your statement about the "dismantled US hospital capacities" as a major factor in high COVID mortality. We don't need more hospitals, we need a healthier population. That is mainly achieved by a combination of good public health policy (things people are taking a dump on), and by universal and affordable access to primary care and NOT *building more sick care capacity.

*(before someone interprets the statement as people should not have universal access to sick case)

This extrapolates to systems. You can be sure that those trapped behind the Iron Curtain were happy for the Soviet Union to fall. This fact will not be changed by the misgivings of the US Military-Industrial Complex.

I agree about multipolar global powers potentially provide better balance. However, your equation ignores  the nuclear arsenal. Multilaterality provides more reasons to make and keep nukes, and perhaps one time, even use them. Putin directly threatened the world with a nuclear war here.


> Do you realise that if Ukraine joins NATO and decides to take Crimea back through military means, the European countries will automatically get drawn into a military conflict with Russia? Of course, NATO’s united potential and that of Russia are incomparable. *We understand that, but we also understand that Russia is one of the world’s leading nuclear powers, and is superior to many of those countries in terms of the number of modern nuclear force components.* But there will be no winners, and you will find yourself drawn into this conflict against your will. You will be fulfilling Paragraph 5 of the Treaty of Rome in a heartbeat, even before you know it.











						News conference following Russian-French talks
					






					en.kremlin.ru
				



From Kremlin.ru, so nobody accuses me of consuming western propaganda.

So on one end, I appreciate the humanistic ideals you hold and share some of your criticisms, but on the other hand, the USA not measuring up to those doesn't mean Putin isn't the #1 threat to world peace right now.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Good opinion piece by always smart and interesting Mrs. Madeline Albright on today’s New York Times. 

I think her view about Russia’s isolation is too optimistic (as in I am sure that Mr Putin took what she said in consideration), but overall I agree with her.


----------



## Huntn

NT1440 said:


> No, I think the Cold War was completely unnecessary from the very get go.
> 
> A unipolar world is dangerous. A multipolar world at least provides *some* checks and balances. That’s a very broad statement I know, but I’ve already spent way too much time on here tonight.
> 
> Thank you, Matt, for at least engaging with me in an actual dialogue. I know my views aren’t popular to most, but I have very specific reasons and years of reading/studying that go into them. Thanks for lending me the space to elaborate in good faith on them.



I’m not sure what you are saying and who you are blaming when you say the Cold War was completely unnecessary. Maybe you should clarify this.

My impression is that emerging from WWII, European Allies with an unlikely, temporary ally, enemy of my enemy, the USSR, the Cold War was inevitable due to a regime that was built on it’s distrust, intolerance, and expansionist designs, and no I’m not talking  about the USA. 

Historically Russia is interesting because they had a non aggression pact with Germany and if Hitler had not been a megalomaniac who decided he was unstoppable and turned on Russia,  WWII would have unfolded differently.

Post WWII, the  US did feel compelled to counter Communism, but to say we should not have done that (if that is what you are saying) comes from the benefit of hindsight. The arms race that the US pushed or reacted to depending on your perspective, the cost of it all, along with Soviet leadership that saw the light, was one of the reasons why the USSR collapsed when it did.

It is threatening that as countries have pealed away from the USSR, that Russia/Putin is trying to force  them back into the fold. We can stand by and watch this or again react to it. And usually in these circumstances acting sooner than later is the better thing to do.

And btw we can thank our lucky stars that Trump is not in charge of our military and State Department.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496152945980751872/


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

theSeb said:


> Look, there is no doubt that capitalism without regulations is a bad thing, especially when you have powerful forces so easily able to manipulate it and the concept of "free markets" turned out to be a sham, but it is still the best economic system we have come up with to date. It needs to be closely regulated though - something that many right wing politicians are desperate to remove across the globe.
> 
> There is also no doubt the US foreign policy and meddling in foreign countries has fucked things up in places like the Middle East and Latin America. There is also a lot of good though that came out of it. It's easy to focus on the bad and forget about all of the good
> 
> But, that's not what this topic is all about. It is about Ukraine and you seem confused and misinformed on the topic. Ukraine has been a tumultuous region throughout known history, but without going back a thousand years, let's focus on the important bits.
> 
> 
> 
> There were already ethnic Russians living in the area a century ago. During the USSR days many more Russians were brought into eastern Ukraine and many Ukrainians were sent on holiday to sunny Siberia. The end result is the situation in eastern Ukraine. Crimean Oblast is a particularly interesting area. Here is a short hint into the developments that led us to today
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian citizens voted to leave the USSR in 1991. It was around 92% if I remember correctly.
> 
> 
> 
> Moving on then to the mid 2000s...
> 
> There were two candidates in the 2004 Ukraine presidential election: Yanukovych and Yushchenko.
> 
> Yanukovych was the primate minister and was supported by previous president, Kuchma, and the Russian Federation. Yushchenko was pro West and had the goal of joining the EU. Yanukovych won by a narrow margin, but there were widespread allegations of vote rigging and intimidation, especially in eastern Ukraine. Massive street protests erupted in Kyiv and other citiies - the Orange Revolution. The supreme court of Ukraine declared the results void and another election saw Yushchenko as the winner.
> 
> Yushchenko's reign saw him pushing towards improved relations with EU, straining the relationship between Russia and Ukraine further. 2010 presidential elections came and Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko, once allies during the Orange Revolution, became enemies and thus the presidential race became a 3 way race. Yushchenko's popularity had plummeted by this stage. Our old pro Russia friend, Yanukovych, emerged as the winner with 48% vs 45% for Tymoshenko. Many of the pro-Orange revolution voters stayed at home due to the feud between Tymoshenko and Yushchenko.
> 
> Yanukovych tried to dismantle democracy in Ukraine from 2010 to 2014. He put Tymoshenko in prison, for example, in the hope of dismantling his oppositiopn. Yanukovych continued to push the country closer to Russia and did not sign the Ukraine - EU association agreement in November 2013. This resulted in protests on the streets of Kyiv and ultimately lead to the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, thus giving Russia the pretext to enter the country under the guise of peacekeepers.
> 
> I am genuinely not sure where your feelings about the US and the importance of multiple world super powers fits into all of this. Unless you are suggesting that it's good for Putin and Russia to take over other countries and become a super power once again, because it's good for world peace. The proxy wars fought around the globe during the cold war suggest your hypothesis is flawed.
> 
> 
> 
> From Vlad himself. He wrote an essay about it and everything... back in 2006, or 2008. I can't remember.



Excellent, well-informed and thoughtful post.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

According to Russian TV station "Россия 24" this is how Ukraine emerged as a country:


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Russian oligarchs lose $32B as Ukraine crisis escalates
					

Russia's ultrawealthy oligarchs have lost $32 billion so far this year – and looming sanctions over the deepening conflict in Ukraine are poised to wipe out even more of their fortunes.




					www.foxbusiness.com


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Russian oligarchs lose $32B as Ukraine crisis escalates
> 
> 
> Russia's ultrawealthy oligarchs have lost $32 billion so far this year – and looming sanctions over the deepening conflict in Ukraine are poised to wipe out even more of their fortunes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxbusiness.com



My heart weeps for them.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

This evening two further developents have occurred, apart, that is, from the Russians closing their embassy in Kyiv, - cue images of scurrying diplomats with wheelie suitcases, the inevitable wisps of smoke and shuttered windows - and an earlier (one can wearily predict some of the moves - as in chess - that will be played by the Russian authorities) internet denial of service - in other words, a massive cyber-attack - across much of Ukraine, targeting - among many others - several government ministries.

These are, firstly: The Ukrainian government have declared a state of emergency (which will allow them to call upon considerable powers).

And, secondly, the key move in justfying an invasion, (in Russia) the separatist leaders in Luhansk and Donetsk (in an exquisitely choreographed but not remotely surprising move) have officially "requested" military aid - military force - from Russia, ostensibly to "repel Ukrainian aggression".

For those who want a more nuanced take, (and it is an excellent piece), Jonathan Steele in today's Guardian has an article that is well worth a read.


----------



## Zoidberg

Mobile crematoriums being deployed. Mass graves are so unsightly.









						Russia deploys mobile crematoriums to follow its troops into battle
					

Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, suggests the vehicle-mounted incinerators will be used to hide evidence of battlefield casualties




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				




They will surely say, unashamedly, that their purpose is to burn detritus so as not to leave litter behind them.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> This evening two further developents have occurred, apart, that is, from the Russians closing their embassy in Kyiv, - cue images of scurrying diplomats with wheelie suitcases, the inevitable wisps of smoke and shuttered windows - and an earlier (one can wearily predict some of the moves - as in chess - that will be played by the Russian authorities) internet denial of service across much of Ukraine, targeting - among others - government ministries.
> 
> These are, firstly: The Ukrainian government have declared a state of emergency (which will allow them to call upon considerable powers).
> 
> And, secondly, the key move in justfying an invasion, (in Russia) the separatist leaders in Luhansk and Donetsk (in an exquisitely choreographed but not remotely surprising move) have officially "requested" military aid - military force - from Russia, ostensibly to "repel Ukrainian aggression".
> 
> For those who want a more nuanced take, (and it is an excellent piece), Jonathan Steele in today's Guardian has an article that is well worth a read.



The closing of the embassy is to me a clear sign that the idea is still to get to Kiev.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> The closing of the embassy is to me a clear sign that the idea is still to get to Kiev.




Agreed.


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Russian oligarchs lose $32B as Ukraine crisis escalates
> 
> 
> Russia's ultrawealthy oligarchs have lost $32 billion so far this year – and looming sanctions over the deepening conflict in Ukraine are poised to wipe out even more of their fortunes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxbusiness.com



Without diving into details, nobody should assume they pay their taxes...so probably that's a lot less significant sum to them than one would automatically assume.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> The closing of the embassy is to me a clear sign that the idea is still to get to Kiev.



My guess would be that Putin now can wait a little. He has the positions, he gains more with waiting a little. EU/US sanctions will just lose out. I can easily see him wait until next winter, when saying no to Russian gas would hurt Europeans way more.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> My guess would be that Putin now can wait a little. He has the positions, he gains more with waiting a little. EU/US sanctions will just lose out. I can easily see him wait until next winter, when saying no to Russian gas would hurt Europeans way more.



I am not sure he will wait.

Both US and Europe are playing the game in reverse. “We’ll do more if you do more” is a failing game. Europe and US should’ve imposed the highest sanctions immediately.

Putin now knows that EU and the US are afraid even of sanctions.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I am not sure he will wait.
> 
> Both US and Europe are playing the game in reverse. “We’ll do more if you do more” is a failing game. Europe and US should’ve imposed the highest sanctions immediately.



Again, agreed.

His troops are stationed on the border in considerable numbers and cannot maintain such a "war footing" indefinitely.  They will have to be used quite soon or stood down.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Does anybody honestly believe west Ukraine would launch a major offensive against the east?  Does Putin honestly believe that the rest of the world would believe that?  

If sanctions don't work, what exactly is Plan B?


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Again, agreed.
> 
> His troops are stationed on the border in considerable numbers and cannot maintain such a "war footing" indefinitely.  They will have to be used quite soon or stood down.



Agreed my friend, agreed. 

Some serious questions about how long some European countries (namely Germany and Italy, plus eastern bloc) can survive with gas crisis - and generically a different geopolitical structure - without too much disruption of regular life must be asked and answered.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Europe and US should’ve imposed the highest sanctions immediately.



Then what would stop Putin from going all in?

By staggering the response, they are leaving a (small) door open to deescalation. The sanctions from Johnson are laughable –agreed– but not pushing all the sanctions right now is the right move (again, with the usual caveat of that it's just my opinion, based on what is publicly known)


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> Then what would stop Putin from going all in?




Possibly. The threat of ending up in the Stone Age is not the same as the threat of having billionaire losing money, especially if the threat is implemented. 



Zoidberg said:


> By staggering the response, they are leaving a (small) door open to deescalation. The sanctions from Johnson are laughable –agreed– but not pushing all the sanctions right now is the right move (again, with the usual caveat of that it's just my opinion, based on what is publicly known)



I respectfully disagree. De-escalation should mean: if you release the hostages, I’ll give you something (=release some sanctions).


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Agreed my friend, agreed.
> 
> Some serious questions about how long some European countries (namely Germany and Italy, plus eastern bloc) can survive with gas crisis - and generically a different geopolitical structure - without too much disruption of regular life must be asked and answered.




Not to be US-centric, but I don't think the American people are going to tolerate even higher gas prices as an acceptable sacrifice in this situation.  Of course, not a lot that can do about that...until it's time to vote.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> I respectfully disagree. De-escalation should mean: if you release the hostages, I’ll give you something (=release some sanctions).



Putin would never "release the hostages", no matter the cost. He's all about his strong man image and not backing off (and again, it's not like it costs him anything). Compromising in exchange of the lifting of sanctions would be interpreted as a sign of weakness, and he will never do that.

The overarching goal is to try to avert the invasion as much as possible, not to win against him personally.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Possibly. The threat of ending up in the Stone Age is not the same as the threat of having billionaire losing money, especially if the threat is implemented.




I’m sure I’ll be one of the millions (billions?) who end up on the other plain of existence if WW3 breaks out, but I would like to be around when the super wealthy emerge from their mountain bunkers and realize there’s nobody left to do the shit jobs that funds and services their extravagant lifestyle.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Europe and US should’ve imposed the highest sanctions immediately.



Again, agreed.



Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Does anybody honestly believe west Ukraine would launch a major offensive against the east?  Does Putin honestly believe that the rest of the world would believe that?
> 
> If sanctions don't work, what exactly is Plan B?



No, but the audience Mr Putin is playing to here is his domestic one, in Russia - for whom the merest figleaf of a nonsensical excuse should suffice - not "the west", let alone the rest of the world.



Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Not to be US-centric, but I don't think the American people are going to tolerate even higher gas prices as an acceptable sacrifice in this situation.  Of course, not a lot that can do about that...until it's time to vote.



The US is self-sufficient re energy, and does not rely on Russia for energy; thus, rising oil & gas prices should not be an issue, unless corporate greed is what is driving such pice increases.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> Putin would never "release the hostages", no matter the cost. He's all about his strong man image and not backing off (and again, it's not like it costs him anything). Compromising in exchange of the lifting of sanctions would be interpreted as a sign of weakness, and he will never do that.
> 
> The overarching goal is to try to avert the invasion as much as possible, not to win against him personally.



Do you realize that of you say that he’ll never release the hostages with full on sanctions, he’ll certainly not do it with minor sanctions, especially if the reward is a huge country, right?


----------



## Huntn

Meanwhile back home (my home) remember when Russians where GOP Public Enemy No. 1? An amazing effect Donny has had on his adopted political party.









						How Tucker Carlson became one of Russia’s biggest cheerleaders
					

“Right now, one of the biggest cheerleaders for Russia is also the host of the number one show on Fox News,” says Alex Wagner on Tucker Carlson.




					www.msnbc.com
				




WTF…
*TUCKER “JUST ASKING QUESTIONS” CARLSON WANTS TO KNOW WHAT PUTIN EVER DID TO YOU*








						Tucker “Just Asking Questions” Carlson Wants to Know What Putin Ever Did to You
					

The Fox News opinion star downplayed Russia’s military aggression in Ukraine as a “border dispute” in a markedly pro-Putin segment Tuesday.




					www.vanityfair.com
				




_Russian president *Vladimir Putin*’s aggression in Ukraine has the world bracing for what could be the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II. The Kremlin’s actions, which President *Joe Biden* on Tuesday called “the beginning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine,” prompted a round of sanctions from Western leaders, while Ukraine preps for a state of emergency to defend itself. Fox News opinion star *Tucker Carlson*, meanwhile, took a “nothing to see here, folks” approach on Tuesday. Downplaying the spiraling situation as nothing more than a “border dispute,” Carlson suggested Democrats have brainwashed Americans into thinking they have a “patriot duty” to hate Putin and urged viewers to ask themselves whether the more urgent threat to democracy may be closer to home:

“The main thing to know about Ukraine, for our purposes, is that its leader once sent millions of dollars to Joe Biden’s family,” Carlson told viewers, as he chalked the defense the U.S. is mounting of Ukraine up to Biden’s “personal debts to Ukrainian oligarchs.” Later on Tuesday, appearing on *Laura Ingraham*’s show, Carlson continued to reduce U.S. involvement in the Russia-Ukraine crisis to a “play against fossil fuels,” suggesting the Biden administration is “provoking conflict with the largest gas supplier in Europe” to boost renewable energy. His energy rant came shortly after German Chancellor *Olaf Scholz* issued an order to halt the process of certifying the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline as part of the punishments leveled by the international community on Russia. 

Carlson has used the threat of further Russian invasion of Ukraine not only to attack Biden—as other GOP lawmakers have done—but to reiterate his pro-Russian stance in the style of *Donald Trump.*_

Can you imagine if Trump was calling the shots today as POTUS?


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Do you realize that of you say that he’ll never release the hostages with full on sanctions, he’ll certainly not do it with minor sanctions, especially if the reward is a huge country, right?



Yes. I understand both sides of the argument. But going all in from the get go means he will go all in, and there are too many lives in the balance to be cavalier about it.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Not to be US-centric, but I don't think the American people are going to tolerate even higher gas prices as an acceptable sacrifice in this situation.  Of course, not a lot that can do about that...until it's time to vote.



And you know what that probably means?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> The US is self-sufficient re energy, and does not rely on Russia for energy; thus, rising oil & gas prices should not be an issue, unless corporate greed is what is driving such pice increases.




Corporate greed is always at play and anytime there is instability anywhere near an oil field anywhere on earth they'll use it as an excuse to jack up prices further.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> Yes. I understand both sides of the argument. But going all in from the get go means he will go all in, and there are too many lives in the balance to be cavalier about it.



Let me rephrase it this way.
Putin’s gamble is based in part on his expectation that the West won’t do much, due in part to what @Chew Toy McCoy mentioned. The only way to hope to stop him is to prove that we’re willing to pay the price for it.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> And you know what that probably means?




It means more spite votes against whoever happens to be in office who seems to not be giving a shit about it.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Let me rephrase it this way.
> Putin’s gamble is based in part on his expectation that the West won’t do much



Yes. So now it is vital to show unity (and it has been achieved, kind of). Germany putting NS2 on hold was the missing block for that. Johnson response, on the other hand is ridiculous –as expected, considering he's there thanks to Russian money. Now, like I said earlier, we only know what we know, and I am not privy to how far they are willing to go or the negotiations regarding sanctions between the US and the EU (and the UK). Going "all in" with weak sanctions like Johnson's is a sure way to lose the pre-war stand-off, so if that's all the UK is willing to do, it's like bringing the proverbial knife to a gunfight. Seizing all the Russian-owned real estate, yachts, and so on would certainly send a more powerful message, but I wasn't expecting much from him anyway.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> No, but the audience Mr Putin is playing to here is his domestic one, in Russia - for whom the merest figleaf of a nonsensical excuse should suffice - not "the west", let alone the rest of the world.




I could be wrong here, but given Russia's long history of crushing its own people, I would think that the general population is a lot more skeptical about what their government is feeding them.  It's not like they are the most isolated country on earth.  Do they honestly believe it or is it that they would rather just go about their day and try not to get poisoned?


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I could be wrong here, but given Russia's long history of crushing its own people, I would think that the general population is a lot more skeptical about what their government is feeding them.  It's not like they are the most isolated country on earth.  Do they honestly believe it or is it that they would rather just go about their day and try not to get poisoned?



I heard some interviews with Russian citizens who live near Ukraine on the radio today. Most of them seemed to be against the invasion. That was pretty interesting to me. Something else I found interesting was that most of them seemed to accept as fact that Ukraine is doing something nefarious. The argument against getting involved was more “why should we get involved with Ukraine’s problems?” So the propaganda in Russia seems to have done the job of convincing people that Ukraine‘s leaders are doing bad things, but they haven’t convinced most of their people that Russia should do anything about it.









						For Russian civilians near Ukraine's border, reactions to Putin's moves are mixed
					

Russians who live near the border with Ukraine have mixed opinions on President Vladimir Putin's actions to reclaim the former Soviet republic.




					www.npr.org
				




I highly recommend listening to this - it’s only 4 minutes.


----------



## SuperMatt

Zoidberg said:


> Yes. So now it is vital to show unity (and it has been achieved, kind of). Germany putting NS2 on hold was the missing block for that. Johnson response, on the other hand is ridiculous –as expected, considering he's there thanks to Russian money. Now, like I said earlier, we only know what we know, and I am not privy to how far they are willing to go or the negotiations regarding sanctions between the US and the EU (and the UK). Going "all in" with weak sanctions like Johnson's is a sure way to lose the pre-war stand-off, so if that's all the UK is willing to do, it's like bringing the proverbial knife to a gunfight. Seizing all the Russian-owned real estate, yachts, and so on would certainly send a more powerful message, but I wasn't expecting much from him anyway.



When I see that Boris is still in charge, it reminds me of Trump in America. His party could get rid of him for about a million different reasons, but they simply refuse to. He is a buffoon who “fell up” his entire life, which started with a silver spoon in his mouth. Even the Downing Street parties which he repeatedly lied about haven’t led to his ouster! I’m not surprised that he offered worthless “sanctions” on Russia. It’s absolutely on brand for him… and Trump probably would have done the same if Biden hadn’t supplanted him.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Huntn said:


> “The main thing to know about Ukraine, for our purposes, is that its leader once sent millions of dollars to Joe Biden’s family,” Carlson told viewers, as he chalked the defense the U.S. is mounting of Ukraine up to Biden’s “personal debts to Ukrainian oligarchs.” Later on Tuesday, appearing on *Laura Ingraham*’s show, Carlson continued to reduce U.S. involvement in the Russia-Ukraine crisis to a “play against fossil fuels,” suggesting the Biden administration is “provoking conflict with the largest gas supplier in Europe” to boost renewable energy.




Yeah, no agenda there.

I made a joke elsewhere that Trump would probably find a way to make this all Hunter Biden's fault, but it seems Tucker Carlson is thinking along the same lines. 

And of course we've gotta throw some blame at renewable energy as well. 

Incredible.


----------



## yaxomoxay

I am reading about explosions in Kiev, can anyone confirm???!


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> I am reading about explosions in Kiev, can anyone confirm???!



CNN is reporting multiple of them, they're saying they hear a lot of outgoing fire from the Russian side as well but not sure where it's all going.

It's a shame.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> CNN is reporting multiple of them, they're saying they hear a lot of outgoing fire from the Russian side as well but not sure where it's all going.
> 
> It's a shame.



WTF they’re already near Kiev?!


----------



## yaxomoxay

Ok, not the best source but according to Senator Rubio, Russia is already taking over Kiev’s airport. This is going incredibly fast.


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> Ok, not the best source but according to Senator Rubio, Russia is already taking over Kiev’s airport. This is going incredibly fast.



I saw him on CNN earlier and he was pretty hawkish on this whole thing, when he's not bashing Biden and defending Trump he's not so bad and he does have an inside scoop since he's on the right committees.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> I saw him on CNN earlier and he was pretty hawkish on this whole thing, when he's not bashing Biden and defending Trump he's not so bad and he does have an inside scoop since he's on the right committees.



If Russians are close to Kiev already it might mean that the Ukrainian army melted like butter.


----------



## Cmaier

If Putin wants to get rid of nazis, I know where he can find some (And it ain’t Ukraine)


----------



## User.45




----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> If Putin wants to get rid of nazis, I know where he can find some (And it ain’t Ukraine)



Why would he possibly want to do that? It would make no sense. Nazis are useful, in the same way as measles: _if they cause instability in those other countries, then those other coutries will be less able to confront me_. B-QN5. Your move.


----------



## Huntn

I'll wait until tomorrow for a more definitive reporting, but this kind of aggressive war is completely unacceptable. Putin is a menace. Europe has a rabid bear munching on the eastern borders. Oh and btw, the home grown USA HEAD SHIT HEAD says Putin is doing this because the 2020 US Presidential election was rigged <uncomfirmed>. 

I'd be very interested to hear what will be said at the G7 meeting tomorrow and among the NATO member countries. A quick look at a map and it looks like Ukraine is mostly got NATO on its Western border. I would love to see all of the country's  $$ frozen in the world markets. And I wonder what kind of popular support he is getting at home. There have been reports that the idea of invading Ukraine has not been very popular, but those are just reports.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Arkitect

Well, there it is.

Putin (Sorry, couldn't help it) the frights on Russia with sanctions was never going to be enough. In the UK Putin's chums own the parts of London the Saudi's don't… The City is a Mycelium of money laundering that has even managed to put a Russian Oligarch in the House of Lords. There is going to be no Kremlin palace revolt. 

So we'll continue to wave our pieces of paper, smash our keyboards and cry, _"How very dare he!?"_ Everyone will take to Twitter to froth with outrage, and yes, (as another poster here said) _"At least Ukraine will have the West's thoughts and prayers"_.

He certainly bided (or is that Bidened) his time well. Putin will do as he pleases. After the Ukraine is back in the fold, where next? 

Anyway, I believe that before I shuffle off this mortal coil — I am 58 — China will have invaded Taiwan. And the world will be at war.

But heh! In the meantime, foldable iPhones anyone?


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Arkitect

theSeb said:


> Who is that? Obviously Boris is one of them... the clue is in the name, but is there anybody else?



That'd be Evgeny Alexandrovich Lebedev, Baron Lebedev, of Hampton in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and of Siberia in the Russian Federation…

_"Pair (Pfeffel and Lebedev) have been friends since 2009, but security concerns were raised because of the Russian tycoon’s father, a one-time Moscow spy"_
Link


----------



## Zoidberg

theSeb said:


> I'll be very surprised if he goes any further than Donetsk and Lugansk



Well… here are some of the recorded explosions so far.




Keep in mind those strikes in the west are aviation, shelling and cruise missiles, it doesn't mean the troops/tanks are anywhere near there.

Fucking Russians.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Zoidberg

theSeb said:


> Yes, that's exactly what I mean. He will strike air defences and such, but I don't expect the troops to march any further.



They are already crossing into the mainland from Crimea, towards the Northwest.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Zoidberg

theSeb said:


> Where is that reported?



Ukrainian reporters on site, via Twitter. It's honestly the fastest way to get info. IIRC this came from Ilia Ponomarenko.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## AG_PhamD

I think we should all be concerned what this means for the future of global politics. Russia certainly feels emboldened to attack Ukraine. You have to question if China will seize the opportunity of the west being distracted to take over Taiwan and further push their control over the South China Sea. Iran and nuclear weapons and regional influence, etc. This has the potential of becoming extremely messy situation, especially if the US and West can’t handle more than one crisis at once.


----------



## User.45

> The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.
> 
> It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force. At the same time, we have been hearing an increasing number of statements coming from the West that there is no need any more to abide by the documents setting forth the outcomes of World War II, as signed by the totalitarian Soviet regime. How can we respond to that?
> 
> The outcomes of World War II and the sacrifices our people had to make to defeat Nazism are sacred. This does not contradict the high values of human rights and freedoms in the reality that emerged over the post-war decades. This does not mean that nations cannot enjoy the right to self-determination, which is enshrined in Article 1 of the UN Charter.
> 
> Let me remind you that the people living in territories which are part of today’s Ukraine were not asked how they want to build their lives when the USSR was created or after World War II. Freedom guides our policy, the freedom to choose independently our future and the future of our children. We believe that all the peoples living in today’s Ukraine, anyone who want to do this, must be able to enjoy this right to make a free choice.




this is batshit fucking crazy. (putler's speech).


----------



## MarkusL

The official explanation for the weak EU sanctions after Russia’s recognition of the LPR and DPR was that the EU wanted to keep stronger sanctions in the toolbox in case of further aggression. Unfortunately the latest developments indicate that Putin may have found this infographic on the EU’s own website, with the real reason for why there will not be any real sanctions.








						Shedding light on energy in the EU: From where do we import energy ?
					

For its own consumption, the EU also needs energy that is imported from third countries. In 2020, the main imported energy product was petroleum products (including crude oil, which is the main component), accounting for almost two thirds of energy imports into the EU, followed by natural gas...




					ec.europa.eu
				




European politicians hate Russian expansionism, but they hate losing elections even more. Real sanctions against Russia would hurt also the EU economy, so that is why real sanctions are off the table. Putin knows this. He may be crazy, but he is not stupid.


----------



## Pumbaa

Just watched some live coverage of the situation in Swedish media. The hosts, the guests in the studio and the dignitaries videoing in were professional, stressing the importance of confirming reports and imagery. One of the guest provided some examples of clips and pics circulating online, both pro- and anti-Russian messages, and debunked them by showing the original context.

I can’t recall much of what they said overall, but the look in their eyes and that something in their voices haunt me…


----------



## Alli

Remember that old curse “may you live in interesting times?” Well here we are. The real question is what will Europe do (with Russia knocking at their door), and will the US help?


----------



## shadow puppet

Just waking up here on the West coast and this is the first Ukraine situation I see.  

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496858049927077888/


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Italian news is reporting that Russian troops are occupying Kiev’s airport.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Italian news is reporting that Germany will NOT provide material aid to Ukraine. Same goes for Hungary.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Just waiting for Trump to chime in with the sound byte that will singlehandedly derail his chances for a second term. I know he’s got it in him. Come on, buddy.


----------



## Huntn

AG_PhamD said:


> I think we should all be concerned what this means for the future of global politics. Russia certainly feels emboldened to attack Ukraine. You have to question if China will seize the opportunity of the west being distracted to take over Taiwan and further push their control over the South China Sea. Iran and nuclear weapons and regional influence, etc. This has the potential of becoming extremely messy situation, especially if the US and West can’t handle more than one crisis at once.



You might argue that NATO hems him in to the West. I can’t say this is any consolation, but if you want a hard trip wire, it will be if he starts this activity with a NATO member, not that that makes what he is doing to a sovereign nation just because _he wants it,_ wants more territory to be acceptable. In the meantime, NATO imo should fast track new member memberships for those countries deemed worthy and say fuck him.

It’s being reported that Putin made an announcement  that he is conducting a special military operation to “de-militarize“ Ukraine just because…he does not like having an armed country next to him, not  under his influence, really?  So because this is not NATO, he thinks he has cart blanche to cause mayhem Because the NATO states won’t risk a major war over Ukraine.

From a strategic standpoint I would love to be privy to a couple of NATO meetings to see that the considerations were. My guess is illegal action without any reasonable justification vs the economic impact of a war with Russia, a nuclear armed State.

Russia is a menace. We can either bolt our shutters  and hope he keeps looking the other way at the vulnerable countries that make up for former USSR, and allow him to absorb them. Ukraine seems to be quite a prize. If he actually stops in the “breakaway” provinces, I’m looking to see how NATO treats Ukraine- _you’re on your own kid_ or meaningful assistance including NATO membership.

Yeah I know, that’s not going to happen, and as I understand it, now that Russia has drawn this line in the sand, they will easily say, _if NATO Forces cross into Ukraine we consider this an act of war. _Because to make Ukraine a NATO state, most likely NATO would have to assemble their own large force, because my guess is that the Russian forces if they don’t take Ukraine now, will remain in the vicinity. It’s also possible that now that they seem to be having their way with Ukraine militarily, they might actually make ovations to them to try to lure them  back into the fold while they undermine Ukraine every way they can, including assassinations and placing their own pro-Russian stooges in key positions.

However, it you want to be scared, be scared of the nukes and if it comes to a point where someone  under stress calculates a well placed nuke might help their cause where as it might spark a general nuclear exchange.


----------



## shadow puppet

yaxomoxay said:


> Italian news is reporting that Russian troops are occupying Kiev’s airport.



I saw that news last night and couldn't believe how fast that happened.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> Italian news is reporting that Germany will NOT provide material aid to Ukraine. Same goes for Hungary.



Don’t poke the bear…


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> The US is self-sufficient re energy, and does not rely on Russia for energy; thus, rising oil & gas prices should not be an issue, unless corporate greed is what is driving such pice increases.




https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/24/politics/putin-ukraine-russia-attack-us-global-impact/index.html

Higher gas prices in the US mentioned several times in the article.  It would be nice if industry waited more than 5 minutes from the last time it happened to use a crisis as a smoke screen to cover their increased profit margins, but you know, 'Merica!

I wonder if our military contractors still attempt to display humanitarian outrage on why they now have to increase production or have they finally forgone that and gone straight to "Ha!  Cha-ching!!" as they witness the destruction.


----------



## MarkusL

Oh shit, let’s hope they are careful.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496862540957114370/

The power plant and the surrounding facilities still employ several thousand people, and many of them commute by train from Ukraine to Ukraine via a transit through Belarus. The plant is not stable enough to be abandoned, so it stands to reason that the Russians have some kind of plan for keeping the operation running.


----------



## shadow puppet

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496864869756567561/

According to this post, the southern area you see, the Kherson region, Ukraine just officially announced it has been lost to Russia.


----------



## Eric

Alli said:


> Remember that old curse “may you live in interesting times?” Well here we are. The real question is what will Europe do (with Russia knocking at their door), and will the US help?



Putin will only respond to force and from the sounds of it the world is afraid to push back, it's like we've all learned nothing from WWII. Where are our Republican hawks here? IMO if he makes one step toward any other nation you put him down like a rabid animal.


----------



## Arkitect




----------



## Scepticalscribe

MarkusL said:


> Oh shit, let’s hope they are careful.
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496862540957114370/
> 
> The power plant and the surrounding facilities still employ several thousand people, and many of them commute by train from Ukraine to Ukraine via a transit through Belarus. The plant is not stable enough to be abandoned, so it stands to reason that the Russians have some kind of plan for keeping the operation running.




Dear God.

I visited Chernobyl in early 2013.

And I observed a number of elections in Ukraine in 2019.


----------



## shadow puppet

Anyone think this could happen?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496875491105640455/


----------



## MarkusL

yaxomoxay said:


> Italian news is reporting that Russian troops are occupying Kiev’s airport.



Are they specifying which one? I have seen reports about fighting at Gostomel airport, a special-use airport that is the home of the Antonov freight operation. It is more or less on the road from Belarus to Kiev.

The largest commercial airport serving Kiev is Boryspil on the other side of the city, and if they have reached that one it would indicate a more dramatic progress of the invasion.


----------



## Huntn

Alli said:


> Remember that old curse “may you live in interesting times?” Well here we are. The real question is what will Europe do (with Russia knocking at their door), and will the US help?



I believe NATO member states would be a trip wire to a war involving all of Europe. I mean that is what is supposed to happen and we’d better be there, although we have corrupting influences none other than The Head Shit and Faux News miscreants like Carlson. The fact that he can express such pro-Russian sentiments and not be immediately sacked is the reality. what Russia needs is a good revolution.

You know NATO was there for US when we made some terrible decisions. We’d better damn well be there for them. For you selfish types out there, it’s in our best interests.


----------



## Eric

Condemnation from his own people along with the rest of the world will help, just not sure how much.









						Over 150 Russian officials sign letter condemning invasion of Ukraine
					

The deputies said they were 'convinced' Russian citizens do not back the war and blamed Putin 'personally' for ordering an invasion, warning it will lead to 'catastrophic consequences'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## MarkusL

shadow puppet said:


> Anyone think this could happen?
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496875491105640455/



I could happen when the EU decides it is time to stop funding the Russian war through the buying of fossil fuels, but I don't see that happening any time soon.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Putin will only respond to force and from the sounds of it the world is afraid to push back, it's like we've all learned nothing from WWII. Where are our Republican hawks here? IMO if he makes one step toward any other nation you put him down like a rabid animal.



An analogy, in your neighborhood a group of thugs invade your neighbors house, taking them hostage, abusing and raping them while daring you to do anything about it. And you respond by locking the doors and yelling at them to go away. You’ve got your shotgun ready if they try to break down your doors.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Condemnation from his own people along with the rest of the world will help, just not sure how much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Over 150 Russian officials sign letter condemning invasion of Ukraine
> 
> 
> The deputies said they were 'convinced' Russian citizens do not back the war and blamed Putin 'personally' for ordering an invasion, warning it will lead to 'catastrophic consequences'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They maybe putting themselves in jeopardy, but you don’t change anything without some kind of counter action.


----------



## Arkitect

I see more toothless sanctions incoming…

From the FT:
World leaders divided on whether to eject Russia from Swift payment system
"Boris Johnson, UK prime minister, is pushing “very hard” for Russia to be ejected from the Swift international payments system, a move that would deliver a heavy blow to the country’s banks and its ability to trade beyond its borders.

However, Olaf Scholz, German chancellor, warned Johnson on Thursday that his country would not support such a dramatic move and neither would the EU, according to officials close to sanctions negotiations. A German official declined to comment, saying only that “all options are still on the table”.


----------



## Edd

In a moment of weakness, I checked out the Breitbart comments section. So you guys know, this is all Biden’s and the Democrats fault. If Trump were still in office, Putin wouldn’t have dared. Pass it on.


----------



## Arkitect

This will have Putin quaking in his boots… not!

From the G7:
_"We condemn President Putin for his consistent refusal to engage in a diplomatic process to address questions pertaining to European security, despite our repeated offers.

We stand united with partners, including NATO, the EU and their member states as well as Ukraine and remain determined to do what is necessary to preserve the integrity of the rules-based international order.*"_

*Except where it affects our own bottomline.


----------



## MEJHarrison

Edd said:


> In a moment of weakness, I checked out the Breitbart comments section. So you guys know, this is all Biden’s and the Democrats fault. If Trump were still in office, Putin wouldn’t have dared. Pass it on.




It's not just Breirbart.  Fox and OAN can confirm those reports.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> Putin will only respond to force and from the sounds of it the world is afraid to push back, it's like we've all learned nothing from WWII. Where are our Republican hawks here? IMO if he makes one step toward any other nation you put him down like a rabid animal.




I don't trust him to keep his fingers off the nukes.  He's coming off as a bitter ex with a "If I can't have her then nobody can" mentality. 

Also the alliance with China is a bit concerning, but given my previous statement, I don't think China would be onboard with a global murder-suicide pact.  They aren't teetering on losing their dominance like Russia is.


----------



## Huntn

Edd said:


> In a moment of weakness, I checked out the Breitbart comments section. So you guys know, this is all Biden’s and the Democrats fault. If Trump were still in office, Putin wouldn’t have dared. Pass it on.



We just have Trump and Fox News pundits cheering Russia. If Trump was still POTUS, Vlad would have nothing to worry about from the USA,


----------



## yaxomoxay

MarkusL said:


> Are they specifying which one? I have seen reports about fighting at Gostomel airport, a special-use airport that is the home of the Antonov freight operation. It is more or less on the road from Belarus to Kiev.
> 
> The largest commercial airport serving Kiev is Boryspil on the other side of the city, and if they have reached that one it would indicate a more dramatic progress of the invasion.



They’re saying both airports are under attack but that Hostomel is already occupied by the Russians.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> I see more toothless sanctions incoming…
> 
> From the FT:
> World leaders divided on whether to eject Russia from Swift payment system
> "Boris Johnson, UK prime minister, is pushing “very hard” for Russia to be ejected from the Swift international payments system, a move that would deliver a heavy blow to the country’s banks and its ability to trade beyond its borders.
> 
> However, Olaf Scholz, German chancellor, warned Johnson on Thursday that his country would not support such a dramatic move and neither would the EU, according to officials close to sanctions negotiations. A German official declined to comment, saying only that “all options are still on the table”.



I’d say a dramatic move is required after such a drastic action by Russia.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

MEJHarrison said:


> It's not just Breirbart.  Fox and OAN can confirm those reports.




I'd like to know how they square that with Trump quite publically calling Putin a genius for doing this.   "He wouldn't dare do that thing that Trump is praising him for!"

But this is another layer of "why now?".  Clearly there are a lot of Americans still stuck on tilt and are willing to die on the hill of being contrarian.  I'm sure Putin is well aware of that.  This even transcends Trump specifically.  Some people's brains are irredeemably fried and permanently fused to outrage for the sake of outrage.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> I’d say a dramatic move is required after such a drastic action by Russia.



NATO just confirmed not a single solider will enter Ukraine. In other words, Putin will own Ukraine within a few days.


----------



## Renzatic

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Just waiting for Trump to chime in with the sound byte that will singlehandedly derail his chances for a second term. I know he’s got it in him. Come on, buddy.




He's already done it, complementing Putin for his genius move. 

...it didn't make any difference. Most of them either agreed with him, or said he was being sarcastic, and the fake news media was putting words in his mouth.


----------



## User.45

This is literally the worst case scenario and I concede, @yaxomoxay was right about this. This scenario is pure insanity and i have a difficult time seeing a geopolitical scenario where this doesn’t  spiral into a 3rd world war. The only quesTion is whether that will emanate from this conflict directly, or the insane arms race of the coming years.


----------



## yaxomoxay

I honestly think we’re at the brink of a new geopolitical order, one that has been brewing for 20 years. 

We told Ukraine that we’d defend her if they got rid of their nukes, and they believed us. Another betrayal by the EU and the US if you ask me.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> This is literally the worst case scenario and I concede, @yaxomoxay was right about this. This scenario is pure insanity and i have a difficult time seeing a geopolitical scenario where this doesn’t  spiral into a 3rd world war. The only quesTion is whether that will emanate from this conflict directly, or the insane arms race of the coming years.



I truly hope that somehow you and I meet one day and have a beer reminiscing how we thought this was going to be WW3 but ended up being just a limited event. 

I don’t see how an arms race can be avoided at this point. I’d keep an eye on Asia (Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan) as they are not going to trust us anymore.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I see more toothless sanctions incoming…
> 
> From the FT:
> World leaders divided on whether to eject Russia from Swift payment system
> "Boris Johnson, UK prime minister, is pushing “very hard” for Russia to be ejected from the Swift international payments system, a move that would deliver a heavy blow to the country’s banks and its ability to trade beyond its borders.
> 
> However, Olaf Scholz, German chancellor, warned Johnson on Thursday that his country would not support such a dramatic move and neither would the EU, according to officials close to sanctions negotiations. A German official declined to comment, saying only that “all options are still on the table”.




For now, the UK strikes me as a somewhat tainted source (even though the FT is usually excellent).

Firstly, were the utterly feeble sanctions proposed earier this week in the House of Commons (Brussels did better, but needs to do much more), and secondly, is the closeness of the appalling embrace between Russian oligarchic donors and the Tory party, and thirdly, is the laundromat role played by the City of London re dodgy Russian monies.   

In other words, I'm saying that the Brits are not the most credible sources on this; unless and until he feels his own survival threatened, - or events over-take him, and there is a growing groundswell of support for such steps - as seems to be happening - Mr Johnson will not take strong action on Russia.


----------



## Deleted member 215

There’s not going to be a Third World War because we’re not going to respond to this. Ukraine will just become another province of Russia like Crimea did. Like, maybe there should be a wider war, but I don’t think that’s going to happen. Russia will likely achieve its goal of installing a pro-Russian government in Kiev and “de-militarizing” the country and the response from the West won’t go further than sanctions. It’s the fear of world war that’s preventing a military response.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

TBL said:


> There’s not going to be a Third World War because we’re not going to respond to this. Ukraine will just become another province of Russia like Crimea did. Like, maybe there should be a wider war, but I don’t think that’s going to happen. Russia will likely achieve its goal of installing a pro-Russian government in Kiev and “de-militarizing” the country.




Good luck to them attempting to hold the west of Ukraine, not necessarily militarily, but, most certainly, socially, culturally amd psychologically; they will find that an indigestible and permanently troublesome morsel, akin to the role Poland played within the wider Warsaw Pact during the years of the Cold War.

While I have long thought - and said, and written, and believed - that "Russia will go to the wire on Ukraine in a way it would not for anywhere else in te post Soviet space", I confess that even I did not - ever, entertain - or envisage the idea a full scale invasion.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Good luck to them attempting to hold the west of Ukraine, not necessarily militarily, but, most certainly, socially, culturally amd psychologically; they will find that an indigestible and permanently troublesome morsel, akin to the role Poland played within the wider Warsaw Pact during the years of the Cold War.



I don’t think Putin wants to hold Ukraine by military means. I can see him “restoring freedom” by installing a puppet government (backed by Russian forces) or even worse separating Ukraine into multiple pieces.


----------



## yaxomoxay

The WSJ is reporting that the sanctions on Russian banks apply only to debt and deals after March 2, 2022. If this is true, no shit that Putin doesn’t fear the sanctions.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> I truly hope that somehow you and I meet one day and have a beer reminiscing how we thought this was going to be WW3 but ended up being just a limited event.
> 
> I don’t see how an arms race can be avoided at this point. I’d keep an eye on Asia (Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan) as they are not going to trust us anymore.



I don’t see humanity unfucking itself, COVID on its own was a good rehearsal for what to expect with climate change creeping into our day-to-day lives. Now all the attention and resources  we need to fix climate will be siphoned to military shit. 

It’s interesting to see Orban and Erdogan both condem the Russian actions. Brazil advocates for military intervention. No matter what NATO is doing now, the (new and old) russian borders will be hypermilitarized sitting on a keg of gunpowder. Statistically, it’s many fold more likely that this shit will explode than it would not.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> For now, the UK strikes me as a somewhat tainted source (even though the FT is usually excellent).
> 
> Firstly, were the utterly feeble sanctions proposed earier this week in the House of Commons (Brussels did better, but needs to do much more), and secondly, is the closeness of the appalling embrace between Russian oligarchic donors and the Tory party, and thirdly, is the laundromat role played by the City of London re dodgy Russian monies.
> 
> In other words, I'm saying that the Brits are not the most credible sources on this; unless and until he feels his own survival threatened, - or events over-take him, and there is a growing groundswell of support for such steps - as seems to be happening - Mr Johnson will not take strong action on Russia.



Oh I agree!

Boris Johnson is the last person I want to have in charge… But he is what we poor Brits have.

However, the reaction from other countries speaks volumes as to how far they are prepared to go. Not very far…
I also suspect Pfeffel knows no one else will follow his lead on this issue and so he can safely say to his Tory backbenchers: _"See! I tried! But the dastardly German/French… whatever didn't back us up."_

Remember, with Tories it is ALWAYS about party politics.


----------



## User.45

TBL said:


> There’s not going to be a Third World War because we’re not going to respond to this. Ukraine will just become another province of Russia like Crimea did. Like, maybe there should be a wider war, but I don’t think that’s going to happen. Russia will likely achieve its goal of installing a pro-Russian government in Kiev and “de-militarizing” the country and the response from the West won’t go further than sanctions. It’s the fear of world war that’s preventing a military response.



And when did a bully stop taking other kids’ lunch money after they learned how easily  they can get away with it.


----------



## shadow puppet

What a disturbing turn of events this morning has been.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496895929688858642/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Renzatic said:


> He's already done it, complementing Putin for his genius move.
> 
> ...it didn't make any difference. Most of them either agreed with him, or said he was being sarcastic, and the fake news media was putting words in his mouth.




Voters who have their heads firmly lodged up Trump’s ass will probably always remain that way, but as hard as it is to believe, there are still “free thinking” voters watching things play out before they decide to cast their vote in Biden vs Trump. Trump’s praise for Putin’s current actions might be a bridge too far for them. There’s a perception difference when Trump was praising Putin when nothing of consequence was going on.


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> NATO just confirmed not a single solider will enter Ukraine. In other words, Putin will own Ukraine within a few days.



That will be the easy part but full on occupation and takeover will be a problem with a people who do not want you there, Russia (as the US) never learned that lesson from Afghanistan and it's never ended well for either. It's like none of us learn anything from history.


----------



## Arkitect

shadow puppet said:


> What a disturbing turn of events this morning has been.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496895929688858642/



Yup… and prevailing winds from the east over Europe.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Eric said:


> Condemnation from his own people along with the rest of the world will help, just not sure how much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Over 150 Russian officials sign letter condemning invasion of Ukraine
> 
> 
> The deputies said they were 'convinced' Russian citizens do not back the war and blamed Putin 'personally' for ordering an invasion, warning it will lead to 'catastrophic consequences'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



well they are now history. lots of accidents are going to happen to them.


----------



## Edd

Eric said:


> That will be the easy part but full on occupation and takeover will be a problem with a people who do not want you there, Russia (as the US) never learned that lesson from Afghanistan and it's never ended well for either. It's like none of us learn anything from history.



Are the Ukrainians that hearty or the terrain there so daunting as in Afghanistan? Honest question because I don’t know.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Eric

Nice to know the Russian people aren't buying Putin's bullshit lies.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496885742009823233/


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> That will be the easy part but full on occupation and takeover will be a problem with a people who do not want you there, Russia (as the US) never learned that lesson from Afghanistan and it's never ended well for either. It's like none of us learn anything from history.



Tell this to Belarus. Putin has the Soviet machinery and armamentarium to maintain power in occupied former Soviet territories.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Renzatic

A lot of people are running around quoting this article about Trump being right.

...it may be one of the few times he actually was.









						Trump lashes Germany over gas pipeline deal, calls it Russia's 'captive'
					

U.S. President Donald Trump launched a sharp public attack on Germany on Wednesday for supporting a Baltic Sea gas pipeline deal with Russia, saying Berlin had become "a captive to Russia" and he criticized it for failing to raise defense spending more.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Edd said:


> Are the Ukrainians that hearty or the terrain there so daunting as in Afghanistan? Honest question because I don’t know.




The country - Ukraine - is largely flat (whereas the northern part of Afghanistan is extremely mountainous), so, no, not "so daunting" - with very fertile soil, ("the bread basket of Europe"), the 'black earth' of Ukraine fed much of Russia in the old, Soviet days, an agreeable climate, a very well educated (and quite prosperous) population - this is Europe, after all - and Kyiv, the capital, is a large, comfortable, very pleasant, cosmopolitan city.

"Hearty"?   No, not in that (Afghan) sense.

However, I would expect Russia not to be able to hold the west of the country if they are foolish enough to extend their invasion that far.

There is no way - ever - Russian rule would be accepted - not politically - in west Ukraine; the situation would be akin to Poland or Lithuania or Estonia - Russian rule would be faced with eternal utter loathing, and cold contempt.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Eric said:


> Nice to know the Russian people aren't buying Putin's bullshit lies.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496885742009823233/



yes but it wont do any good and could cost them a lot.


----------



## Edd

Here we go with US right wingers. 









						These Are the American Right-Wingers Covering for Putin as Russia Invades Ukraine
					

From Tucker Carlson to Tulsi Gabbard, these prominent Moscow apologists tried to tell you Ukraine’s fate shouldn’t matter to America




					www.rollingstone.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Renzatic said:


> A lot of people are running around quoting this article about Trump being right.
> 
> ...it may be one of the few times he actually was.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump lashes Germany over gas pipeline deal, calls it Russia's 'captive'
> 
> 
> U.S. President Donald Trump launched a sharp public attack on Germany on Wednesday for supporting a Baltic Sea gas pipeline deal with Russia, saying Berlin had become "a captive to Russia" and he criticized it for failing to raise defense spending more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



I’d say that Romney was right.


----------



## Arkitect

So it has been confirmed that Russian troops have taken the Chernobyl nuclear plant…

How about a little *cough* accident *cough* ?
Putin can blame the Ukrainians as the radioactive winds spread over Europe.
_"Oops! So sorry. Thoughts and prayers!"_

Europe would be fucked.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Arkitect

theSeb said:


> I was a little kid living about 600 miles away from Chernobyl in 1986. We all had mandatory special injections. I am still alive and *touches wood* cancer free. Can anything further be done there to replicate the events of 1986, or worse? Genuine question, since I have no idea.



It is under a huge concrete shell (IIRC)… I am quite sure it could be cracked and the genie is out of the bottle.

And with a continent (globe) already panicked by Covid I'd say chances are high we'd be pretty spooked.


----------



## Edd

theSeb said:


> Has he gone completely senile?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Confused Trump believes US has invaded Ukraine in Fox call-in — The Independent
> 
> 
> ‘You told me about the amphibious attack by Americans’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Ya, ya, Donny, with the help of the Martians with whom we signed the Milky Way Treaty with in 1971, two years after the fake moon landing. You’re all over it, buddy.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Really bizarre watching the Trump wing of the GOP parroting Russian propaganda and talking points. Its the usual suspects, but to hear it, see it on Fox and see the tweets that say essentially we shouldn't worry about Ukraine, but only the southern border....

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496606277019090948/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496593117021147148/

And to top it off, the usual nimrod talking heads who make their money pushing BS are trying to equate what's happening in Ukraine to this so-called "crisis" at the southern border.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496901035994013703/

I need a vacation from politics. It's too polarizing. Some of the debate I can get. Pro-life, pro-choice.. I'm clearly pro-choice, but I can at least understand why someone is pro-life. Tax debates, spending bills... all that stuff is negotiable and debatable. But stuff that has been going on the last decade or so, especially with Trump, has laid bare just how vast the differences are between many of us.

This used to be a moment where everyone would come together and condemn Putin. Same with covid - I'd imagine in most other times, the amount of anti-vaccine dumb-dumbs would have been much fewer.

If we face a real crisis, we're in deep shit.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> It is under a huge concrete shell (IIRC)… I am quite sure it could be cracked and the genie is out of the bottle.
> 
> And with a continent (globe) already panicked by Covid I'd say chances are high we'd be pretty spooked.




When I visited Chernobyl, in February 2013, it was explained to me that (over the coming year or two) that they intended to further secure - by way of extra layers of protection - the (notorious and ill-fated) concrete "sarcophagus" of what had been reactor No 4.

Reactor No 4 had been shut down in 1986 (it was totally destroyed), and the remainder of the station had been shut down by 2000; in other words, it wasn't - and isn't - a functioning nuclear power station.

However, the worry about, concern about, issue of (lingering and lasting) radioactive damage and contamination is an entirely different matter.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> Has he gone completely senile?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Confused Trump believes US has invaded Ukraine in Fox call-in — The Independent
> 
> 
> ‘You told me about the amphibious attack by Americans’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news




I like how he shoehorned in the US southern border, but he forgot to mention Russia’s invasion is because of Biden’s vaccine mandates.  A real missed opportunity.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

GermanSuplex said:


> Really bizarre watching the Trump wing of the GOP parroting Russian propaganda and talking points. Its the usual suspects, but to hear it, see it on Fox and see the tweets that say essentially we shouldn't worry about Ukraine, but only the southern border....
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496606277019090948/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496593117021147148/
> 
> And to top it off, the usual nimrod talking heads who make their money pushing BS are trying to equate what's happening in Ukraine to this so-called "crisis" at the southern border.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496901035994013703/
> 
> I need a vacation from politics. It's too polarizing. Some of the debate I can get. Pro-life, pro-choice.. I'm clearly pro-choice, but I can at least understand why someone is pro-life. Tax debates, spending bills... all that stuff is negotiable and debatable. But stuff that has been going on the last decade or so, especially with Trump, has laid bare just how vast the differences are between many of us.
> 
> This used to be a moment where everyone would come together and condemn Putin. Same with covid - I'd imagine in most other times, the amount of anti-vaccine dumb-dumbs would have been much fewer.
> US
> If we face a real crisis, we're in deep shit.



Look: This is one of the (inevitable) consequences of what has been (broadly) accepted as Russian interference in the elections of 2016.  

Profoundly unsettling.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> When I visited, in February 2013, it was explained to me that (over the coming year or two) that they intended to further secure - by way of extra layers of protection - the (notorious and ill-fated) concrete "sarcophagus" of what had been reactor No 4.
> 
> Reactor No 4 had been shut down in 1986 (it was totally destroyed), and the remainder of the station had been shut down by 2000; in other words, it wasn't - and isn't - a functioning nuclear power station.
> 
> However, the matter of (lingering and lasting) radioactive damage and contamination is an entirely different matter.



Correct.

It is not a fear of it "blowing up".

A slow leak and an easterly wind… An ill wind that might blow Putin good.



theSeb said:


> Apart from the obvious nukes, I wonder if Chernobyl is what Putin was referring to in his speech
> 
> ""We are ready for any turn of events. All necessary decisions in this regard have been made. I hope that I will be heard."



Exactly what I am wondering.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Scepticalscribe said:


> Look: This is one of the (inevitable) consequences of what has been (broadly) accepted as Russian interference in the elections of 2016.
> 
> Profoundly unsettling.




At what point is it easier to just dump Trump and cast him aside like they did McCain and Romeny, than it is to keep going on these tangents that weaken America's standing? This fat oaf has convinced people Putin is great, Russia isn't so bad and elections should have do-overs.

Their arguments are all over the map. On one hand, they're saying Biden is weak and this wouldn't have happened with Trump (an amazing eye-popping statement in and of itself), but then also saying Ukraine is no big deal and we should be more worried about brown people coming over the southern border.

This is a cult mixed with long-standing racism coming to a head. People are ready to throw the baby out with the bath water to score a political win, which at this point I guess is to prove "Trump is great". It's bigger than Trump, but at the same time, he's the main catalyst for a lot of this stuff we're seeing.


----------



## shadow puppet

I'm reading Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president, has declared martial law and promised to give weapons to any citizen willing to defend the country.


----------



## MarkusL

Scepticalscribe said:


> When I visited Chernobyl, in February 2013, it was explained to me that (over the coming year or two) that they intended to further secure - by way of extra layers of protection - the (notorious and ill-fated) concrete "sarcophagus" of what had been reactor No 4.
> 
> Reactor No 4 had been shut down in 1986 (it was totally destroyed), and the remainder of the station had been shut down by 2000; in other words, it wasn't - and isn't - a functioning nuclear power station.
> 
> However, the worry about, concern about, issue of (lingering and lasting) radioactive damage and contamination is an entirely different matter.



Correct, the original concrete sarcophagus did its job well in the emergency phase, but it was a quick and improvised construction and it started crumbling after only a decade. As it breaks down the structures inside would shift, potentially creating new leaks into the ground. In the worst case pieces of fuel that had been separated could move into clusters of greater concentration and speed up the reaction locally.  A new confinement was built a few hundred meters away in order to not expose the workers to too much radiation. Then it was pushed onto the old sarcophagus, sliding on teflon rails since no bearings can take the weight so wheels would not work. It is the largest manmade object ever to have been moved in one piece over land.






The danger is that once the new confinement was put in place, the clock is ticking. The accident below it is still an active situation and the whole plan hinges on the successful dismantling of the mess before the end of the technical lifespan of the new confinement. There are no known engineering methods to put a new even bigger shell over the current one when it starts to break down. The plan is to finish the dismantling of the reactor some time around 2065, possibly within my lifetime if I eat right and excercise.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## yaxomoxay

theSeb said:


> Countries like Poland have been warning their new Western European friends about being friends with Russia for over a decade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> War on Ukraine Ends Europe’s Dream of Russia as a Friend — The Wall Street Journal
> 
> 
> Invasion forces Berlin, Paris and other European capitals to end years of ambivalence over whether to accommodate or confront Vladimir Putin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



I mean, there is no doubt the Western European countries and the EU messed up for decades.


----------



## yaxomoxay

shadow puppet said:


> I'm reading Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president, has declared martial law and promised to give weapons to any citizen willing to defend the country.



I understand him, but I am not sure it’s the best idea. It will be a slaughter of civilians. 

Again, I do understand him.


----------



## DT

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I like how he shoehorned in the US southern border, but he forgot to mention Russia’s invasion is because of Biden’s vaccine mandates.  A real missed opportunity.




JFC, yes ...

“But you know what’s also very dangerous is you told me about the amphibious attack by Americans. You shouldn’t be saying that because you and everybody else shouldn’t know about it. They should do that secretly, not be doing that through the great Laura Ingraham. They should be doing that secretly. Nobody should know that, Laura,” he continued before the host interrupted him.

“No, those are the Russian amphibious landings,” she said.

Continuing, Mr Trump later added: “That’s all we need. That’ll be next, ok? Now, we want to protect our own borders. You know, we oughta get to the southern border and start protecting the southern border. But it’s a very terrible situation. It’s a situation that should’ve never happened.”


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> Countries like Poland have been warning their new Western European friends about being friends with Russia for over a decade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> War on Ukraine Ends Europe’s Dream of Russia as a Friend — The Wall Street Journal
> 
> 
> Invasion forces Berlin, Paris and other European capitals to end years of ambivalence over whether to accommodate or confront Vladimir Putin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news




I was going to say doesn’t Russia have more to lose from this than whatever it thinks it is gaining?  This is clearly a land grab and Putin vanity project, period.  What’s his next move “Buy our gas or I’ll nuke you.”?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

It will be interesting to see where the right is on welcoming Ukrainian refugees.  They have the requisite skin color.


----------



## Cmaier

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> It will be interesting to see where the right is on welcoming Ukrainian refugees.  They have the requisite skin color.



Yeah, but they interfered in the 2020 election and helped try and elect Hillary - don’t you remember that conspiracy theory?


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> This is literally the worst case scenario and I concede, @yaxomoxay was right about this. This scenario is pure insanity and i have a difficult time seeing a geopolitical scenario where this doesn’t  spiral into a 3rd world war. The only quesTion is whether that will emanate from this conflict directly, or the insane arms race of the coming years.



Insanity- there is conjecture that Putin maybe unhinged reworking the world order in his  favor, and under such circumstances, sanctions are meaningless to him. However sanctions may effect those around him and there are reports of protest to the Ukraine invasion in Russia. Biden, based on input from our NATO Allies just said NATO will not be fighting in Ukraine, but forces are being shifted to defend eastern NATO member states.


yaxomoxay said:


> I honestly think we’re at the brink of a new geopolitical order, one that has been brewing for 20 years.
> 
> We told Ukraine that we’d defend her if they got rid of their nukes, and they believed us. Another betrayal by the EU and the US if you ask me.



Ukraine not having nukes might  be an excellent thing under this circumstance.


----------



## Huntn

GermanSuplex said:


> Really bizarre watching the Trump wing of the GOP parroting Russian propaganda and talking points. Its the usual suspects, but to hear it, see it on Fox and see the tweets that say essentially we shouldn't worry about Ukraine, but only the southern border....
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496606277019090948/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496593117021147148/
> 
> And to top it off, the usual nimrod talking heads who make their money pushing BS are trying to equate what's happening in Ukraine to this so-called "crisis" at the southern border.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496901035994013703/
> 
> I need a vacation from politics. It's too polarizing. Some of the debate I can get. Pro-life, pro-choice.. I'm clearly pro-choice, but I can at least understand why someone is pro-life. Tax debates, spending bills... all that stuff is negotiable and debatable. But stuff that has been going on the last decade or so, especially with Trump, has laid bare just how vast the differences are between many of us.
> 
> This used to be a moment where everyone would come together and condemn Putin. Same with covid - I'd imagine in most other times, the amount of anti-vaccine dumb-dumbs would have been much fewer.
> 
> If we face a real crisis, we're in deep shit.



To be polarized by politics is to be aware of the reality the USA exists in. To be unaware may make you feel good until the revolution appears in your city, you neighborhood.


----------



## Eric

Biden: "direct sanctions on Putin still on the table", if a full on invasion isn't enough, what is? We look and are acting weak.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> Biden: "direct sanctions on Putin still on the table", if a full on invasion isn't enough, what is? We look and are acting weak.



“I’ll count to three and then I’ll punish you. One… two… two and a half… two and three quarters….”


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Biden: "direct sanctions on Putin still on the table", if a full on invasion isn't enough, what is? We look and are acting weak.



You can’t rule out that it’s Maybe because  we are


----------



## SuperMatt

Putin is essentially threatening to use nukes if any nation interferes with his invasion of Ukraine.

Many EU countries are STILL resistant to putting serious sanctions in place.

Look, Europe, just rip the band-aid off. Cut off ALL trade to Russia. Find alternate energy sources, find a way to manage without Russian trade, and isolate the country. The temporary economic hit will be worth it in the long run when things get so bad in Russia that the people oust Putin. Even Russians that believe the propaganda of “Ukraine is run by Nazis” don’t think the invasion is a good idea. They will turn on Putin if things get really bad.

Without European money coming in, Russia won’t last a year. China isn’t gonna save them. Europe could take out Putin if they were willing to suffer some temporary economic pain.


----------



## Huntn

Jim Townsend- _The Ukraine was not built up to where it needed to be. Its military is  better than where it was in 2014, but not enough. The Trump Administration wasted 4 years in this regard._

…and he’s not going to go against his best buddy strongman.


----------



## Deleted member 215

P_X said:


> You can’t rule out that it’s Maybe because  we are




Maybe we need tough strongman Trump


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> Maybe we need tough strongman Trump



Trump would be sending in troops to assist Putin and would have a hotel up in Ukraine within 6 months.


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> Jim Townsend- _The Ukraine was not built up to where it needed to be. Its military is  better than where it was in 2014, but not enough. The Trump Administration wasted 4 years in this regard._
> 
> …and he’s not going to go against his best buddy strongman.



The GOP could have removed Trump for his misdeeds in blackmailing Ukraine, withholding military aid unless they came up with “dirt” on Biden’s son. But they decided to vote against conviction in the impeachment trial.

It’s complete  that right-wingers are now saying Trump would have prevented this. In reality, Trump is the one who paved the highway for Russia to take over. Legitimizing Putin, driving wedges between our NATO allies, withholding military aid from Ukraine, you name it.


----------



## quagmire

My biggest takeaway from reading reactions to this?

People just want to use the invasion to score petty partisan points here in the US. Yep Russia invades Ukraine, but all I see on facebook and other websites is petty partisanship about how Biden is the worst president ever, Trump wouldn't let Putin do this, etc.

I see it here too with comments like Putin is Trump's best buddy.

Stop with the petty BS. If you want to say the sanctions are not strong enough and need to be harsher, fine. But don't use this to further your own biased and petty BS......

I also don't get people who disagree with any sanctions claiming they are ineffective, but don't want to get militarily involved. What should we do then?


----------



## Deleted member 215

So, genuine question to everyone in this thread: *if Biden announced right now he was sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to fight the Russians, would you be satisfied?*

I'm trying to figure out what people actually want to happen.


----------



## quagmire

TBL said:


> So, genuine question to everyone in this thread: if Biden announced right now he was sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to fight the Russians, would you be satisfied?
> 
> I'm trying to figure out what people actually want to happen.




People just want to squabble and complain about Trump or Biden and using this as another way to do it. Not actually caring about the actual invasion by Russia.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> Trump would be sending in troops to assist Putin and would have a hotel up in Ukraine within 6 months.




If Trump gets a second term he'll probably try to invent some US + Russia vs everybody else alliance.  At that point Putin will bend him over and Trump will say Putin fucking him shows that he considers him an equal.


----------



## Arkitect

Illustration: Ben Jennings/The Guardian


----------



## Huntn

quagmire said:


> My biggest takeaway from reading reactions to this?
> 
> People just want to use the invasion to score petty partisan points here in the US. Yep Russia invades Ukraine, but all I see on facebook and other websites is petty partisanship about how Biden is the worst president ever, Trump wouldn't let Putin do this, etc.
> 
> I see it here too with comments like Putin is Trump's best buddy.
> 
> Stop with the petty BS. If you want to say the sanctions are not strong enough and need to be harsher, fine. But don't use this to further your own biased and petty BS......
> 
> I also don't get people who disagree with any sanctions claiming they are ineffective, but don't want to get militarily involved. What should we do then?



I like some of what you said but describing Putin as Donny’s best buddy is not only, not petty, but damned accurate. The former POTUS who on multiple occasions has professed this admiration for strongman dictators, did his best to drive a stake into the heart of NATO, to such a degree I shudder to think of that sinister human being in charge of the US Military and State Dept at this point in time.

And the Right Wing members who are trying to dump on Biden for political advantage because of this conflict is not only expected, but transparent, and disgusting. In fact the move of Right Wing Pundits into the defense of a Russia mode based on their devotion to Trump, is far beyond petty. It’s damned alarming and drifting towards treasonous.


----------



## Deleted member 215

quagmire said:


> People just want to squabble and complain about Trump or Biden and using this as another way to do it. Not actually caring about the actual invasion by Russia.




Seems to be the case. I would bet a majority of Americans do not want to get militarily involved and risk nuclear war with Russia or WWIII. So then sanctions are your only option. Sorry if that makes you feel "weak", but then maybe you should be the one on the ground willing to fight the Russians.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

quagmire said:


> My biggest takeaway from reading reactions to this?
> 
> People just want to use the invasion to score petty partisan points here in the US. Yep Russia invades Ukraine, but all I see on facebook and other websites is petty partisanship about how Biden is the worst president ever, Trump wouldn't let Putin do this, etc.
> 
> I see it here too with comments like Putin is Trump's best buddy.
> 
> Stop with the petty BS. If you want to say the sanctions are not strong enough and need to be harsher, fine. But don't use this to further your own biased and petty BS......



Agree with this and well said.

Please do not derail this thread into a (futile) discussion of (the utterly loathsome) Mr Trump, and Mr Biden, and the wider distraction of US politics, even in the context of Ukraine - we have "loads of place", plenty of space, - and a laid back approach to political discussion - to start as many threads on the topic as you wish.

I do sometimes get very tired of how US centric much political discussion is, both here and elsewhere.  I get - understand - that it is compelling and incredibly important.

However, it is not the only show in town, especially on the day Ukraine has been invaded - and should not be allowed to soak up all of the available oxygen in a discussion chamber.



quagmire said:


> .....
> 
> Stop with the petty BS. If you want to say the sanctions are not strong enough and need to be harsher, fine. But don't use this to further your own biased and petty BS......
> 
> I also don't get people who disagree with any sanctions claiming they are ineffective, but don't want to get militarily involved. What should we do then?



Sanctions (especially robust, far-reaching and comprehensive sanctions, not just the appearance of sanctions) are - and can be - exceptionally effective.

Very effective, and this sort of "soft power" tool is one at which the EU excels and has considerable experience and expertise at.

However, it is not immediately effective - they can take months, and years to bite fully.

For an audience weaned on sound-bites, a 24 hour news cycle, and with a limited attention span, a focus on economic hits can look less than exciting.  


quagmire said:


> People just want to squabble and complain about Trump or Biden and using this as another way to do it. Not actually caring about the actual invasion by Russia.



Well said.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> So, genuine question to everyone in this thread: *if Biden announced right now he was sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to fight the Russians, would you be satisfied?*
> 
> I'm trying to figure out what people actually want to happen.



Now it’s way too late. The Russian buildup started back in November. That’s when a coalition should’ve immediately put boots on the ground. As soon as the buildup reached critical mass, heavy sanctions should’ve started.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> If Trump gets a second term he'll probably try to invent some US + Russia vs everybody else alliance.  At that point Putin will bend him over and Trump will say Putin fucking him shows that he considers him an equal.



Heaven forbid if we see Trump as POTUS a second time, expect the worst. I would not be surprised if this is the trigger that leads to the USA actual unraveling.


----------



## User.45

TBL said:


> So, genuine question to everyone in this thread: *if Biden announced right now he was sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to fight the Russians, would you be satisfied?*
> 
> I'm trying to figure out what people actually want to happen.



Sanctions that are proportional to Putin’s aggression. Cut em off SWIFT freeze assets. Halt ALL trade, ban Russian participation from international events including junk like Eurovision. Scrap Russian sponsorship insignia from sports teams. 

That would be a good start. You’re somewhat right, Trump himself is irrelevant. But when people like Erdogan or Orban take a stance and foxnews’ america is in deny/minimize/deflect mode, you know we have huge internal problems. I can’t images any other era in the history of the USA where this wouldn’t be an immediate uniting situation.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> Now it’s way too late. The Russian buildup started back in November. That’s when a coalition should’ve immediately put boots on the ground. As soon as the buildup reached critical mass, heavy sanctions should’ve started.



I think then it would have been much harder to convince public opinion about the necessity of their sacrifices, and Putin would have used it as proof of Western Imperialism. The only upside is that at least we have an international consensus we would never had otherwise


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Please do not derail this thread into a (futile) discussion of (the utterly loathsome) Mr Trump, and Mr Biden, and the wider distraction of US politics, even in the context of Ukraine - we have "loads of place", plenty of space, - and a laid back approach to political discussion - to start as many threads on the topic as you wish.




I second this with all my heart.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> I think then it would have been much harder to convince public opinion about the necessity of their sacrifices, and Putin would have used it as proof of Western Imperialism.



What Putin would’ve used, is irrelevant. But you snapped a good picture of the underlying problem: the West (meant as EU and US plus a few other countries) is not willing to pay the price to stop Putin. He knows that, hence the invasion with total disregard of Ukraine or international peace.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> Sanctions (especially robust, far-reaching and comprehensive sanctions, not just the appearance of sanctions) are - and can be - exceptionally effective.
> 
> Very effective, and this sort of "soft power" tool is one at which the EU excels and has considerable experience and expertise at.
> 
> However, it is not immediately effective - they can take months, and years to bite fully.




I wonder how much hesitation on sanctions is due to people outside Russia also getting pounded economically, and I’m not talking the average person at the gas pump. We’re already at the civil breaking point economically and those at the top won’t be able to have their losses subsidized by the tax payers again.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> Sanctions that are proportional to Putin’s aggression. Cut em off SWIFT freeze assets. Halt ALL trade, ban Russian participation from international events including junk like Eurovision. Scrap Russian sponsorship insignia from sports teams.



I wish. I read earlier that EU already clarified sanctions, but not on energy import. That is, money will flow to Russia and if they get pissed off they’ll just provide less.


----------



## Renzatic

TBL said:


> I'm trying to figure out what people actually want to happen.




I don't think anyone wants us to involve ourselves militarily in Ukraine. We need to take other measures to address the situation.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

A few thoughts on sanctions and other economic tools, lest anyone think that they are "soft":

There are steps that can be taken which will hurt Russia, and send a signal that such an outrageous act (invasion of a sovereign state) is completely unacceptable and utterly disproportionate (and, I write this as someone who has some sympathy for the Russian leaning "separatists" in eastern Ukraine; steps - such as on language recognition - could have been taken to address their sense of alienation and grievance - some of which were quite legitimate - ages ago).

Political: Visa bans on all government ministers, on all members of the Duma and Federation Council, all governors and office-holders in Russia’s regions, on all officials in the “power ministries” and security agencies, and on the 35 individuals named in Alexei Navalny’s list.

And on their spouses, siblings, offspring, parents and other associates.

Economic: Shut Russia out of the Swift banking system, and impose sanctions on - and freeze the assets of - any and all of their banks that have links to their government and trade in the west; Announce a sweeping program of asset freezes on these individuals, and on companies linked to the Kremlin or owned (even in part) by Kremlin cronies.

Delist these companies from the exchanges in London, Frankfurt, New York and other western financial centers. Stop trading their debt, bonds and other financial instruments.

Take serious steps (a medium to long term plan) to curb our dependency on Russian oil & gas.

This will also mean persuading our own electorates - yes, our Green leaning electorates - to slow down the pace of environmental change away from carbon; in other words, would I be prepared to pollute the environment - keep coal, for example - burning to ensure western homes remain heated while we reduce our dependence on Russian energy and simultaneously take around a decade to develop alternative sources of fuel? Yes, I would.

Our electorates need to be advised that actions have consequences and that if you own the action, you also own the consequence.

Diplomatic: Promote bare bones embassies, and shut Russian consular and "trade" missions.  (Yes, that will be reciprocated passionately with vehement vengeance by the Russians).

Cultural: Remove Russia from the Eurovision song contest.

Refuse to play football matches in Russia, impose sanctions - and freeze assets of - on Russians owning media in the west, or on owning football clubs (Chelsea, anyone?) or the like.

I would even contemplate expelling Russia from FIFA, and from European football competitions, or boycotting them.   Exclusion from international sports - soft power though they are - will hurt, in reputational terms.

Expel Russia from the Olympic Games.

Remove RT and other Russian propaganda organs from the airwaves in all countries that have regulated broadcast media. (Yes, this would mean reciprocity: The BBC and others would then be exelled from Russia.  So be it).

Personally, since I do not (and would not) recommend military action, I would strongly argue for any and all economic (diplomatic, cultural, and political) steps to be taken - some of which would (no, will) hurt us - that will signal, strongly, our deep disapproval of this step.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> I wish. I read earlier that EU already clarified sanctions, but not on energy import. That is, money will flow to Russia and if they get pissed off they’ll just provide less.



Sanctions that don’t include energy import seem pretty weak to me. Oil and gas revenues make up over a third of Russia’s economic output. Take that away and the country will suffer greatly. If countries boycott Russian oil and gas, OPEC could increase production to make up the difference.

The international community needs to find the will to work together and completely cut off Russia until they leave Ukraine.


----------



## yaxomoxay

@Scepticalscribe do you think that Putin’s game is: get Ukraine with minimal losses, then respond to European sanctions with heavy energy-related countermeasures?

I have the feeling that if he causes spikes to energy costs, and gas goes to $9/gallon or something, we’ll see disorders in Europe. Heck, if there’s a serious crisis he might even reach Rome and Berlin and be greeted as a liberator.


----------



## Huntn

TBL said:


> Seems to be the case. I would bet a majority of Americans do not want to get militarily involved and risk nuclear war with Russia or WWIII. So then sanctions are your only option. Sorry if that makes you feel "weak", but then maybe you should be the one on the ground willing to fight the Russians.



Ultimately under this circumstance, an attack on NATO member states would be the trigger to get us fighting over there. Now as far as not wanting WWIII, a lot of consideration has to go into how far do you allow a dictator with nukes to abuse his neighbors?

Btw, how do you feel about NATO and the US’s obligation to it’s mutual support?

My impression is that at this point Ukraine is expendable and I’m not prepared to assign blame. There are others here that seem to be better educated on the circumstances that kept Ukraine from becoming a NATO member.

Sure we will “punish“ Russia with sanctions, and maybe it might tilt the landscape against him eventually, but it’s like don’t hold your breath.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

P_X said:


> The only upside is that at least we have an international consensus we would never had otherwise




I think one of the most disturbing aspects is outside Putin’s circle and braindead contrarians nobody is looking at this and going “Well, that was totally justified.” Putin attempted a very narrow justification and when that didn’t work he just said fuck it. There was never a response that would have prevented him from going forward with this. This is about as black and white as they come.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> @Scepticalscribe do you think that Putin’s game is: get Ukraine with minimal losses, then respond to European sanctions with heavy energy-related countermeasures?
> 
> I have the feeling that if he causes spikes to energy costs, and gas goes to $9/gallon or something, we’ll see disorders in Europe. Heck, if there’s a serious crisis he might even reach Rome and Berlin and be greeted as a liberator.



The speculation I’m hearing is that the goal is to set up a Russian  friendly puppet government in Kiev.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> The speculation I’m hearing is that the goal is to set up a Russian  friendly puppet government in Kiev.



That is a possibility, but my concern is about what will follow. I don’t see him just staying quiet when he can truly strangle Europe.


----------



## MarkusL

I think NATO should have rules for how much money the member states are allowed to spend on the enemy’s military, just like they have rules for minimum spending on their own military.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Not sure if Italian news is overly dramatic, but they’re reporting Russian troops are already near Kiev, with very little resistance, and the expectation is that the capital will fall in the matter of a few hours.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> That is a possibility, but my concern is about what will follow. I don’t see him just staying quiet when he can truly strangle Europe.



We’d better be ready for a fight to commit our troops to. And while there is a sincere desire to keep politics out of this particular thread, you’d really have to examine the current state of politics in the United States to get a handle on our mutual willingness to fulfill our obligations to NATO vs _it’s not in my backyard. _And then think about who is the President when such a decision has to be made.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> We’d better be ready for a fight to commit our troops to. And while there is a sincere desire to keep politics out of this particular thread, you’d really have to examine the current state of politics in the United States to get a handle on our mutual willingness to fulfill our obligations to NATO vs _it’s not in my backyard. _



Well, technically this is not really a NATO obligation.


----------



## quagmire

Scepticalscribe said:


> Sanctions (especially robust, far-reaching and comprehensive sanctions, not just the appearance of sanctions) are - and can be - exceptionally effective.
> 
> Very effective, and this sort of "soft power" tool is one at which the EU excels and has considerable experience and expertise at.
> 
> However, it is not immediately effective - they can take months, and years to bite fully.
> 
> For an audience weaned on sound-bites, a 24 hour news cycle, and with a limited attention span, a focus on economic hits can look less than exciting.




Oh don't take me stating that as my actual position. 

I think sanctions at this moment is the right response to the invasion. I would be for Russia being removed from SWIFT, but it sounds like EU countries are not onboard with it yet where the US sounds like it is open to.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> Well, technically this is not really a NATO obligation.



I was  responding to your comment that you are worried he won’t stop there. I need to look on the map and see how many other non NATO countries there are for him to attack.  But I was presuming your further action comment  would involve a NATO member state.

That said, Ukraine is the second time he has attacked a sovern Nation. What does NATO do for the next country that comes under his sights? Sure, after Ukraine, he might let things cool down, but NATO had better damned sure have plans set up well in advance for the next country on his list and I would think it would have to include more than puffing one’s feathers and imposing financial sanctions.


----------



## quagmire

Huntn said:


> I was  responding to your comment that you are worried he won’t stop there. I need to look on the map and see how many other non NATO countries there are for him to attack.  But I was presuming your further action comment  would involve a NATO member state.
> 
> That said, Ukraine is the second time he has attacked a sovern Nation. What does NATO do for the next country that comes under his sights? Sure, after Ukraine, he might let things cool down, but NATO had better damned sure have plans set up well in advance for the next country on his list and I would think it would have to include more than puffing one’s feathers and imposing financial sanctions.




NATO is a defense alliance for member states. Russia invading a non-NATO member would be none of NATO's business.

Now if the US, UK, France, etc want to separately get militarily involved if Putin invades yet another sovereign non-member nation then that is on them. But they can't drag other NATO members into it.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Scepticalscribe said:


> A few thoughts on sanctions and other economic tools, lest anyone think that they are "soft":
> 
> There are steps that can be taken which will hurt Russia, and send a signal that such an outrageous act (invasion of a sovereign state) is completely unacceptable and utterly disproportionate (and, I write this as someone who has some sympathy for the Russian leaning "separatists" in eastern Ukraine; steps - such as on language recognition - could have been taken to address their sense of alienation and grievance - some of which were quite legitimate - ages ago).
> 
> Political: Visa bans on all government ministers, on all members of the Duma and Federation Council, all governors and office-holders in Russia’s regions, on all officials in the “power ministries” and security agencies, and on the 35 individuals named in Alexei Navalny’s list.
> 
> And on their spouses, siblings, offspring, parents and other associates.
> 
> Economic: Shut Russia out of the Swift banking system, and impose sanctions on - and freeze the assets of - any and all of their banks that have links to their government and trade in the west; Announce a sweeping program of asset freezes on these individuals, and on companies linked to the Kremlin or owned (even in part) by Kremlin cronies.
> 
> Delist these companies from the exchanges in London, Frankfurt, New York and other western financial centers. Stop trading their debt, bonds and other financial instruments.
> 
> Take serious steps (a medium to long term plan) to curb our dependency on Russian oil & gas.
> 
> This will also mean persuading our own electorates - yes, our Green leaning electorates - to slow down the pace of environmental change away from carbon; in other words, would I be prepared to pollute the environment - keep coal, for example - burning to ensure western homes remain heated while we reduce our dependence on Russian energy and simultaneously take around a decade to develop alternative sources of fuel? Yes, I would.
> 
> Our electorates need to be advised that actions have consequences and that if you own the action, you also own the consequence.
> 
> Diplomatic: Promote bare bones embassies, and shut Russian consular and "trade" missions.  (Yes, that will be reciprocated passionately with vehement vengeance by the Russians).
> 
> Cultural: Remove Russia from the Eurovision song contest.
> 
> Refuse to play football matches in Russia, impose sanctions - and freeze assets of - on Russians owning media in the west, or on owning football clubs (Chelsea, anyone?) or the like.
> 
> I would even contemplate expelling Russia from FIFA, and from European football competitions, or boycotting them.   Exclusion from international sports - soft power though they are - will hurt, in reputational terms.
> 
> Expel Russia from the Olympic Games.
> 
> Remove RT and other Russian propaganda organs from the airwaves in all countries that have regulated broadcast media. (Yes, this would mean reciprocity: The BBC and others would then be exelled from Russia.  So be it).
> 
> Personally, since I do not (and would not) recommend military action, I would strongly argue for any and all economic (diplomatic, cultural, and political) steps to be taken - some of which would (no, will) hurt us - that will signal, strongly, our deep disapproval of this step.



At the risk of quoting myself, a few thoughts (and suggestions or recommendations) for anyone who thinks sanctions, or socio-economic-cultural political responses are "weak".



yaxomoxay said:


> @Scepticalscribe do you think that Putin’s game is: get Ukraine with minimal losses, then respond to European sanctions with heavy energy-related countermeasures?
> 
> I have the feeling that if he causes spikes to energy costs, and gas goes to $9/gallon or something, we’ll see disorders in Europe. Heck, if there’s a serious crisis he might even reach Rome and Berlin and be greeted as a liberator.



Yes.

However, he will have a job holding the west of Ukraine, - nothing will persuade them to accept Russian rule - and - if the threat becomes too severe - there will be a backlash in the west, i.e. western Europe.

The backlash may be twofold: Both against higher energy prices (but Governments do have tools to ameliorate this - in other words, there is no need for the market to continue to be supreme, state subsidies, state regulation of oil and gas prices - or, a reduced state tax take from energy - can all play a role), and also - to persuade the Green leaning part of the electorate that the timetable for the implementation of the environmental reforms they dream of may need to be adjusted, and that they may need to contemplate a few pressing geopolitial imperatives as they think about the threat posed by global warming.

Moreover, while we may not "understand" Russia (or their history, - and I spent  a decade of my life teaching Russian and Soviet history), they, likewise, do not "understand" the west.

And no, the gloomy, bleak, murderous and intolerant history of Russian autocratic traditions will not prove attractive to anyone in western Europe, - they will not be welcomed as "liberators" - and (culturally) western Europe, unlike some of the states in central & eastern Europe - will not be seduced in any way by silly Slav sentiments of "a common culture".

In fact, the Russian Orthodox Church is so ludicrously retrograde and supportive of authoritarian traditions that it manages the amazing feat of making the Catholic Church (forget Protestant democratic traditions) look exceedingly advanced, cultured, civilised, educated and enlightened in comparison.

Anyway, such a threat - if offered - is nothing but existential: I would expect western Europe to respond (slowly, belatedly, in a moody quarrelsome manner), but to respond quite fiercely, with economic, political, cultural and diplomatic tools.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> I was  responding to your comment that you are worried he won’t stop there. I need to look on the map and see how many other non NATO countries there are for him to attack.  But I was presuming your further action comment  would involve a NATO member state.




Oh I understand. I apologize, I thought you were referring to Ukraine. 


Huntn said:


> That said, Ukraine is the second time he has attacked a sovern Nation. What does NATO do for the next country that comes under his sights?



Contrary to popular belief, having a NATO action ain’t easy. Invoking article 5 is not easy and it can be done only in certain geographical areas. 


Huntn said:


> Sure, after Ukraine, he might let things cool down, but NATO had better damned sure have plans set up well in advance for the next country on his list and I would think it would have to include more than puffing one’s feathers and imposing financial sanctions.



I don’t think that Putin will attack a NATO country, but I think once Ukraine is his, he’ll impose very tough sanctions on energy export which will be lifted only if sanctions against Russia are lifted.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

quagmire said:


> Oh don't take me stating that as my actual position.
> 
> I think sanctions at this moment is the right response to the invasion. I would be for Russia being removed from SWIFT, but it sounds like EU countries are not onboard with it yet where the US sounds like it is open to.



It (Russia removal from SWIFT) will take us some time, but I would expect it to be implemented once western European states recognise the current Russian government (and its actions) for the threat it is to them.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> the amazing feat of making the Catholic Church (forget Protestant democratic traditions) look cultured, civilised, educated and enlightened.




Hey!!! 

Thanks for the reply. You’re right, I am very curious to see how he’ll manage west Ukraine.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

The discussion about the threat of strangling supply, higher oil and gas supplies (which is real) misses the point firstly, that many western Euriopean countries have strong social democratic traditions, (irrespective of who is in power), and secondly, that a threat to the economic survival of - or the socio-political-cultural traditions (i.e. democracy) of - can mean that free market "sacred cows" - the idea that one cannot interfere with the "workings" of a market - can be dismantled in the face of a threat to the state.

Thus, I would expect to see (and would strongly support) state subsidies re (domestic and business) oil & gas prices; state regulation re energy prices; and - perhaps - a reduced state tax take from energy.

In other words, even in the absence of military adventures (NATO), western Governments (and the EU) are not helpless.

This also means persuading Greens (including Greens in government) that sometimes you have to attempt to bridge the dilemma of saving the planet or securing your country's independence and energy supply in a way that your citizens can afford but which may cost the planet.

What is striking about energy threats is that even during the very worst of the Cold War the old USSR maintained the security of energy supplies to the west  (and yes, they needed the hard currency).


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Good article by Alexander Vindman on The Atlantic. 









						America Could Have Done So Much More to Protect Ukraine
					

The paths to deterrence were not taken.




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## yaxomoxay

theSeb said:


> Thanks for that. It led me to this also excellent article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Reason Putin Would Risk War
> 
> 
> He is threatening to invade Ukraine because he wants democracy to fail—and not just in that country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com



Yes, another excellent article.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> I would expect western Europe to respond (slowly, belatedly, in a moody quarrelsome manner), but to respond quite fiercely, with *cultural *tools.



Does that mean we're going to ban the export of Adidas tracksuits and second hand German sedans to Russia?


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Does that mean we're going to ban the export of Adidas tracksuits and second hand German sedans to Russia?



The tracksuits are coming from china, so they are probably safe…


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Does that mean we're going to ban the export of Adidas tracksuits and second hand German sedans to Russia?



Whatever it takes.


----------



## Huntn

quagmire said:


> NATO is a defense alliance for member states. Russia invading a non-NATO member would be none of NATO's business.
> 
> Now if the US, UK, France, etc want to separately get militarily involved if Putin invades yet another sovereign non-member nation then that is on them. *But they can't drag other NATO members into it.*



I did not say or imply they would try to drag other countries in. I said NATO should be ready for this, have considered it, and already made a decision in advance on what course of action they will take for the next non-NATO country with a target on it’s back. How many countries fall before your alliance decides to physically counter? Now I admit  the weak point of my statement is that I don’t how many vulnerable former satellites of the USSR exist that not have become NATO members.

Plus this is who Europe/NATO  is dealing with, a not so veiled nuclear strike threat. it can be asked is the Russian Autocrat in a rational state of mind??
Putin threatens countries 'tempted to intervene' in Ukraine​








						Putin threatens countries 'tempted to intervene' in Ukraine
					

Putin threatens countries 'tempted to intervene' in Ukraine




					news.yahoo.com
				




_Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to fend off anyone who wants to help Ukraine amid his military action against the country, threatening to deliver "consequences as you have never experienced in your history."_


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> Oh I understand. I apologize, I thought you were referring to Ukraine.
> 
> Contrary to popular belief, having a NATO action ain’t easy. Invoking article 5 is not easy and it can be done only in certain geographical areas.
> 
> I don’t think that Putin will attack a NATO country, but I think once Ukraine is his, he’ll impose very tough sanctions on energy export which will be lifted only if sanctions against Russia are lifted.



No problem. 

…if his own economy can stand it. Who is best prepared to weather such a standoff? It could be argued that the dictator has the advantage over the democratic leader. Maybe…


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> No problem.
> 
> …if his own economy can stand it. Who is best prepared to weather such a standoff? It could be argued that the dictator has the advantage over the democratic leader. Maybe…



Good question. 
I read earlier on Asia Times that Putin and Xi signed a deal to export gas and other resources to China, which will increase Russian export by 10x. There’s also some sort of exchange based on technology.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Sanctions after Crimea failed to change that situation and they failed to prevent the current situation.


----------



## Huntn

theSeb said:


> Thanks for that. It led me to this also excellent article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Reason Putin Would Risk War
> 
> 
> He is threatening to invade Ukraine because he wants democracy to fail—and not just in that country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com



I’ve loved The Atlantic since the 90s when my wife discovered it for me.


----------



## Huntn

Macky-Mac said:


> Sanctions after Crimea failed to change that situation and they failed to prevent the current situation.



Maybe these are new and improved sanctions.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Huntn said:


> Maybe these are new and improved sanctions.



hmmmmm.....indeed........but since the main practical use of sanctions is to express dismay, annoyance and distress, it's hard to imagine that any of the new & improved will really be any better


----------



## Eric

Macky-Mac said:


> Sanctions after Crimea failed to change that situation and they failed to prevent the current situation.



Even Biden said it wouldn't prevent Putin from attacking but it will at least isolate them and cripple a lot of their money, would also like to see Germany step up to the plate here too. Welcome to the site BTW.


----------



## Eric

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/t0n7mb


----------



## quagmire

Huntn said:


> I did not say or imply they would try to drag other countries in. I said NATO should be ready for this, have considered it, and already made a decision in advance on what course of action they will take for the next non-NATO country with a target on it’s back. How many countries fall before your alliance decides to physically counter? Now I admit  the weak point of my statement is that I don’t how many vulnerable former satellites of the USSR exist that not have become NATO members.
> 
> Plus this is who Europe/NATO  is dealing with, a not so veiled nuclear strike threat. it can be asked is the Russian Autocrat in a rational state of mind??
> Putin threatens countries 'tempted to intervene' in Ukraine​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin threatens countries 'tempted to intervene' in Ukraine
> 
> 
> Putin threatens countries 'tempted to intervene' in Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to fend off anyone who wants to help Ukraine amid his military action against the country, threatening to deliver "consequences as you have never experienced in your history."_




They are already moving military assets to NATO members in Eastern Europe to shore up their defenses. 

But to answer your country to how many non-NATO countries get taken over before NATO reacts? Every single one because NATO will not preemptively attack Russia. A member state needs to be attacked first before NATO will take military action against the attacking country. Keep in mind Article 5 was only activated ONCE in history which is after 9/11. 

Again NATO is all about defense. It isn't an alliance meant to go on the offensive based on perceived threats put upon a member nation. The aggressor needs to act first. No, " Get them before they can get me".


----------



## lizkat

quagmire said:


> I also don't get people who disagree with any sanctions claiming they are ineffective, but don't want to get militarily involved. What should we do then?




Putin counted on the west's uncertainty if he crossed the line.  So, he crossed it.

And, no one really knows what we should do next.   Putin counts on that too.

Both situations are temporary, but the damage is done already.  We just sat around and watched a country in Europe partition another one, even as the UN Security Council was meeting to confirm its impotence.

China is being a little more cautious this time about what it says about Russia v Ukrainian turf, but it will print money for Vladimir for awhile the same as China did after Crimea annexation,  until ways around the sanctions are found, like they were before.  They have a lot of business together now anyway with their pipelines under construction.

Anyway every time we see the tip of some iceberg regarding laundered money or questionable tax havens,  it's good to remember we've only seen the tip of an iceberg.  All those not-really-regular banks around the globe in places like Kazakhstan and elsewhere in Central Asia and the Middle East are also just tips of icebergs.

Do we imagine those who have been sanctioned for years now have just sighed and said wow we can hardly even buy a loaf of bread these days...   What do we think they were doing while sanctions were being debated, sitting around waiting for them to hit?

Make no mistake, money talks last and sometimes at lightning speed before sanctions do hit. And there's always the high dollar version of _hawala _when it comes to implementation.  What's a few hundred million or a couple billion in a network of friends when a large asset transfer is desired without visibly "moving money".  It's not different from the far more ordinary amounts and users of _hawala _around the world. Maybe it would take more trust to move a couple billion that way, but then anyone with a huge amount of dough to move has access to ways to ensure that trust is the better part of misplaced valor in thievery.

 The whole thing about the EU being wary of banning Russia from using the Swift exchange, what do we think that wariness is about anyway?   Banning any country from using regular wire transfer would get in the way of some big (if ordinary) and not necessarily very public conduct of "business as usual".    All those rules for banks about knowing your customers don't preclude banks from deciding yeah I know this guy and I know how to have his back while protecting my own a^^ as well.  Meanwhile the money flows in plain view so to speak over Swift because there's always some low man on the totem pole to take the hit if fraud or money laundering or sanctions violations are later discovered.

It's a mess.  It was always going to be a mess.  I was hoping Putin would die peacefully in bed sometime after a big dinner and a few glasses of whatever, with his big dreams for lost empire still unrealized.


----------



## Renzatic

Huntn said:


> Maybe these are new and improved sanctions.




They're considerably more extreme than what's been levied previously. Right now, the intentions are to attempt to prevent Putin from funding any long term military action by crippling the Russian economy.

I guess we'll see how well it works over the coming months.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> Putin counted on the west's uncertainty if he crossed the line.  So, he crossed it.
> 
> And, no one really knows what we should do next.   Putin counts on that too.
> 
> Both situations are temporary, but the damage is done already.  We just sat around and watched a country in Europe partition another one, even as the UN Security Council was meeting to confirm its impotence.
> 
> China is being a little more cautious this time about what it says about Russia v Ukrainian turf, but it will print money for Vladimir for awhile the same as China did after Crimea annexation,  until ways around the sanctions are found, like they were before.  They have a lot of business together now anyway with their pipelines under construction.
> 
> Anyway every time we see the tip of some iceberg regarding laundered money or questionable tax havens,  it's good to remember we've only seen the tip of an iceberg.  All those not-really-regular banks around the globe in places like Kazakhstan and elsewhere in Central Asia and the Middle East are also just tips of icebergs.
> 
> Do we imagine those who have been sanctioned for years now have just sighed and said wow we can hardly even buy a loaf of bread these days...   What do we think they were doing while sanctions were being debated, sitting around waiting for them to hit?
> 
> Make no mistake, money talks last and sometimes at lightning speed before sanctions do hit. And there's always the high dollar version of _hawala _when it comes to implementation.  What's a few hundred million or a couple billion in a network of friends when a large asset transfer is desired without visibly "moving money".  It's not different from the far more ordinary amounts and users of _hawala _around the world. Maybe it would take more trust to move a couple billion that way, but then anyone with a huge amount of dough to move has access to ways to ensure that trust is the better part of misplaced valor in thievery.
> 
> The whole thing about the EU being wary of banning Russia from using the Swift exchange, what do we think that wariness is about anyway?   Banning any country from using regular wire transfer would get in the way of some big (if ordinary) and not necessarily very public conduct of "business as usual".    All those rules for banks about knowing your customers don't preclude banks from deciding yeah I know this guy and I know how to have his back while protecting my own a^^ as well.  Meanwhile the money flows in plain view so to speak over Swift because there's always some low man on the totem pole to take the hit if fraud or money laundering or sanctions violations are later discovered.
> 
> It's a mess.  It was always going to be a mess.  I was hoping Putin would die peacefully in bed sometime after a big dinner and a few glasses of whatever, with his big dreams for lost empire still unrealized.



All those “Panama Papers” that were greeted with a shrug by Congress gave us a hint of who sanctions really hurt. Putin and the other billionaires in the world have illicitly moved money to safe havens all over the globe.

The hope for sanctions will have to be that they cause enough pain to either the general public in Russia or the businessmen who didn’t have enough hidden away to recover. Then they will be able to put pressure on Putin. As for him, he’s set for life regardless of any sanctions.


----------



## Eric

We're all there for them.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/t0kkok


----------



## lizkat

SuperMatt said:


> All those “Panama Papers” that were greeted with a shrug by Congress gave us a hint of who sanctions really hurt. Putin and the other billionaires in the world have illicitly moved money to safe havens all over the globe.
> 
> The hope for sanctions will have to be that they cause enough pain to either the general public in Russia or the businessmen who didn’t have enough hidden away to recover. Then they will be able to put pressure on Putin. As for him, he’s set for life regardless of any sanctions.




Putin possibly will be angered past rationality if political pressure from within Russia (or maybe from China)  comes to bear on him via effects of newly added western sanctions.  

The part that bothers me about "truly crippling" economic sanctions is remembering how dangerous it was for a dog that belonged to one of my brothers to corner a woodchuck at the junction of a couple stone walls and to torment the creature by holding it at bay. 

There finally comes a time when a cornered rodent figures ok I got nothing to lose but I'm not going quietly.  Sure the Doberman broke that sucker's neck after it finally lunged at the dog's throat,  but the vet's bill for damage to the Dobie ran to well over a grand.  Another inch over and the dog would have bled to death inside of a minute.

Putin has nukes.   Is he nuts enough to use them?  I dunno.   Maybe Putin doesn't know either.   Once a war starts, anything can happen.  We're in uncharted territory now. My own worst nightmare is that we might not be sure who all has a nuke, including in that part of the world despite all past efforts to ensure accountability.

So Putin might not be considering using tactical nuclear weapons but no one knows who else might decide that now's the time to stir the pot and throw one into the mix.  Fog of war is fog of war.  There are always people willing to take advantage of it in their own ways for their own purposes.

Putin has escalated past some initial Western expectations by actually shelling facilities in western Ukraine.  But since --as others here have said--  it costs money to have military forces deployed, so it was probably always going to be either stand them down pretty soon or else get on with an invasion.  Until he said he meant to"demilitarize" Ukraine,  I sure didn't think he'd immediately attack sites other than some points in the east that had been offering problematic resistance to the pro-insurgents there.   I guess Putin figured in for a penny,  in for a pound.   It may have been a terrible miscalculation (for everyone).


----------



## Macky-Mac

Renzatic said:


> They're considerably more extreme than what's been levied previously. Right now, the intentions are to attempt to prevent Putin from funding any long term military action by crippling the Russian economy.
> 
> I guess we'll see how well it works over the coming months.




Crippling the Russian economy may be what's being talked about in some sectors, but the international unity required to actually attempt it simply doesn't seem to exist.


----------



## yaxomoxay

lizkat said:


> I sure didn't think he'd immediately attack sites other than some points in the east that had been offering problematic resistance to the pro-insurgents there.




I don’t see how people could think he’d do otherwise. The price of going halfway is always very close to the price of going all the way in. There was no way in heaven on earth that he would’ve gone through all this trouble  just for a couple of miserable eastern regions.


----------



## Macky-Mac

and the possibility of stronger sanctions seems to be slipping away

from The Guardian;



> Kyiv furious as EU wavers on banning Russia from Swift payment system​Ukraine foreign minister voices anger as EU leaders likely to decide against blocking Russia from international payments system
> 
> The EU faced furious remonstrations from Kyiv as Europe’s leaders looked set to hold back from imposing the potentially most damaging sanction on Russia, even as the Kremlin lay siege to Ukraine via land, air and sea....


----------



## Huntn

quagmire said:


> They are already moving military assets to NATO members in Eastern Europe to shore up their defenses.
> 
> But to answer your country to how many non-NATO countries get taken over before NATO reacts? Every single one because NATO will not preemptively attack Russia. A member state needs to be attacked first before NATO will take military action against the attacking country. Keep in mind Article 5 was only activated ONCE in history which is after 9/11.
> 
> Again NATO is all about defense. It isn't an alliance meant to go on the offensive based on perceived threats put upon a member nation. The aggressor needs to act first. No, " Get them before they can get me".



You sound like you are trying to educate me.  I don’t know how you got the idea I think we as part of NATO should be preemptively attacking Russia. I have not said or implied that.

NATO is an organization designed for group defense, without a doubt. And what I said, is when the next country is assaulted by Russia, NATO member states will have to decide if they should just stand by, discuss how many countries they are willing allow be absorbed, or get into the conflict. If you recall the US got support from some NATO Members when we were the aggressors. So as a group, I fully expect NATO to not only discuss the situation, but decide on what is a prudent course of action as members of the international community facing a common threat. And Russia today is a common threat.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Macky-Mac said:


> and the possibility of stronger sanctions seems to be slipping away
> 
> from The Guardian;




That was hours ago.

Given the (legitimate) historical & current security concerns of the Baltic states, and of the security concerns of some of the former Warsaw Pact states, and also, given that sentiment towards possible NATO membership is viewed more warmly and is being floated (in political circles, even in left wing political circles) in (historically neutral) countries such as Sweden and Finland, and, furthermore, given that the outrageous Russian military adventure in Ukraine is going to get nastier (reports are that Kyiv is being shelled by missiles tonight), uglier, and far more intemperate, - and will be resisted vigorously by the Ukrainians - I would expect to see European public (and political) opinion to harden (further) considerably, as it has done already since the start of the week.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> That was hours ago.
> 
> Given the (legitimate) historical & current security concerns of the Baltic states, and of some of the former Warsaw Pact states, and also, given that sentiment towards possible NATO membership is viewed more warmly and is being floated (in political circles, even in left wing political circles) in countries such as Sweden and Finland, and, furthermore, given that the outrageous Russian military adventure in Ukraine is going to get nastier (reports are that Kyiv is being shelled by missiles tonight), uglier, and far more intemperate, - and will be resisted vigorously by the Ukrainians - I would expect to see European public (and political) opinion to harden (further) considerably, as it has done already since the start of the week.




one can only hope that the current crisis will lead to some serious reassessment of the security situation......often the easiest way to get past and then ignore the problem seems to be what inevitably happens


----------



## quagmire

Huntn said:


> You sound like you are trying to educate me.  I don’t know how you got the idea I think we as part of NATO should be preemptively attacking Russia. I have not said or implied that.
> 
> NATO is an organization designed for group defense, without a doubt. And what I said, is when the next country is assaulted by Russia, NATO member states will have to decide if they should just stand by, discuss how many countries they are willing allow be absorbed, or get into the conflict. If you recall the US got support from some NATO Members when we were the aggressors. So as a group, I fully expect NATO to not only discuss the situation, but decide on what is a prudent course of action as members of the international community facing a common threat. And Russia today is a common threat.




So asking how many nations NATO will let fall to Russia is not the right wording then. Proper question is how many countries will the EU tolerate before they take action would be a better phrasing or just European countries in general.


----------



## Huntn

quagmire said:


> So asking how many nations NATO will let fall to Russia is not the right wording then. Proper question is how many countries will the EU tolerate before they take action would be a better phrasing or just European countries in general.



I accept your opinion as yours, but I like my wording.  Who better to consider the outlaw actions of an aggressive nation than a military self defense alliance who is based  in close proximity (the same continent) to the atrocities?


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t see how people could think he’d do otherwise. The price of going halfway is always very close to the price of going all the way in. There was no way in heaven on earth that he would’ve gone through all this trouble  just for a couple of miserable eastern regions.




I think Putin will have overreached in the short term, and it may damage his longer term aspirations because it's going to be costly indeed in terms of the upcoming hits to his country's economy.,

Remarks in the UN General Assembly aside (about respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity), some European states just to west of Ukraine may well have somewhat different views of Russia supporting insurgents in the eastern provinces versus Russia actually attacking points elsewhere in the country, never mind Putin going on to make clear he means to "demilitarize" that entire nation.   This due to the different histories of the two regions in terms of religion, language and culture. 

Also, western Ukraine seems to have been viewed by some Europeans, for better or worse in terms of realities, as a kind of buffer zone between the rest of Europe and "that mess in [eastern] Ukraine".   So this morning was a kind of epiphany, since in fact  there is no buffer zone, and the insurgency in the east of Ukraine has suddenly turned into "war, in Europe".    A war of international aggression in Europe, in 2022.

War on your very doorstep tends to make you think differently about how to regard what you thought was some mess down the road.  There's no way Putin can have gamed out all the potential consequences of that kind of wakeup call in Europe early this morning.

He might have done better to settle for half a loaf at a time... the way he kind of suggested he was doing with his annexation of Crimea.  Half a loaf here, half of half of a loaf there, pretty soon it's half of only a sliver of bread left in the loaf...   but the world is paying much, much more attention this morning after Putin basically went for the whole bakery.  

Still the question remains what to do in response besides sanctions.  Raising war against war is just hellish anyway,  and I suppose Putin banks on the war weariness of the USA putting a damper on much of a military response to his aggression in Ukraine.


----------



## leman

We were communicating with our family in Kyiv, the city is being bombed. I barely go any sleep last night trying to catch some news. I am sad, confused and angry. There is still a slight hope that Ukraine can hold — the difference in morale is staggering and you don't need as many resources for defending as you need for attacking. Regardless, the reaction from the world community, especially our European is disappointing. From long-term historical perspective, I can kind of understand it, I mean, who cares about some Eastern European folks if that's about money and having a working heating system, but I would have hoped that the XIX century crap was behind us. If the world community lets this slide, it will be the end of the democratic trade-oriented world established after the Second World War. Wars of aggression in "civilised" world are back.


----------



## Zoidberg

lizkat said:


> Putin counted on the west's uncertainty if he crossed the line.  So, he crossed it.
> 
> And, no one really knows what we should do next.   Putin counts on that too.
> 
> Both situations are temporary, but the damage is done already.  We just sat around and watched a country in Europe partition another one, even as the UN Security Council was meeting to confirm its impotence.
> 
> China is being a little more cautious this time about what it says about Russia v Ukrainian turf, but it will print money for Vladimir for awhile the same as China did after Crimea annexation,  until ways around the sanctions are found, like they were before.  They have a lot of business together now anyway with their pipelines under construction.
> 
> Anyway every time we see the tip of some iceberg regarding laundered money or questionable tax havens,  it's good to remember we've only seen the tip of an iceberg.  All those not-really-regular banks around the globe in places like Kazakhstan and elsewhere in Central Asia and the Middle East are also just tips of icebergs.
> 
> Do we imagine those who have been sanctioned for years now have just sighed and said wow we can hardly even buy a loaf of bread these days...   What do we think they were doing while sanctions were being debated, sitting around waiting for them to hit?
> 
> Make no mistake, money talks last and sometimes at lightning speed before sanctions do hit. And there's always the high dollar version of _hawala _when it comes to implementation.  What's a few hundred million or a couple billion in a network of friends when a large asset transfer is desired without visibly "moving money".  It's not different from the far more ordinary amounts and users of _hawala _around the world. Maybe it would take more trust to move a couple billion that way, but then anyone with a huge amount of dough to move has access to ways to ensure that trust is the better part of misplaced valor in thievery.
> 
> The whole thing about the EU being wary of banning Russia from using the Swift exchange, what do we think that wariness is about anyway?   Banning any country from using regular wire transfer would get in the way of some big (if ordinary) and not necessarily very public conduct of "business as usual".    All those rules for banks about knowing your customers don't preclude banks from deciding yeah I know this guy and I know how to have his back while protecting my own a^^ as well.  Meanwhile the money flows in plain view so to speak over Swift because there's always some low man on the totem pole to take the hit if fraud or money laundering or sanctions violations are later discovered.
> 
> It's a mess.  It was always going to be a mess.  I was hoping Putin would die peacefully in bed sometime after a big dinner and a few glasses of whatever, with his big dreams for lost empire still unrealized.



Yes. The lesson learned here is that if you invade quickly enough, you will get away with it because by the time the West agrees on the response, it will already be over. The West will basically shrug their shoulders, tap your wrist and say “don’t do it again!”.

Also, with bitcoin, it will be even easier for them to evade the sanctions.

A former comedian and a former boxer have done their best as politicians and are getting ready to –probably– die, while professional Italian and Belgian politicians are negotiating excluding luxury goods and jewels from the sanctions because Russian oligarchs are important customers.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## leman

theSeb said:


> View attachment 11938
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497128120746401799/




I hope they continue coming in like this. Easier to burn. Bastards.


----------



## leman

Same area, probably same armored vehicle deliberately crushing a civilian  car:









						verkhovna_rada_ua
					

You can view and join @verkhovna_rada_ua right away.




					t.me
				




Luckily, the car driver survived and was rescued by the neighborhood community

https://t.me/hk_kiev1/11252

Frankly, I really don’t understand Russian logic here. I mean, they could probably hold some eastern cities - folks there are generally apolitical  and will cooperate. But Kyiv? It’s a big city with patriotic and armed population that will not tolerate occupation.

P.S. More that 10000 assault rifles have been distributed in Kyiv to trained volunteers. That is going to a nightmare for any occupant to hold.


----------



## User.45

> LONDON — Britain’s defense secretary, Ben Wallace, said on Friday that the verified assessment of his country’s intelligence services was that Russian forces “hadn’t achieved their goals so far” and had failed to meet any of their objectives in the first day of their invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> *Mr. Wallace, speaking to the BBC on Friday morning, said President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had so far failed in an attempt to take a key airport north of Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital. Russian forces also lost approximately 450 troops and a significant number of tanks, and have so far not broken through the line of control in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, he said.*
> 
> “Putin had in his mind and in his articles and speeches that somehow Ukrainians were waiting to be liberated by the great czar, and that he would turn up in Ukraine and they would all cheer him,” Mr. Wallace said. “Of course we all saw that’s not true.”
> He added that while Ukrainians were bravely standing up for their values, Mr. Putin had also grossly miscalculated the support he would receive at home.
> “It shows how out of touch with his own people he is,” Mr. Wallace said, pointing to antiwar protests in several Russian cities.
> Mr. Wallace repeated that he had no intention of ordering British forces into a ground battle in Ukraine, despite what he called Russia’s “naked military aggression.”
> “I said very clearly about a month ago that we are not going to be sending British troops to fight directly with Russian troops,” he said.
> Instead, Mr. Wallace again emphasized the new sanctions imposed by Britain, which include a ban on Russia’s Aeroflot flights. Russia retaliated against those actions on Friday morning by banning British flights from its own airspace.



from NYT









						Ukraine crisis: Russia has failed to take any of its major objectives, lost 450 personnel and made 'limited progress', Ministry of Defence says
					

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace tells Sky News it is the UK government's view that Russian President Vladimir Putin intends "to invade the whole of Ukraine". But he said Russia is "behind its hoped-for timetable" in the military action against its neighbour.




					news.sky.com
				




With video.


----------

Thinking about this, Biden's strategy definitely achieved one thing. It placed Putin in a position where the decision to invade would be unambiguously perceived as an act of aggression. This has been the biggest failure of Russian propaganda since Putin took power, IMHO. Not even Russian propaganda sites could produce a coherent narrative to justify the invasion and this is something really new - at least to me. Putin took a risk that is unlike him and the only way I can resolve this uncharacteristic behavior is that there is a significant change in his personal circumstances where the risk taken became worthwhile.

So Putin has a relatively low morale invading army. International condemnation even by close allies and to date, a slower-than-expected invasion. I'm deeply disappointed by Western powers, however. There should have been a much more robust and decisive economic response primed and ready to be triggered at a moment like this. Going all in with sanctions in the acute phase of this invasion could save the lives of both Ukrainian forces and civilians and it's a _moral obligation_ (something I don't take lightly). It's also insane to see how it's not obvious to everyone that this might by a direct invasion against Ukraine, but it's an indirect attack against democracies. Putin's propaganda machine might recoup later on and then it will be much harder to achieve the same impact.

Lastly, this is why I hated Bush's rhetoric on spreading Democracy. It's an idea, a way of life, a principle that has to be congruent with the citizens of a nation. You can't force it. So the verbiage of "defending democracy" in places that aren't ready for such is nearly completely meaningless in my opinion. Protecting Democracy is actually about protecting nations like Ukraine.


----------



## Agent47

leman said:


> We were communicating with our family in Kyiv, the city is being bombed. I barely go any sleep last night trying to catch some news. I am sad, confused and angry. There is still a slight hope that Ukraine can hold — the difference in morale is staggering and you don't need as many resources for defending as you need for attacking. Regardless, the reaction from the world community, especially our European is disappointing. From long-term historical perspective, I can kind of understand it, I mean, who cares about some Eastern European folks if that's about money and having a working heating system, but I would have hoped that the XIX century crap was behind us. If the world community lets this slide, it will be the end of the democratic trade-oriented world established after the Second World War. Wars of aggression in "civilised" world are back.



I agree, its disappointing. As a European I am ashamed of the west (=us) not supporting Ukraine as we should.

Pretty much each person I spoke to feels the same. Its just - western politicians are mostly cowards, dilettantes and certaily not the leaders we should have.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Zoidberg

Just a quick hypothetical question. Given Russia's history of leadership backstabbing, what are the chances –if the invasion becomes too costly, the sanctions somehow start coming in, and so on– of the Russian armed forces ousting Putin out?

His security must be insane, and he must be –rightly, in a way– paranoid, but I can't imagine he's making a lot of friends with this, and fear only goes so far. The video of him dressing down his own intelligence advisor was chilling to see.


----------



## Arkitect

Ah well, better late than never.


> *EU preparing to freeze Putin and Lavrov’s assets*
> Eleni Varvitsioti, Henry Foy and Sam Fleming in Brussels
> 
> The EU is preparing to freeze the assets of Vladimir Putin and his foreign minister Sergei Lavrov under the sanctions package being pushed through on Friday, according to three people familiar with the matter.
> 
> Foreign ministers are planning to approve the sanctions package this afternoon, along with a number of measures against Russian banks and industry, the people said.
> 
> Putin and Lavrov will not, however, be subject to a ban on travelling under the measures, underlining the EU’s willingness to keep symbolic diplomatic possibilities open.
> 
> The matter was discussed by leaders late on Thursday, with a large number of them speaking in favour of the idea.



FT Link Paywall


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> Just a quick hypothetical question. Given Russia's history of leadership backstabbing, what are the chances –if the invasion becomes too costly, the sanctions somehow start coming in, and so on– of the Russian armed forces ousting Putin out?
> 
> His security must be insane, and he must be –rightly, in a way– paranoid, but I can't imagine he's making a lot of friends with this, and fear only goes so far. The video of him dressing down his own intelligence advisor was chilling to see.



Ha! In Russia Fear goes a loooong way.
I certainly doubt a Kremlin/Palace coup will happen.

This is all about MRGA! aka, Make Russia Great Again.

Nostalgia for a perceived lost past is a powerful drug.

_"Sure, we have to queue a day for half a loaf of black bread… but you now what? We have respect! And "The Others" fear us."_


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Just a quick hypothetical question. Given Russia's history of leadership backstabbing, what are the chances –if the invasion becomes too costly, the sanctions somehow start coming in, and so on– of the Russian armed forces ousting Putin out?



That suggests that there are - or may be - individuals (within whatever the Cabinet/Politburo/Executive/Council of Ministers is called these days) with an independent power base who could possibly mount a challenge to his leadership (or support someone who does).

Given Mr Putin's own paranoia, and given his increasing control of all of the levers of state power, I'm not sure that this is the case.


Zoidberg said:


> His security must be insane, and he must be –rightly, in a way– paranoid, but I can't imagine he's making a lot of friends with this, and fear only goes so far. The video of him dressing down his own intelligence advisor was chilling to see.



Agreed.

Both profoundly chilling and extraordinarily telling.



P_X said:


> Putin took a risk that is unlike him and the only way I can resolve this uncharacteristic behavior is that there is a *significant change in his personal circumstances* where the risk taken became worthwhile.




You make a very interesting point, and the same question has crossed my mind.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Thinking about this, Biden's strategy definitely achieved one thing. It placed Putin in a position where the decision to invade would be unambiguously perceived as an act of aggression. This has been the biggest failure of Russian propaganda since Putin took power, IMHO. Not even Russian propaganda sites could produce a coherent narrative to justify the invasion and this is something really new - at least to me.



Very true.

And your comment about a "low morale invading army" is also true, more true in some ways - despite its marked advantage in materiél and resources - than is immediately obvious.

For, while slaughtering Muslim Chechens (very much an obvious "Other", physically, theologically, culturally) can possibly be justified on propaganda and security grounds, it is much harder (for a Russian audience, and for a Russian army) to digest a message that simultaneously calls for the warm and passionate embrace of one's fellow (possibly oblivious) Slavs, (especially, when they live in the place where you have persuaded yourself is the cradle of your civilisation), and crudely calls for their elimination on the grounds of their being "neo-Nazis," among other deficiencies and delinquencies.

Killing fellow Slavs - a people and culture you also think of as "brothers" - won't go down well with a Russian army, especially when that is couched, framed and expressed in such crude and racist terms.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> You make a very interesting point, and the same question has crossed my mind.











						Putin, riddled with cancer & suffering from Parkinson’s, preparing to step down – claims conspiracy-loving Western media
					

The Russian president is the world’s sickest leader, if you believe reports in Western media, that is. Popular US and UK outlets are now claiming Vladimir Putin has Parkinson’s, underwent secret surgery and is battling cancer.




					www.rt.com
				



I remember these news and there wasn't any hard or even soft evidence to corroborate, but I'm starting to revisit this rumor, because if added to the equation, everything would suddenly start making sense.



Scepticalscribe said:


> Very true.
> 
> And your comment about a "low morale invading army" is also true, more true in some ways - despite its marked advantage in materiél and resources - than is immediately obvious.
> 
> For, while slaughtering Muslim Chechens (very much an obvious "Other", physically, theologically, culturally) can possibly be justified on propaganda and security grounds, it is much harder (for a Russian audience, and for a Russian army) to digest a message that simultaneously calls for the warm and passionate embrace of one's fellow (perhaps oblivious) Slavs, (especially when they live in the place where you have persuaded yourself is where the cradle of your civilisation is to be found), and crudely calls for their elimination on the grounds of their being "neo-Nazis," among other deficiencies and delinquencies.
> 
> Killing fellow Slavs - a people and culture you also think of as "brothers" - won't go down well with a Russian army, especially when that is couched, framed and expressed in such crude and racist terms.



Exactly. A key thing about military and human nature is that you need to dehumanize the enemy to make killing easier. Out-groups with language barriers are easier to dehumanize. People who speak your language AND supposed to be your brethren AND the justification of the very invasion is too "free these people" (and not exterminate them like in WW2...) aren't motivating targets. I cannot see the Russian forces' morale go up over time. Ukraine can be hacked, air-stricken, radiated, but to occupy, you need foot soldiers on ground. That's where I have increasingly difficult time seeing a long-term Russian victory.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Putin, riddled with cancer & suffering from Parkinson’s, preparing to step down – claims conspiracy-loving Western media
> 
> 
> The Russian president is the world’s sickest leader, if you believe reports in Western media, that is. Popular US and UK outlets are now claiming Vladimir Putin has Parkinson’s, underwent secret surgery and is battling cancer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rt.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remember these news and there wasn't any hard or even soft evidence to corroborate, but I'm starting to revisit this rumor, because if added to the equation, everything would suddenly start making sense.



Actually, strange to relate, (and I was wondering about this only last night), a number of years ago, a Russian journalist, (in fact, the TASS correspondent) told me (over lunch) that Mr Putin was thought to be very ill.

At the time, I must say - I must confess - that I didn't actually believe him, and even darkly harboured the suspicion that he was "feeding" me a story. 

That is the problem with a media so thoroughly versed in mendacity and character assassination; when they are telling a story that may have some truth to it, you simply don't believe them.



P_X said:


> Exactly. A key thing about military and human nature is that you need to dehumanize the enemy to make killing easier. Out-groups with language barriers are easier to dehumanize. People who speak your language AND supposed to be your brethren AND the justification of the very invasion is too "free these people" (and not exterminate them like in WW2...) aren't motivating targets. I cannot see the Russian forces' morale go up over time. Ukraine can be hacked, air-stricken, radiated, but to occupy, you need foot soldiers on ground. That's where I have increasingly difficult time seeing a long-term Russian victory.



A long term occupation will not be accepted by the population of central and west Ukraine, and, while Russians (that distancing and othering vocabulary again) may well swallow mendacious nonsense about "duplicitous" Asiastics, "murderous" Muslims, and "ungrateful" Balts, using such crude and crass verbs as "elimination" - in this context - about fellow Slavs (in the place that is supposedly the cradle of your own civilisation and culture, no less) is a lot harder to accept.

Moreover, the disproportate nature of the Russian military action is also striking; this is excessive and disproportionate and impossible to justify on any grounds, militarily, politically, or otherwise. 

There has been no attempt whatsoever at a more measured, more moderate, approach: Instead, it is over-whelming force against an invented enemy.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

ericwn said:


> Unfortunately I never tried any recipes for that dish and haven’t really eaten it in ages, probably 15 or so years ago before I moved from Germany to Ireland (and then to Canada). I should look into this stuff…
> 
> Also while on topic, have you ever tried the Dutch snack Bamischijf? Loved it as kids!
> 
> Also, for these border- area dishes you could browse the German site Chefkoch.de and then if needed parse the recipe through a translation site. They have some good content.






Zoidberg said:


> Just a quick hypothetical question. Given Russia's history of leadership backstabbing, what are the chances –if the invasion becomes too costly, the sanctions somehow start coming in, and so on– of the Russian armed forces ousting Putin out?
> 
> His security must be insane, and he must be –rightly, in a way– paranoid, but I can't imagine he's making a lot of friends with this, and fear only goes so far. The video of him dressing down his own intelligence advisor was chilling to see.






theSeb said:


> To understand Russia you have to consider that the government operates very much along the lines of a mafia, coupled with KGB efficiency. Putin is the "don". The early / mid 90s power vacuum in Russia, as the USSR fell apart, allowed those two groups (Russian mafia + KGB officers / other USSR era officials) to work together. Putin didn't get to where he was by accident. He outmanoeuvred, or removed, all of his opponents.



While the world came ominously close to the brink of catastrophe during the Cuban Missile Crisis (and Russian/Soviet horror in political and military high circles were not known publicly at the time), Nikita Khrushchev was not actually removed from office until the summer of 1964, two years later.

In other words, even if there is an appetite for a leadership challenge, means, motive and opportunity may take some time to arrange.

One of the major problems with autocratic systems is the perennially pressing issue of how to set about regime change (peacefully) without destroying your system of government and/or country in the process.

In our world, (legitimate) elections give the victor a mandate (and the moral right to rule), but - of equal importance - (legitimate) elections are a mechanism that enable or permit a peaceful change of regime, one that allows the defeated candidate (candidates/party) to depart from the political stage without fear of reprisal (unles they have broken laws while in office), whereas people such as Mr Putin tend to have to face the grim chocie of dying in their beds or being over-thrown (usually violently).


----------



## Arkitect

P_X said:


> Putin, riddled with cancer & suffering from Parkinson’s, preparing to step down – claims conspiracy-loving Western media
> 
> 
> The Russian president is the world’s sickest leader, if you believe reports in Western media, that is. Popular US and UK outlets are now claiming Vladimir Putin has Parkinson’s, underwent secret surgery and is battling cancer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rt.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remember these news and there wasn't any hard or even soft evidence to corroborate, but I'm starting to revisit this rumor, because if added to the equation, everything would suddenly start making sense.






Scepticalscribe said:


> Actually, strange to relate, (and I was wondering about this only last night), a number of years ago, a Russian journalist, (in fact, the TASS correspondent) told me (over lunch) that Mr *Putin was thought to be very ill*.




100% agree about this possibility.

A man who knows his time on earth is numbered;
A man who may feel he needs to leave a mark in history;
A man with few scruples about the human cost to his ambitions…

A dangerous man indeed.


----------



## Agent47

According to media, the airport has been recaptured by Ukrainian forces


----------



## lizkat

Agent47 said:


> I agree, its disappointing. As a European I am ashamed of the west (=us) not supporting Ukraine as we should.
> 
> Pretty much each person I spoke to feels the same. Its just - western politicians are mostly cowards, dilettantes and certaily not the leaders we should have.




It's like in the USA, all the money in politics now --coupled with high levels of invective and even death threats during campaigns (and ongoing during governance)-- tends to drive out qualified individuals and attract either wealthy narcissists or pseudo-populist extremists.

A drive towards autocracy naturally ensues, but in a lot of cases the newer leaders are incompetent even if on paper they have the ability to move certain levers of power once in office.  The outcomes are erratic and depend both on how well the ground was laid in the agencies reporting to the autocrat and what the rest of the governmental structure looks like. 

 In the case of Putin though, he's not new and hardly an incompetent,  and there is a component of post-Soviet society that long since began to yearn for "the old order" during the chaotic years under Yeltsin and Gorbachev, even if it took a lot of very selective memory to get there.    Putin is thuggish but also entirely capable of nuance where it's called for, e.g. his brutal crackdowns in Chechnya contrast with his care not to characterize terrorists as "Islamic terrorists" and his publicized attendance at ceremonies for the opening of any new mosques.  The main thing though is his projection of order and strength.  To be on the wrong end of it at home in Russia now is two things:   uncomfortable, but familiar and so ironically also comforting, at least to those who remember the chaos after the initial joys of _glasnost._

Still, over time, Putin's methodically orchestrated changes to the structure of post-Soviet Russian government,  and the economic and psychological effect on Russians of living in a kleptocracy -- in a thieving den of oligarchs tolerated by Putin (so long as they kick back dough to him and stay out of opposition politics)--  have been bound to cause discontent not only among the citizenry but within government circles. 

Everyone knows Putin was KGB, and no one is sure what is the day to day reach of the successor FSB or other less formal means of intimidation of Russian citizens (aside from mass telephonic surveillance).   Every time there's some widely publicized death --by poisoning, by "falling out a window"-- of one of Putin's perceived enemies at home or abroad, the mystique within Russia of Putin's omipotence grows. 

And yet there's no way Putin or any autocrat can control the thoughts of the plain citizen or the weary number-crunching bureaucrat or the disgruntled soldier in Russia, say one who remembers having been sent to patrol the godforsaken border of Tajikistan with China in times when resupply was a joke along lines of "Is there any news from Moscow?" during an 8-year deployment...   or is now sent to invade a western neighbor whose citizens look just like him and likely speak at least some Russian, since that language is still at least a _lingua franca_ if not first language in homes of eastern Europe.

So what are they thinking this week, all those governed by Putin?  Not even Vladimir knows, and the Russian press is cowed enough by now that they're not going to inquire and then run color pieces as filler in their state-directed news of the war on Ukraine.  The press certainly might be directed to some pro-Putin opinion.  But if one is a citizen inside Russia now and some acquaintance asks what to think of the situation in Ukraine this morning,  one might be inclined to strive for a noncommittal response, even though there are photos of protests already starting to spring up.   Students and older activists are always the first to bring idealism to the street.  It doesn't mean they are alone.  It means others are more cautious.

Fear of being found out doesn't mean Putin doesn't have some fairly organized opposition inside Russia.  It does mean they must bide their time, possibly until he dies.  If he's ill, and ill enough to have a pretty short lease on life now,   not only is he more dangerous but so also is the post-Putin situation:   a non-democratic country forced to switch horses while running a major military operation is primed to let the military figure out what to do next. 

The question though remains whether rumors of Putin's illness really are just rumor, or even a  ruse perpetrated by the man himself, to help ferret out hidden opposition,  or whether it's true that he's gravely ill and so in a position to figure his legacy will be that he heroically worked to restore all due glory to Russia.  Either way a man who would fake fatal illness to discover traitors or who would launch a 21st century attack on a sovereign neighbor in Europe is an extremely dangerous enemy. 

One can almost understand the west's reluctance to engage now decisively with a guy who's been clever at revealing or concealing over time whatever he wishes broadcast or hidden,  but it's difficult to forgive the West's not having gamed this out far better ahead of time. It's not like they didn't know this day was coming. The western alliances have ended up playing it the way corporations play the quarter-end:  "oh hell it's nearly here, ok let's just crunch out how it would fly to sell half of WXYZ and announce a merger with ABCD, let's have this done by 2pm so we can announce it after the market closes."


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> Putin, riddled with cancer & suffering from Parkinson’s, preparing to step down – claims conspiracy-loving Western media
> 
> 
> The Russian president is the world’s sickest leader, if you believe reports in Western media, that is. Popular US and UK outlets are now claiming Vladimir Putin has Parkinson’s, underwent secret surgery and is battling cancer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rt.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remember these news and there wasn't any hard or even soft evidence to corroborate, but I'm starting to revisit this rumor, because if added to the equation, everything would suddenly start making sense.
> 
> 
> Exactly. A key thing about military and human nature is that you need to dehumanize the enemy to make killing easier. Out-groups with language barriers are easier to dehumanize. People who speak your language AND supposed to be your brethren AND the justification of the very invasion is too "free these people" (and not exterminate them like in WW2...) aren't motivating targets. I cannot see the Russian forces' morale go up over time. Ukraine can be hacked, air-stricken, radiated, but to occupy, you need foot soldiers on ground. That's where I have increasingly difficult time seeing a long-term Russian victory.



A likely goal in my mind would be to set up a puppet government and then vacate to whatever degree Russian troops can leave.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> a Russian journalist, (in fact, the TASS correspondent) told me (over lunch) that Mr Putin was thought to be very ill.



While I certainly can’t dispute or confirm Mr Putin’s health condition, I am getting increasingly frustrated about this issue (not you telling us, of course).

there’s this journalistic fetish about leaders being sick and this is sometimes used to justify the “it’s a crazy decision” position, bringing it down to a personal level instead of the geopolitical. Trump is sick. Biden is sick. Putin is sick. Draghi is sick. Pope Francis is sick. Holy shit.

Again, not attacking you for reporting your personal experience. I personally heard the Pope Francis one before it hit the newspapers months ago by not one, not two, but three people in his inner circle. Didn’t take them too seriously because the Vatican has more gossip than the National Enquirer.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> It's like in the USA, all the money in politics now --coupled with high levels of invective and even death threats during campaigns (and ongoing during governance)-- tends to drive out qualified individuals and attract either wealthy narcissists or pseudo-populist extremists.
> 
> A drive towards autocracy naturally ensues, but in a lot of cases the newer leaders are incompetent even if on paper they have the ability to move certain levers of power once in office.  The outcomes are erratic and depend both on how well the ground was laid in the agencies reporting to the autocrat and what the rest of the governmental structure looks like.
> 
> In the case of Putin though, he's not new and hardly an incompetent,  and there is a component of post-Soviet society that long since began to yearn for "the old order" during the chaotic years under Yeltsin and Gorbachev, even if it took a lot of very selective memory to get there.    Putin is thuggish but also entirely capable of nuance where it's called for, e.g. his brutal crackdowns in Chechnya contrast with his care not to characterize terrorists as "Islamic terrorists" and his publicized attendance at ceremonies for the opening of any new mosques.  The main thing though is his projection of order and strength.  To be on the wrong end of it at home in Russia now is two things:   uncomfortable, but familiar and so ironically also comforting, at least to those who remember the chaos after the initial joys of _glasnost._
> 
> Still, over time, Putin's methodically orchestrated changes to the structure of post-Soviet Russian government,  and the economic and psychological effect on Russians of living in a kleptocracy -- in a thieving den of oligarchs tolerated by Putin (so long as they kick back dough to him and stay out of opposition politics)--  have been bound to cause discontent not only among the citizenry but within government circles.
> 
> Everyone knows Putin was KGB, and no one is sure what is the day to day reach of the successor FSB or other less formal means of intimidation of Russian citizens (aside from mass telephonic surveillance).   Every time there's some widely publicized death --by poisoning, by "falling out a window"-- of one of Putin's perceived enemies at home or abroad, the mystique within Russia of Putin's omipotence grows.
> 
> And yet there's no way Putin or any autocrat can control the thoughts of the plain citizen or the weary number-crunching bureaucrat or the disgruntled soldier in Russia, say one who remembers having been sent to patrol the godforsaken border of Tajikistan with China in times when resupply was a joke along lines of "Is there any news from Moscow?" during an 8-year deployment...   or is now sent to invade a western neighbor whose citizens look just like him and likely speak at least some Russian, since that language is still at least a _lingua franca_ if not first language in homes of eastern Europe.
> 
> So what are they thinking this week, all those governed by Putin?  Not even Vladimir knows, and the Russian press is cowed enough by now that they're not going to inquire and then run color pieces as filler in their state-directed news of the war on Ukraine.  The press certainly might be directed to some pro-Putin opinion.  But if one is a citizen inside Russia now and some acquaintance asks what to think of the situation in Ukraine this morning,  one might be inclined to strive for a noncommittal response, even though there are photos of protests already starting to spring up.   Students and older activists are always the first to bring idealism to the street.  It doesn't mean they are alone.  It means others are more cautious.
> 
> Fear of being found out doesn't mean Putin doesn't have some fairly organized opposition inside Russia.  It does mean they must bide their time, possibly until he dies.  If he's ill, and ill enough to have a pretty short lease on life now,   not only is he more dangerous but so also is the post-Putin situation:   a non-democratic country forced to switch horses while running a major military operation is primed to let the military figure out what to do next.
> 
> The question though remains whether rumors of Putin's illness really are just rumor, or even a  ruse perpetrated by the man himself, to help ferret out hidden opposition,  or whether it's true that he's gravely ill and so in a position to figure his legacy will be that he heroically worked to restore all due glory to Russia.  Either way a man who would fake fatal illness to discover traitors or who would launch a 21st century attack on a sovereign neighbor in Europe is an extremely dangerous enemy.
> 
> One can almost understand the west's reluctance to engage now decisively with a guy who's been clever at revealing or concealing over time whatever he wishes broadcast or hidden,  but it's difficult to forgive the West's not having gamed this out far better ahead of time. It's not like they didn't know this day was coming. The western alliances have ended up playing it the way corporations play the quarter-end:  "oh hell it's nearly here, ok let's just crunch out how it would fly to sell half of WXYZ and announce a merger with ABCD, let's have this done by 2pm so we can announce it after the market closes."



As if we don’t want to disturb our economies? In the US, regarding the economy, I fear what will be elected in 2022 and more in 2024 if energy prices stay high. And if I hear anyone lamenting the good ole Trumpian Days, I’ll .


----------



## yaxomoxay

I usually prefer Foreign Affairs, but The Atlantic has been superb lately 









						How Far Will Biden Go to Stop Putin?
					

The underlying purpose of American foreign policy is to prove that democracy is “not a relic of history.”




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

According to reports (Guardian, Twitter, others), Mr Putin has called upon the Ukrainian Army to over throw the Ukrainian government led by Mr Zelensky.

"Take power into your own hands," he is reported to have advised the Ukrainian Army, adding, "and do not let a gang of drug addicts and neo-fascists use your families as human shields."

A few things to note:


1. Mr Putin is now clear that one of his key aims - one of his main aims - in Ukraine is regime change.

Yes, we suspected this, but now we know it.

2.  I would suspect that Ukrainian resistance is greater (and more passionate) than Mr Putin may have expected (or his sycophants led him to believe).

Moreover, while Ukrainian resistance to this invasion may be more motivated than expected (by Russia), I also suspect that Russian resistance to killing fellow Slavs may be greater than Mr Putin expected; in other words, the Russian Army may be less enthusiastic with elements of this assignment than had been expected prior to the invasion.

Certainly, it is significant that this appeal has been made to the Ukrainian Army, who are clearly defending themselves - and their country - far better than expected (and both their motivation will be quite high and, moreover, they will enjoy considerable - genuine - public support).

3.  "Drug addicts": This is clearly an attack - a personal attack - on Mr Zelensky.

I observed the various rounds of the presidential election in Ukraine in 2019, and this was one of the attacks (made by his opponent, the outgoing, defeated president, Mr Poroshenko - who today was photographed holding weaponry and making clear his total support for the Ukrainian government) - targeted at Mr Zelensky.

Actually, some of the attack ads were as basic as name calling: Thus, "drug addict" (the Poroshenko campaign re Mr Zelensky) and "alcoholic" (the Zelensky campaign against Mr Poroshenko).

"Neo-fascists": Self-evident, re WW2; But - an accusation that is baseless and quite ridiculous in a "hearts'n'minds" campaign aimed at one's "Slavic brethren".  You can't simultaneously be a brother to be embraced and a neo-Nazi best eliminated.

4.  Other reports (from Israeli, Armenian sources among others) say that Russia is open to talks in a "neutral" venue (presumably Minsk) on the condition that Ukraine "disarms".

Elsewhere,

5: The Council of Europe have suspended Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> While I certainly can’t dispute or confirm Mr Putin’s health condition, I am getting increasingly frustrated about this issue (not you telling us, of course).
> 
> there’s this journalistic fetish about leaders being sick and this is sometimes used to justify the “it’s a crazy decision” position, bringing it down to a personal level instead of the geopolitical. Trump is sick. Biden is sick. Putin is sick. Draghi is sick. Pope Francis is sick. Holy shit.
> 
> Again, not attacking you for reporting your personal experience. I personally heard the Pope Francis one before it hit the newspapers months ago by not one, not two, but three people in his inner circle. Didn’t take them too seriously because the Vatican has more gossip than the National Enquirer.



Leaders’ personalities definitely play into their decisions, some of those personalities reach a state where decisions they make  can legitimately be tied to a faulty, sick mind. Trump definitely qualifies as such.. Now the rumors of Putin being physically sick, or just the evolution of a megalomaniac, someone drunk on power, I can’t say.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> Leaders’ personalities definitely play into their decisions, some of those personalities reach a state where decisions they make  can legitimately be tied to a faulty, sick mind. Trump definitely qualifies as such.. Now the rumors of Putin being physically sick, or just the evolution of a megalomaniac, someone drunk on power, I can’t say.



I don’t disagree that personalities and health are decisional factors for leaders (as for us). But unless proven somehow, I am certainly not going to fall for the gossip. Heck I remember hearing stuff in 2000 even about Mr Berlusconi as terminally ill. 22 years later he’s still alive and somewhat well.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> While I certainly can’t dispute or confirm Mr Putin’s health condition, I am getting increasingly frustrated about this issue (not you telling us, of course).
> 
> there’s this journalistic fetish about leaders being sick and this is sometimes used to justify the “it’s a crazy decision” position, bringing it down to a personal level instead of the geopolitical. Trump is sick. Biden is sick. Putin is sick. Draghi is sick. Pope Francis is sick. Holy shit.
> 
> Again, not attacking you for reporting your personal experience. I personally heard the Pope Francis one before it hit the newspapers months ago by not one, not two, but three people in his inner circle. Didn’t take them too seriously because the Vatican has more gossip than the National Enquirer.



I take your point completely, but hadn't considered this possibility until it crossed my mind last night, (when I remembered my lunch) and I read @P_X's post this afternoon.

In fact, as I wrote in my post, when this possibility was first put to me, (by a potentially credible source - a Russian journalist - who may have been worth paying heed to) a few years ago, originally, I discounted it.

However, it would be foolish to exclude the possibility of failing health entirely, and, while I don't argue that this is true (not least because I don't know, and cannot state this, not with any degree of authority), I do merely note that it is a possibility, one that should not be entirely discounted as offering some sort of explanation for otherwise inexplicable actions.

What is interesting is the disproportionate nature of this invasion; Mr Putin - I believe - could have contented himself with an occupation of the eastern regions, even with an occupation of the "enhanced" eastern regions of Ukraine, and there was a very good chance that he would have gotten away with it, not least because a considerable proportion of the population in those regions look to Russia culturally, linguistically, historically, politically and so on.

Then, the subsequent debate (in the west, also) would have been about reconciling the rest of Ukraine (a process that would take years, if not decades) to this regrettable outcome.

But, that is not what is happening: This is disproportionate, excessive, over-kill, - vicious, vindictive and vengeful - and utterly unjustified and unjustifiable by any measurable yardstick.

Even the Russian propaganda efforts have been risible.

And that prompts questions about Mr Putin's judgment, which has been poor on this occasion (in my opinion).

Thus, questions about failing (or impaired) judgment, will also serve to raise inevitable queries about factors (such as matters of health, both physical and mental) that may have had an effect (for good or ill) on that judgment.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> According to reports (Guardian, Twitter, others), Mr Putin has called upon the Ukrainian Army to over throw the Ukrainian government led by Mr Zelensky.
> 
> "Take power into your own hands," he is reported to have advised the Ukrainian Army, adding, "and do not let a gang of drug addicts and neo-fascists use your families as human shields."
> 
> A few things to note:
> 
> 
> 1. Mr Putin is now clear that one of his key aims - one of his main aims - in Ukraine is regime change.
> 
> Yes, we suspected this, but now we know it.
> 
> 2.  I would suspect that Ukrainian resistance is greater (and more passionate) than Mr Putin may have expected (or his sycophants led him to believe).
> 
> Moreover, while Ukrainian resistance to this invasion may be more motivated than expected (by Russia), I also suspect that Russian resistance to killing fellow Slavs may be greater than Mr Putin expected; in other words, the Russian Army may be less enthusiastic with elements of this assignment than had been expected prior to the invasion.
> 
> Certainly, it is significant that this appeal has been made to the Ukrainian Army, who are clearly defending themselves - and their country - far better than expected (and both their motivation will be quite high and, moreover, they will enjoy considerable - genuine - public support).
> 
> 3.  "Drug addicts": This is clearly an attack - a personal attack - on Mr Zelensky.
> 
> I observed the various rounds of the presidential election in Ukraine in 2019, and this was one of the attacks (made by his opponent, the outgoing, defeated president, Mr Poroshenko - who today was photographed holding weaponry and making clear his total support for the Ukrainian government) - targeted at Mr Zelensky.
> 
> Actually, some of the attack ads were as basic as name calling: Thus, "drug addict" (the Poroshenko campaign re Mr Zelensky) and "alcoholic" (the Zelensky campaign against Mr Poroshenko).
> 
> "Neo-fascists": Self-evident, re WW2; But - an accusation that is baseless and quite ridiculous in a "hearts'n'minds" campaign aimed at one's "Slavic brethren".  You can't simultaneously be a brother to be embraced and a neo-Nazi best eliminated.
> 
> 4.  Other reports (from Israeli, Armenian sources among others) say that Russia is open to talks in a "neutral" venue (presumably Minsk) on the condition that Ukraine "disarms".
> 
> Elsewhere,
> 
> 5: The Council of Europe have suspended Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.



Ukrainians appear quite reluctant to allow Russians to take over. Putin is already tossing the idea of diplomacy out there. This tells me that he is meeting more resistance than he expected.

I saw images on The NY Times of destroyed bridges. The Ukrainians destroyed their own bridges to stop Russia’s advance. That is NOT the action of people that welcome Russia. As mentioned before, Zelensky got 73% of the vote in the last election.

Has Putin miscalculated? As others mentioned, he has been surrounded by “yes men" for many years. So it’s possible he honestly believed a larger number of Ukrainians would accept the takeover.

If Putin does pull out of Kyiv, he will most likely try to hold onto the separatist regions. No matter if he pulls back or not, sanctions need to be continued. Russia needs to be an international pariah as long as Putin is their leader. It’s time for aggressive “green energy” pushes to remove all of Russia’s leverage in the future.


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> I usually prefer Foreign Affairs, but The Atlantic has been superb lately
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Far Will Biden Go to Stop Putin?
> 
> 
> The underlying purpose of American foreign policy is to prove that democracy is “not a relic of history.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com




indeed, _The Atlantic_ has become quite interesting in recent years


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> According to reports (Guardian, Twitter, others), Mr Putin has called upon the Ukrainian Army to over throw the Ukrainian government led by Mr Zelensky.
> 
> "Take power into your own hands," he is reported to have advised the Ukrainian Army, adding, "and do not let a gang of drug addicts and neo-fascists use your families as human shields."



Unconfirmed reports of Russian soldiers wearing Ukrainian uniforms and vehicles.

So (simplistically I agree, though looking back at history I am often surprised by how simplistic things really were)… I wonder if Putin isn't aiming to spin this as the Ukrainian army (ie. Russians posing as Ukrainians) overthrowing the _"neo-Nazi, drug addicted, alcoholics etc"_ Ukrainian government.
These fake Ukrainians install his puppet regime and all is hunky dory for Vlad.
He can pose as a hero to his countrymen and with the press in his pocket, who's going to nay-say him?
He just needs an aircraft carrier, a banner and an ill fitting leather jacket.






SuperMatt said:


> Ukrainians appear quite reluctant to allow Russians to take over. Putin is already tossing the idea of diplomacy out there.



True, but only after Ukraine military surrenders.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t disagree that personalities and health are decisional factors for leaders (as for us). But unless proven somehow, I am certainly not going to fall for the gossip. Heck I remember hearing stuff in 2000 even about Mr Berlusconi as terminally ill. 22 years later he’s still alive and somewhat well.





Well considering what has happened to Navalny, et al., a Russian who doesn't see eye to eye with Putin would have to be pretty much in a bubble of his own to imagine challenging Putin in the political arena.

So... one can empathize with an average discontented Russian's possible desire to believe Putin might be gravely ill, and to seize on any such proffered rumor.  It could seem an appealing thing that he sickens and so doesn't get to die "of old age," because he's not actually that old in an era when people who look after their health can live into their 90s and even beyond. That's another whole generation of "just you wait"...


----------



## Agent47

Scepticalscribe said:


> According to reports (Guardian, Twitter, others), Mr Putin has called upon the Ukrainian Army to over throw the Ukrainian government led by Mr Zelensky.
> 
> "Take power into your own hands," he is reported to have advised the Ukrainian Army, adding, "and do not let a gang of drug addicts and neo-fascists use your families as human shields."



Again, eerie resemblance between Hitler and Putin: The former also used to insult his opponents (e.g. Churchill) as being addicts


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> Other reports (from Israeli, Armenian sources among others) say that Russia is open to talks in a "neutral" venue (presumably Minsk) on the condition that Ukraine "disarms".




"Neutral" surely belongs in those quotes, doesn't it.   Minsk is as neutral as Putin means to make Kyiv.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> 4.  Other reports (from Israeli, Armenian sources among others) say that Russia is open to talks in a "neutral" venue (presumably Minsk) on the condition that Ukraine "disarms".




Al Jazeera is reporting that Russia suggests Minsk with Ukraine responding that meeting in Warsaw would be acceptable from their side


----------



## Arkitect

*Russia will “partly limit” access to Facebook, Russia’s censorship agency has announced.*






If this situation was not so serious, we'd be laughing our butts off.

Seriously? The Russian Ministry Agency of Censorship complains about "violations of freedom of speech"!


----------



## Huntn

Before I go swimming and enjoy my normal day, I’ll say:

I not only hoped that NATO would/could  have done more to prevent this unfolding tragedy perpetrated by Russia (or if you don’t like the term NATO then substitute the EU and United States). I hope we have the resolve not to destroy human civilization in the process, while caging The Bear. This is a situation were civilizations can sit back and watch the tragedy happen to their neighbors, or they take action.

Sure action is being taken, but in hindsight was there, is there enough action? Right, hindsight is 100%, maybe…

Or would enough action to prevent this, to stop a single leader of a  morally bankrupt, nuclear armed  nation from destroying a neighboring country, have resulted in a European War as in all of Europe at a minimum, and a nuclear 3rd WW Armageddon as a maximum? With nukes, this is a sword hanging over all of us and this might be a real cause for some level of hesitancy.

Also we tend not to learn from or remember our history: Poland 1939.

So as Ukrainians loose their lives in a blatant, unjust act of aggression, we have the luxury of debating what the appropriate action is from our relative positions of safety. I’m not being critical of forum members, the US, the EU, or NATO, I’m just depressed and making an observation about the situation.

I view these kind of events as just another nail in coffin of humanity. We are smart, but not smart enough, we are not all bad, even mostly not bad, but there are enough of us that are deadly and self destructive that I tend not to see a bright future for our species.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> *Russia will “partly limit” access to Facebook, Russia’s censorship agency has announced.*
> 
> 
> View attachment 11950
> 
> If this situation was not so serious, we'd be laughing our butts off.
> 
> Seriously? The Russian Ministry Agency of Censorship complains about "violations of freedom of speech"!



Yes, that is very funny, and wonderfully, bitterly ironical.

But, I cannot say that I am sorry to see someone attempt to put manners on Facebook; this is something that is long overdue.

Rather, my only regret is that it has come about via the expression of the notorious - and controlling - autocratic tendencies and traditions of the historic Russian state.


----------



## lizkat

Arkitect said:


> *Russia will “partly limit” access to Facebook, Russia’s censorship agency has announced.*
> 
> 
> View attachment 11950
> 
> If this situation was not so serious, we'd be laughing our butts off.
> 
> Seriously? The Russian Ministry Agency of Censorship complains about "violations of freedom of speech"!




People including Russians in Russia should at least feel free to laugh their butts off over this tweet,  even if they have to turn off their phones and stick them in a jamming cage to do it privately...

On a more serious note, the unreliability of net access itself becomes a problem in the war zones as infrastructure ends up damaged whether by intent or as collateral damage.


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> Before I go swimming and enjoy my normal day, I’ll say:
> 
> I not only hoped that NATO would/could  have done more to prevent this unfolding tragedy perpetrated by Russia (or if you don’t like the term NATO then substitute the EU and United States). I hope we have the resolve not to destroy human civilization in the process, while caging The Bear. This is a situation were civilizations can sit back and watch the tragedy happen to their neighbors, or they take action.
> 
> Sure action is being taken, but in hindsight was there, is there enough action? Right, hindsight is 100%, maybe…
> 
> Or would enough action to prevent this, to stop a single leader of a  morally bankrupt, nuclear armed  nation from destroying a neighboring country, have resulted in a European War as in all of Europe at a minimum, and a nuclear 3rd WW Armageddon as a maximum? With nukes, this is a sword hanging over all of us and this might be a real cause for some level of hesitancy.
> 
> Also we tend not to learn from or remember our history: *Poland 1939.*
> 
> So as Ukrainians loose their lives in a blatant, unjust act of aggression, we have the luxury of debating what the appropriate action is from our relative positions of safety. I’m not being critical of forum members, the US, the EU, or NATO, I’m just depressed and making an observation about the situation.
> 
> I view these kind of events as just another nail in coffin of humanity. We are smart, but not smart enough, we are not all bad, even mostly not bad, but there are enough of us that are deadly and self destructive that I tend not to see a bright future for our species.



I do agree… though I would say Ukraine 2022 is more akin to Czechoslovakia 1938.

Poland 1939 would in fact be… well… Poland 2022!


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And now it appears that Russia (already suspended from the Counci of Europe) has been kicked out of the Eurovision Song Contest.

Some may well laugh, but - strange as it may seem (or sound), to countries, culturs and societies who view the Eurovision Song Contest with ironical condescension - some countries in central and eastern Europe (and Russia) - and places such as Turkey - take it very seriously indeed.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And, @Arkitect: Oh, irony, blessed irony: The Taliban have "urged restraint" on both Russia and Ukraine.


----------



## SuperMatt

I saw this concerning the UN Security Council:



> The U.N. Security Council is meeting on Friday at 3 p.m. to vote on a resolution condemning Russia and demanding immediate withdrawal of troops. Russia is expected to veto the resolution. Diplomats say they hope to demonstrate Russia’s isolation.




So, if a Security Council member is killing civilians, they can still veto actions against themselves! It makes the council essentially useless when it comes to the “big 5” (France, the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, and China) - they can literally do anything they want.


----------



## SuperMatt

Zelensky posted a video showing he hasn’t left Kyiv. I’m guessing Russian propaganda was pushing the narrative that he left.









						Zelenskiy / Official
					

Ми тут. Ми в Києві. Ми захищаємо Україну🇺🇦




					t.me


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> And now it appears that Russia (already suspended from the Counci of Europe) has been kicked out of the Eurovision Song Contest.
> 
> Some may well laugh, but - strange as it may seem (or sound), to countries, culturs and societies who view the Eurovision Song Contest with ironical condescension - some countries in central and eastern Europe (and Russia) - and places such as Turkey - take it very seriously indeed.



Last night they were still keeping to the "no place for politics in EuroVision" line…


----------



## Arkitect

SuperMatt said:


> I saw this concerning the UN Security Council:
> 
> 
> 
> So, if a Security Council member is killing civilians, they can still veto actions against themselves! It makes the council essentially useless when it comes to the “big 5” (France, the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, and China) - they can literally do anything they want.



Always has been the way… a toothless null entity.




Number of resolutions vetoed by each of the five permanent members of the Security Council from 1946 until present. Link


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> I saw this concerning the UN Security Council:
> 
> 
> 
> So, if a Security Council member is killing civilians, they can still veto actions against themselves! It makes the council essentially useless when it comes to the “big 5” (France, the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, and China) - they can literally do anything they want.



The UN Security Council is just a joke.


----------



## Pumbaa

Scepticalscribe said:


> And now it appears that Russia (already suspended from the Counci of Europe) has been kicked out of the Eurovision Song Contest.
> 
> Some may well laugh, but - strange as it may seem (or sound), to countries, culturs and societies who view the Eurovision Song Contest with ironical condescension - some countries in central and eastern Europe (and Russia) - and places such as Turkey - take it very seriously indeed.



And even if it is not taken seriously, kicking Russia out from whatever is the right thing to do. Happy to hear that EBU made the decision even if the wording is so and so. Now if UEFA could get off their fat corrupt asses too, that would be swell.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497243799889711104/


----------



## ericwn

Scepticalscribe said:


> While the world came ominously close to the brink of catastrophe during the Cuban Missile Crisis (and Russian/Soviet horror in political and military high circles were not known publicly at the time), Nikita Khrushchev was not actually removed from office until the summer of 1964, two years later.
> 
> In other words, even if there is an appetite for a leadership challenge, means, motive and opportunity may take some time to arrange.
> 
> One of the major problems with autocratic systems is the perennially pressing issue of how to set about regime change (peacefully) without destroying your system of government and/or country in the process.
> 
> In our world, (legitimate) elections give the victor a mandate (and the moral right to rule), but - of equal importance - (legitimate) elections are a mechanism that enable or permit a peaceful change of regime, one that allows the defeated candidate (candidates/party) to depart from the political stage without fear of reprisal (unles they have broken laws while in office), whereas people such as Mr Putin tend to have to face the grim chocie of dying in their beds or being over-thrown (usually violently).




You are quoting me from a way different conversation…


----------



## Deleted member 215

Russia now threatening Sweden and Finland over the possibility of their joining NATO:









						Russia issues ominous warning to Finland, Sweden should they join NATO
					

Ukraine's president confirmed that both countries had offered their support in the fight against Russia.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Arkitect

TBL said:


> Russia now threatening Sweden and Finland over the possibility of their joining NATO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia issues ominous warning to Finland, Sweden should they join NATO
> 
> 
> Ukraine's president confirmed that both countries had offered their support in the fight against Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Well as the saying goes, _"If you're going to get wet you may as well go swimming"_.


----------



## Pumbaa

TBL said:


> Russia now threatening Sweden and Finland over the possibility of their joining NATO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia issues ominous warning to Finland, Sweden should they join NATO
> 
> 
> Ukraine's president confirmed that both countries had offered their support in the fight against Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



As is tradition.

Given the Ukraine situation, I fear that Russia will promptly seize Gotland if Sweden seems to be about to join NATO. But that’s for another thread.


----------



## fooferdoggie

is there anything anyone can do? sanctions wont hurt putin and now he has threatened the world with nuclear weapons? even if everyone cuts them off china wont.


----------



## shadow puppet

This is horrifying. 
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497206708439072768/

Through some miracle, the passenger survived.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497153866328018944/


----------



## lizkat

The FT currently drops its paywall on pieces related to "key events" in Ukraine..









						War in Ukraine: free to read
					

The Financial Times is making selected Ukraine coverage free to read to keep everyone informed as events unfold




					www.ft.com


----------



## Agent47

I just talked to a (now former) friend in Russia. She insists that there is no invasion and that the russian army is helping people by fighting terrorists.
In her view, the Ukrainians are the perpetrators. She does not understand at all how anyone can possibly support Ukraine


----------



## Deleted member 215

Disappointing. I commend those Russians actually on the streets protesting and risking arrest by doing so. Clearly not _everyone_ has drunk the Putin Kool-Aid.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Arkitect said:


> Well as the saying goes, _"If you're going to get wet you may as well go swimming"_.



Well, as a matter of fact Putin swims every single day.


----------



## Agent47

TBL said:


> Disappointing. I commend those Russians actually on the streets protesting and risking arrest by doing so. Clearly not _everyone_ has drunk the Putin Kool-Aid.



Indeed. I hoped my former friend would at least be somewhat neutral, but as it turned out she fully fell for Putin‘s propaganda; she does not see the contradictions in her line of thought. So sad


----------



## lizkat

Agent47 said:


> I just talked (to a now former) friend in Russia. She insists that there is no invasion and that the russian army is helping people by fighting terrorists.
> In her view, the Ukrainians are the perpetrators. She does not understand at all how anyone can possibly support Ukraine




 Spoken like the equivalent of someone in the USA who bases reactions on whatever FauxSnooze says.


----------



## quagmire

Agent47 said:


> I just talked to a (now former) friend in Russia. She insists that there is no invasion and that the russian army is helping people by fighting terrorists.
> In her view, the Ukrainians are the perpetrators. She does not understand at all how anyone can possibly support Ukraine




I wouldn't necessarily break off the friendship depending on how supportive she is despite evidence to the contrary. 

Her believing Russian government/media isn't hard to believe cause Americans do the same with our government/media. 

It's amazing to read people go, " Well when we invaded Panama, etc it was to fight communism and bring democracy to the people! Or fight against atrocities!" believing the BS crap to come out of our government and media to justify going to war.


----------



## leman

theSeb said:


> View attachment 11942



200 helicopters! Why not 1000? Anyway, this seems to be fake news. Russia did attempt to take the airport with paratroopers multiple times yesterday, unsuccessfully. Folks from Ukraine who claim to live nearby said that last hours were quiet and while there were some occasional fights, no massive incursion like described, certainly not hundreds of helicopters.  

The interesting thing is that Ukrainians reported that around 200 Russian elite paratroopers lost their life’s in the attack, so it’s very interesting to see Russia claim the same number of kills in the other side. 




Agent47 said:


> I just talked to a (now former) friend in Russia. She insists that there is no invasion and that the russian army is helping people by fighting terrorists.
> In her view, the Ukrainians are the perpetrators. She does not understand at all how anyone can possibly support Ukraine




Yup, it’s unreliable how many folks learns everything from TV.


----------



## yaxomoxay

fooferdoggie said:


> is there anything anyone can do?



Not much for Ukraine imo. Some people think that Russia won’t be able to hold Ukraine due to internal struggle. It’s optimistic in my view but still possible.

The real question is: even if Putin was to retreat for any reason, and if Ukraine was able to get some sort of sovereignty back, what would happen? Ukraine can’t trust its allies anymore; at the moment of need, we abandoned them to their fate. (Zelensky’s jab at Draghi this morning wasn’t random. A clear demonstration of the disconnect between partners).  They will need protection. At the same time, a single western troop in Ukraine would be seen as a provocation by Russia (aka excuse to destroy even more Ukraine). It is obvious that Ukraine would need to rebuild its forces very fast, and so all the countries in the region. That would include even Sweden and Finland. And you’ll see that more countries will want to join NATO, not because they share the ideals behind it, but to get the Article V *automatic* protection.  This is in my view a TNT+nitroglycerin scenario. It’s a nightmare scenario in which no one can trust no one not dissimilar (in concept) to the situation before June 1914.

In other words, with this invasion and independently on how it goes, Russia has radically changed the chessboard and also it has clarified that US and Europe are not reliable partners.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> Not much for Ukraine imo. Some people think that Russia won’t be able to hold Ukraine due to internal struggle. It’s optimistic in my view but still possible.
> 
> The real question is: even if Putin was to retreat for any reason, and if Ukraine was able to get some sort of sovereignty back, what would happen? Ukraine can’t trust its allies anymore; at the moment of need, we abandoned them to their fate. (Zelensky’s jab at Draghi this morning wasn’t random. A clear demonstration of the disconnect between partners).  They will need protection. At the same time, a single western troop in Ukraine would be seen as a provocation by Russia (aka excuse to destroy even more Ukraine). It is obvious that Ukraine would need to rebuild its forces very fast, and so all the countries in the region. That would include even Sweden and Finland. And you’ll see that more countries will want to join NATO, not because they share the ideals behind it, but to get the Article V *automatic* protection.  This is in my view a TNT+nitroglycerin scenario. It’s a nightmare scenario in which no one can trust no one not dissimilar (in concept) to the situation before June 1914.
> 
> In other words, with this invasion and independently on how it goes, Russia has radically changed the chessboard and also it has clarified that US and Europe are not reliable partners.



So, unless Europe and the US are willing to start a world war with NATO vs Russia, they aren’t reliable partners? Right after you pointed out that any NATO troops in Ukraine could lead to a world war?

The idea that Ukraine cannot “trust” its allies simply because they didn’t send 100,000 or more troops into Ukraine to fight Russia? Nope.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Well, as a matter of fact Putin swims every single day.



And wrestles bears. Such a macho man.


----------



## Agent47

quagmire said:


> I wouldn't necessarily break off the friendship depending on how supportive she is despite evidence to the contrary.
> 
> Her believing Russian government/media isn't hard to believe cause Americans do the same with our government/media.
> 
> It's amazing to read people go, " Well when we invaded Panama, etc it was to fight communism and bring democracy to the people! Or fight against atrocities!" believing the BS crap to come out of our government and media to justify going to war.



True - and I didn‘t. She kinda did by hanging up the phone. After a somewat heated argument where she said the west is evil, mostly coz apparently she cannot buy things online any more. In her view, the sanctions are not justified, we all should thank Putin for getting rid of terrorism


----------



## Arkitect

lizkat said:


> Spoken like the equivalent of someone in the USA who bases reactions on whatever FauxSnooze says.



Indeed.
Here in the UK we call them Daily Mail readers...


----------



## lizkat

fooferdoggie said:


> is there anything anyone can do? sanctions wont hurt putin and now he has threatened the world with nuclear weapons? even if everyone cuts them off china wont.




It's too late to prevent the death and infrastructure damage already done,  but not too late to unite in telling Putin he crossed a line that cannot stand.  No one knows how resumption of diplomacy will turn out but I hardly think Europe is ready to see Ukraine reabsorbed into Russia.  Ukraine is not Belarus, and even Belarus had a (suppressed) breakaway from its puppet regime last time around, which of course is part of why Putin's fury has spilled over into taking a crack at Ukraine and pointedly occupying Belarus to do so.

In fact, tough sanctions on people Putin has depended on _will_ hurt him. Existing sanctions had already deeply inconvenienced some of the people he has relied on.  They were or are loyal only through his having allowed them to flourish for his cut of their greedy take.

How deep does purchased loyalty run? Putin's not sure.   Part of the point of sanctions is to bring internal political pressure to bear on a leader who has invited imposition of severe sanctions by the international community.

So Putin reminds us that there are more cards in the deck and that he has some of them,  even if there is no intent to use nukes and so to invite the glassing over of the planet.   The problem of course that is a war in progress is not the same as a war game, and there's no flashing red light over the map of Ukraine right now saying hey if you do this it's game over for everyone.

There might be flashing red lights on threatened use of nuclear weapons in actuality,  but a person in desperate straits can end up with tunnel vision, where every step taken seems to highlight the one and only logical option left.  We don't know if Putin feels desperate yet or is still in megalomania land.  He might end up somehow settling for having troops remaining parked in poor Belarus for quite awhile, having issued what he could come to regard as a severe enough lashing to Ukraine to hobble any overt Western lean on its part for the near term.  The fate of the eastern provinces though seems unclear to me.

As for China:   China still needs the purchasing power of its middle class already accustomed to buying western goods.    So while China and Russia are currently best buds in the petro-based world of pipelines and mineral extraction,  China of course has an eye out for where are the self-serving limits of supporting this guy Putin on his fool's errand of blatantly overriding a European nation's sovereignty.   I would assume the Chinese are working behind scenes, possibly in consultation with one or another western nation, to suggest a quick reversion to diplomacy, even if they're willing to blink and wink at any Russian shenanigans or delay in the run-up to settling on a ceasefire. 

But China's not averse to a roadmap on how far aggression against another nation by a large power can go these days.  After all, at some point they do mean to bring Taiwan to heel, as shocking as that might still seem to some in the West.   So it's useful to Xi to hang back a little and to see how things roll now in western reaction to Russian aggression in Ukraine.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> So, unless Europe and the US are willing to start a world war with NATO vs Russia, they aren’t reliable partners? Right after you pointed out that any NATO troops in Ukraine could lead to a world war?
> 
> The idea that Ukraine cannot “trust” its allies simply because they didn’t send 100,000 or more troops into Ukraine to fight Russia? Nope.



The unreliability doesn’t start with this invasion. It started 30 years ago when we promised Ukraine defense in exchange of nukes. They complied. They listened. They paid for it. They could’ve destroyed Moscow with one button. Now they’re getting annihilated while we get their enemy out of Eurovision. 

As for “willing”, yes that’s how it works in foreign relations when military forces are involved. If you’re not willing to go to war, threats won’t mean much.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> The unreliability doesn’t start with this invasion. It started 30 years ago when we promised Ukraine defense in exchange of nukes. They complied. They listened. They paid for it. They could’ve destroyed Moscow with one button. Now they’re getting annihilated while we get their enemy out of Eurovision.
> 
> As for “willing”, yes that’s how it works in foreign relations when military forces are involved. If you’re not willing to go to war, threats won’t mean much.




Going to war does not have to mean throwing missile strikes and rolling tanks.  War in the nuclear era includes cyberwar.   Part of Europe's earlier reluctance to go deep on sanctions this time around with Russia is likely grounded in considering impact of Russia's retaliatory cyberstrikes.   It's not like the Russians are amateurs at it even if they have peers elsewhere and in the west.   I'm sure this has figured into the USA's calculations of how far to go on sanctions as well.  But what's good for the goose is good for the gander and the US and some of its allies are not no-talents at cyber intrusion,  so Russia has to consider that as well, along with the potential impact of increased sanctions.


----------



## yaxomoxay

lizkat said:


> Going to war does not have to mean throwing missile strikes and rolling tanks.  War in the nuclear era includes cyberwar.



Very true and good observation. However I am specifically referring to geographical war, boots on the ground. 



lizkat said:


> Part of Europe's earlier reluctance to go deep on sanctions this time around with Russia is likely grounded in considering impact of Russia's retaliatory cyberstrikes.   It's not like the Russians are amateurs at it even if they have peers elsewhere and in the west.   I'm sure this has figured into the USA's calculations of how far to go on sanctions as well.  But what's good for the goose is good for the gander and the US and some of its allies are not no-talents at cyber intrusion,  so Russia has to consider that as well, along with the potential impact of increased sanctions.



Well, I don’t disagree with you, but if we are saying that we won’t defend an ally because we fear cyberattacks then we’re in deep shit.


----------



## Arkitect

lizkat said:


> Going to war does not have to mean throwing missile strikes and rolling tanks.  *War in the nuclear era includes cyberwar. *  Part of Europe's earlier reluctance to go deep on sanctions this time around with Russia is likely grounded in considering impact of Russia's retaliatory cyberstrikes.   It's not like the Russians are amateurs at it even if they have peers elsewhere and in the west.   I'm sure this has figured into the USA's calculations of how far to go on sanctions as well.  But what's good for the goose is good for the gander and the US and some of its allies are not no-talents at cyber intrusion,  so Russia has to consider that as well, along with the potential impact of increased sanctions.



Funny you should say that…


----------



## yaxomoxay

Arkitect said:


> Funny you should say that…
> 
> View attachment 11961
> 
> View attachment 11962



Snarky me thinks: hopefully in this cyber war Facebook, Twitter and TikTok will become the so-called “collateral damage”.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> The unreliability doesn’t start with this invasion. It started 30 years ago when we promised Ukraine defense in exchange of nukes. They complied. They listened. They paid for it. They could’ve destroyed Moscow with one button. Now they’re getting annihilated while we get their enemy out of Eurovision.
> 
> As for “willing”, yes that’s how it works in foreign relations when military forces are involved. If you’re not willing to go to war, threats won’t mean much.



I'm in agreement with @lizkat; "war" doesn't just mean what we would consider classic weapons.

There are other fronts (such as economic, cyber, cultural, in all its shapes - from football to ballet to Eurovision - soft power and hybrid power), in addition to the classic "high politics" of diplomacy, politics and actual combat.

Yes, the "soft power" options (one of the EU's strengths, when it eventually gets around to getting its act together) can take time (and are a lot less dramatic) to have an impact, to have an effect, but are no less effective for that.

And Russia will have a job holding Ukraine, and will have a job finding quislings (who are not from the east) to serve in a puppet administration.

The two leading candidates in 2019's presidential elections, the victor, Mr Zelensky, and his predecessor as president, Mr Poroshenko, are united in rejecting this attack; in other words, Ukraine's political elite is not divided and cannot, therefore, be usefully ransacked in the hope of finding people who wish to audition for the role of Russian puppets.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Snarky me thinks: hopefully in this cyber war Facebook, Twitter and TikTok will become the so-called “collateral damage”.



Agreed.

Yes, thus far they have had things very easy; let's see how they deal with a real challenge, one that they cannot weasel out of.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> I'm in agreement with @lizkat; "war" doesn't just mean what we would consider classic weapons.
> 
> There are other fronts (such as economic, cyber, cultural, in all its shapes - from football to ballet to Eurovision - soft power and hybrid power), in addition to the classic "high politics" of diplomacy, politics and actual combat.
> 
> Yes, the "soft power" options (one of the EU's strengths, when it eventually gets around to getting its act together) can take time (and are a lot less dramatic) to have an impact, to have an effect, but are no less effective for that.
> 
> And Russia will have a job holding Ukraine, and will have a job finding quislings (who are not from the east) to serve in a puppet administration.
> 
> The two leading candidates in 2019's presidential elections, the victor, Mr Zelensky, and his predecessor as president, Mr Poroshenko, are united in rejecting this attack; in other words, Ukraine's political elite is not divided and cannot, therefore, be usefully ransacked in the hope of finding people who wish to audition for the role of Russian puppets.



I don’t disagree with you or Lizkat. 

However you would admit that it’s a different side of the die that has been cast, and it’s a long term plan that might or might not work even in the long run. 

Military action (as in the classical way of defining war) deals with the immediate on the ground and it deals with sovereignty.


----------



## mac_in_tosh

And true to form, Trump continued his praise of Putin saying at a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser that he was "pretty smart" in "taking over a country for $2 worth of sanctions." Also, that this wouldn't have happened if the 2020 election wasn't rigged, etc. etc.

It's ironic to hear Republicans attacking Biden for being weak vs. Russia when for four years they were silent as Trump never said one word of criticism of Putin and clearly admired him.


----------



## leman

Agent47 said:


> Indeed. I hoped my former friend would at least be somewhat neutral, but as it turned out she fully fell for Putin‘s propaganda; she does not see the contradictions in her line of thought. So sad




You should show her this: retired citizens of eastern Ukraine are preparing molotovs to meet the “anti-terrorist liberators”


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> So, unless Europe and the US are willing to start a world war with NATO vs Russia, they aren’t reliable partners? Right after you pointed out that any NATO troops in Ukraine could lead to a world war?
> 
> The idea that Ukraine cannot “trust” its allies simply because they didn’t send 100,000 or more troops into Ukraine to fight Russia? Nope.



They aren't trust-worthy partners because they did not live up to the promise of keeping the economic response proportionate to the attack. This happened to multiple nations that had anti-Soviet uprisings quelled without a much hoped western intervention. They got memorials in the USA, sympathy, statues and accepted as refugees. But no local help. So yeah, this stuff is all to familiar for these nations. Life went on for Westerners without self-reflection. So yeah, this seems no different, though not all is lost.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t disagree with you or Lizkat.
> 
> However you would admit that it’s a different side of the die that has been cast, and it’s a long term plan that might or might not work even in the long run.
> 
> Military action (as in the classical way of defining war) deals with the immediate on the ground and it deals with sovereignty.




Fair enough, and I take your point.

Certainly, I will freely admit that while I increasingly came to think that Mr Putin would wish to include Kyiv in his version of what passes for Ukraine, I never thought that his aim, ambition, and deluded take on Russian history, would persuade him that an attack on the entire country was somehow justified.

@Huntn: You have been raising the subject of (appplications) for NATO membership throughout the thread.

At this stage, I would strongly support (and expedite) any applications for NATO membership that might come from the two Nordic sovereign, democratic, nation states (and EU members) that are currently outside NATO, namely Sweden and Finland, should they wish to exercise that option, or choose that path.

Likewise, there is no protection strong enough that I would not support for the Baltic states, although, as they are already members of both the EU and NATO, they currently enjoy strong protection under international law.


----------



## User.45

lizkat said:


> Going to war does not have to mean throwing missile strikes and rolling tanks.  War in the nuclear era includes cyberwar.   Part of Europe's earlier reluctance to go deep on sanctions this time around with Russia is likely grounded in considering impact of Russia's retaliatory cyberstrikes.   It's not like the Russians are amateurs at it even if they have peers elsewhere and in the west.   I'm sure this has figured into the USA's calculations of how far to go on sanctions as well.  But what's good for the goose is good for the gander and the US and some of its allies are not no-talents at cyber intrusion,  so Russia has to consider that as well, along with the potential impact of increased sanctions.



The information warfare part is interesting to me. I don't think the Russians have a working plan right now, and honestly my fear was that the information we'll get will be so confusing we won't know WTF is going on (like with COVID). The fascinating parts are, I have Reddit with a North American view, and not a single piece of russian propaganda could hit the front page, or the comment section in the front page. This is unheard of. And I have FaceBook with mostly Eastern European view, and FB is scrubbed of direct references to the conflict. On Thur I could see some posts hitting my timeline but those disappeared. Nothing pro, nothing con. It's so striking, it cannot be by accident.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t disagree with you or Lizkat.
> 
> However you would admit that it’s a different side of the die that has been cast, and it’s a long term plan that might or might not work even in the long run.
> 
> Military action (as in the classical way of defining war) deals with the immediate on the ground and it deals with sovereignty.




I said before that Ukraine is not Belarus.   Putin said he didn't mean to occupy the country so he does mean to just put in a puppet.   But Ukraine will not settle down the road for a rigged election causing a non-puppet winning candidate to have to set up opposition in exlle.  Ukrainians are more likely to turn their country into a quagmire for puppets, puppet candidates and their sympathizers.   After all, the first thing the Ukranians did as the invasion began was to burn their own bridges in the north,  which is another "classical" way of repelling the enemy in combat.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Fair enough, and I take your point.
> 
> Certainly, I will freely admit that while I increasingly came to think that Mr Putin would wish to include Kyiv in his version of what passes for Ukraine, I never thought that his aim, ambition, and deluded take on Russian history, would persuade him that an attack on the entire country was somehow justified.
> 
> @Huntn: You have been raising the subject of (appplications) for NATO membership throughout the thread.
> 
> At this stage, I would strongly support (and expedite) any applications for NATO membership that might come from the two Nordic sovereign, democratic, nation states (and EU members) that are currently outside NATO, namely Sweden and Finland, should they wish to exercise that option, or choose that path.
> 
> Likewise, there is no protection strong enough that I would not support for the Baltic states, although, as they are already members of both the EU and NATO, they currently enjoy strong protection under international law.



Do you remember what is actually needed for NATO membership? As in, does it need to be ratified by all the parliaments of the various members? Or through some vote?

Basically I am wondering if membership can be obtained “in secret” and quickly or if it requires some sort of long, public process.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> Always has been the way… a toothless null entity.
> 
> View attachment 11955
> Number of resolutions vetoed by each of the five permanent members of the Security Council from 1946 until present. Link



Russia has nukes, but deserves no place on something called the Security Council.


----------



## lizkat

It was something to behold the other night, watching the ambassador to the UN from the Russian Federation ticking boxes on his list of council speakers, reading his scripts and consulting his phone in case new instructions had arrived, but mostly looking like "Are we done yet?" -- including even when Ukraine's representative announced the invasion had actually begun and that he was thus "dispensing with most of my speech".   I guess there was a box for the Russian guy to tick there too.  Everything went like clockwork.


----------



## Huntn

Scepticalscribe said:


> Fair enough, and I take your point.
> 
> Certainly, I will freely admit that while I increasingly came to think that Mr Putin would wish to include Kyiv in his version of what passes for Ukraine, I never thought that his aim, ambition, and deluded take on Russian history, would persuade him that an attack on the entire country was somehow justified.
> 
> @Huntn: You have been raising the subject of (appplications) for NATO membership throughout the thread.
> 
> At this stage, I would strongly support (and expedite) any applications for NATO membership that might come from the two Nordic sovereign, democratic, nation states (and EU members) that are currently outside NATO, namely Sweden and Finland, should they wish to exercise that option, or choose that path.
> 
> Likewise, there is no protection strong enough that I would not support for the Baltic states, although, as they are already members of both the EU and NATO, they currently enjoy strong protection under international law.



The more who join NATO the better, if they are real assets to the alliance and  should be fast tracked. I’ve spent a minimal amount of time, but have searched for articles about why Ukraine is not a NATO member and I’ve not really found a precise reason or set of reasons. Your opinion? Apologies if you have already said. If so, maybe you could point me at it.

When I look at this list and see all the former satellites that broke away from Russia and joined NATO, I wonder was Ukraine just to close (however you want to define close)  to Mother Russia?









						List of NATO Member States
					

At present, NATO Member States comprises 30 countries from the original 12 countries that signed the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949. Check the




					www.jagranjosh.com


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Do you remember what is actually needed for NATO membership? As in, does it need to be ratified by all the parliaments of the various members? Or through some vote?
> 
> Basically I am wondering if membership can be obtained “in secret” and quickly or if it requires some sort of long, public process.



From what I understand is it is a long drawn out process and there is no way it could be kept under wraps. 

As an aside, I see Georgia is also under consideration to join NATO. They were offered Intensified Dialogue status in 2006...


----------



## DT

I'm certainly not making light of the horrific situation, but this is apparently a thing


----------



## Agent47

leman said:


> You should show her this: retired citizens of eastern Ukraine are preparing molotovs to meet the “anti-terrorist liberators”



I kinda tried. However, she dismissed this as untrue, coz her relatives in the Ukraine told her they were happy the Russians came to their rescue. My take: she made this up in order not to have her belief system collapse


----------



## DT

leman said:


> You should show her this: retired citizens of eastern Ukraine are preparing molotovs to meet the “anti-terrorist liberators”





The courage and resistance is just goddam amazing.  I know there was a request to not deviate into US politics, but what the Ukrainian people are doing vs. the baby-fits of anti-maskers is such a stunning dichotomy, it has to be mentioned.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Arkitect said:


> From what I understand is it is a long drawn out process and there is no way it could be kept under wraps.




Then I wonder if this is Putin’s play then. Our friend @Scepticalscribe is right that keeping west Ukraine might be difficult for Russia. I wonder if Putin will meet with Zelensky (or respective representatives) for a treaty of this kind:
1) Ukraine will agree to not join NATO 
2) Ukraine will agree to not have NATO or EU/American bases on its soil
3) Ukraine will agree that the two “separatist” regions are recognized as independent. 
4) A few military concessions. 

In exchange for Ukraine’s government to remain in power.


----------



## Renzatic

DT said:


> I'm certainly not making light of the horrific situation, but this is apparently a thing
> 
> View attachment 11971




...oh shit. I think I hit my head harder than I thought.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> Then I wonder if this is Putin’s play then. Our friend @Scepticalscribe is right that keeping west Ukraine might be difficult for Russia. I wonder if Putin will meet with Zelensky (or respective representatives) for a treaty of this kind:
> 1) Ukraine will agree to not join NATO
> 2) Ukraine will agree to not have NATO or EU/American bases on its soil
> 3) Ukraine will agree that the two “separatist” regions are recognized as independent.
> 4) A few military concessions.
> 
> *In exchange for Ukraine’s government to remain in power.*



This scenario makes two major assumptions:
1. Putin who was insane enough to start the invasion is going to switch back to rational on the instant
2. Putin can afford the hit his strongman reputation took if Zelensky stayed in power.

The narrative switch this would take also gives me whiplash. So the "nazis" who committed "genocide" against Russians suddenly become acceptable genocidal nazis?


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> This scenario makes two major assumptions:
> 1. Putin who was insane enough to start the invasion is going to switch back to rational on the instant
> 2. Putin can afford the hit his strongman reputation took if Zelensky stayed in power.
> 
> The narrative switch this would take also gives me whiplash. So the "nazis" who committed "genocide" against Russians suddenly become acceptable genocidal nazis?



A flip flop by Putin wouldn’t shock me, but yours are great points. Maybe he’ll be able to work out the above points with a different Ukrainian government.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> A flip flop by Putin wouldn’t shock me, but yours are great points. Maybe he’ll be able to work out the above points with a different Ukrainian government.



Yes, I cannot see a scenario where Zelensky staying in power isn't the equivalent of Putin losing. 
This is why it's so important to see Zelenskys main political rival in arms against the Russian forces.

The more I think about this the more I think Putin really really miscalculated here.


----------



## quagmire

Huntn said:


> The more who join NATO the better, if they are real assets to the alliance and  should be fast tracked. I’ve spent a minimal amount of time, but have searched for articles about why Ukraine is not a NATO member and I’ve not really found a precise reason or set of reasons. Your opinion? Apologies if you have already said. If so, maybe you could point me at it.
> 
> When I look at this list and see all the former satellites that broke away from Russia and joined NATO, I wonder was Ukraine just to close (however you want to define close)  to Mother Russia?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> List of NATO Member States
> 
> 
> At present, NATO Member States comprises 30 countries from the original 12 countries that signed the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949. Check the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.jagranjosh.com




Ukraine hasn't been admitted to NATO yet from what I have read and understand is they haven't met all the conditions. 

1. a European nation must demonstrate a commitment to democracy, individual liberty and support for the rule of law

Ukraine ranks 117 out of 180 countries in terms of corruption and would be the lowest member according to this index. 

2. contributing to the collective defense of NATO nations.

Ukraine military until very recently wasn't all that great in terms of capability. It's why the current situation isn't turning out to be like Crimea in 2014. They are more capable today than in 2014. Though still dealing with a lot of old equipment. 

3. Must be anonymous for acceptance. The obvious criteria that hasn't been met. European countries like Germany aren't sure if they should pull that trigger by bringing NATO onto Russia's border. 









						NATO Won’t Let Ukraine Join Soon. Here’s Why.
					

Ukraine has pressed for membership to defend against Russia. But President Biden and European leaders are not ready for that step.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

yaxomoxay said:


> A flip flop by Putin wouldn’t shock me, but yours are great points. Maybe he’ll be able to work out the above points with a different Ukrainian government.



That's been the consistent belief.

Main goals:

Get Zelensky & his family, those who organized the Maidan Revolution, and install a new puppet regime to replace the imagery of the fleeing Yanukovych.


----------



## User.45

quagmire said:


> Ukraine hasn't been admitted to NATO yet from what I have read and understand is they haven't met all the conditions.
> 
> 1. a European nation must demonstrate a commitment to democracy, individual liberty and support for the rule of law
> 
> Ukraine ranks 117 out of 180 countries in terms of corruption and would be the lowest member according to this index.
> 
> 2. contributing to the collective defense of NATO nations.
> 
> Ukraine military until very recently wasn't all that great in terms of capability. It's why the current situation isn't turning out to be like Crimea in 2014. They are more capable today than in 2014. Though still dealing with a lot of old equipment.
> 
> 3. Must be anonymous for acceptance. The obvious criteria that hasn't been met. European countries like Germany aren't sure if they should pull that trigger by bringing NATO onto Russia's border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NATO Won’t Let Ukraine Join Soon. Here’s Why.
> 
> 
> Ukraine has pressed for membership to defend against Russia. But President Biden and European leaders are not ready for that step.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Finland and Sweden's membership is a much more interesting question. If half of Putin's forces are tied down in Ukraine, he has to start launching ballistic missiles  to live up to his threats. And again, as someone else said it, if someone points their gun at you and tells you they'll shoot if you arm yourself, you might as well arm yourself. No better time to do it while someone else is being shot at.


----------



## quagmire

P_X said:


> Finland and Sweden's membership is a much more interesting question. If half of Putin's forces are tied down in Ukraine, he has to start launching ballistic missiles  to live up to his threats. And again, as someone else said it, if someone points their gun at you and tells you they'll shoot if you arm yourself, you might as well arm yourself. No better time to do it while someone else is being shot at.




If Putin went after Finland and Sweden due to wanting to join NATO, I could see military intervention from the US and EU on the table. The political will to defend Ukraine isn't there, but probably is for Sweden and Finland.* 

* This wouldn't be a NATO activation, but just the EU and US joint action.


----------



## Macky-Mac

P_X said:


> Yes, I cannot see a scenario where Zelensky staying in power isn't the equivalent of Putin losing.
> This is why it's so important to see Zelenskys main political rival in arms against the Russian forces.
> 
> The more I think about this the more I think Putin really really miscalculated here.




Zelensky staying in office would definitely be difficult for Putin to accept.  From various reports, I've read that Putin's urged the Ukrainian military to....“_Take power into your own hands, it will be easier for us to reach agreement_”.

As for miscalculations, I suppose Putin thought that simply having the vast Russian military build up along the border would be enough to get acceptance of his demands

Edit; 
instead of preventing NATO expansion, Putin's actions may well lead to a dramatically increased NATO presence along Russia's borders.....exactly the opposite of what he supposedly is trying to prevent


----------



## leman

Agent47 said:


> I kinda tried. However, she dismissed this as untrue, coz her relatives in the Ukraine told her they were happy the Russians came to their rescue. My take: she made this up in order not to have her belief system collapse




That is true. There indeed are people in Ukraine - especially in the eastern regions - who hate the country and identify with old Soviet regime and by extension Russia. The Soviet propaganda machine still works.


DT said:


> The courage and resistance is just goddam amazing.  I know there was a request to not deviate into US politics, but what the Ukrainian people are doing vs. the baby-fits of anti-maskers is such a stunning dichotomy, it has to be mentioned.




I know, I was never more proud of my country. It’s exactly in such moment of crisis where  we tend to exceed expectations. Also, gonna love these people





Translation from Ukrainian (sorry for profanities, trying to be exact): “Fucktards, fuck off out of Ukraine and our village! Signed: Granny Nadya“


----------



## User.45

quagmire said:


> If Putin went after Finland and Sweden due to wanting to join NATO, I could see military intervention from the US and EU on the table. The political will to defend Ukraine isn't there, but probably is for Sweden and Finland.*
> 
> * This wouldn't be a NATO activation, but just the EU and US joint action.



Russia would have to wrap up Ukraine and redistribute its forces. And attacking finland or swe would be even more egregious act of aggression so they'd alienate themselves from the world even more, etc. Putin got himself in a situation where his chances of major victories are decreasing by the day, and his chances of geopolitical losses are increasing by the day. 

Russia is now damaged goods internationally. His citizens are pissed. He'll spend a ton of money on the war and after this many threats he either loses face by not acting up on them, or risk another conflict he would lose. So Putin would lose either way, the only question would be just whether nukes would be used or not. 



Macky-Mac said:


> Zelensky staying in office would definitely be difficult for Putin to accept.  From various reports, I've read that Putin's urged the Ukrainian military to....“_Take power into your own hands, it will be easier for us to reach agreement_”.
> 
> As for miscalculations, I suppose Putin thought that simply having the vast Russian military build up along the border would be enough to get acceptance of his demands
> 
> Edit;
> instead of preventing NATO expansion, Putin's actions may well lead to a dramatically increased NATO presence along Russia's borders.....exactly the opposite of what he supposedly is trying to prevent



Exactly. Also, prior conflicts he entered with the support of a troll army second to none. His trolls are nowhere this time around. I'm still amazed.


----------



## User.45

leman said:


> That is true. There indeed are people in Ukraine - especially in the eastern regions - who hate the country and identify with old Soviet regime and by extension Russia. The Soviet propaganda machine still works.
> 
> 
> I know, I was never more proud of my country. It’s exactly in such moment of crisis where  we tend to exceed expectations. Also, gonna love these people
> 
> View attachment 11973
> 
> Translation from Ukrainian (sorry for profanities, trying to be exact): “Fucktards, fuck off out of Ukraine and our village! Signed: Granny Nadya“



Who would mess with Granny Nadya?

(just imagine you enter a nation you share roots with and those "nazis" welcome you with this. I think it's one of those,_ Are we the baddies? _moments)


----------



## shadow puppet

I had to look up what thermobaric bombs were.  They don't sound good.  

As the author of this tweet explained: 

_"Thermobaric bombs are known as vacuum bombs. They suck oxygen into the blast and can cause awful internal injuries, especially to the lungs."

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497338480061526018/_


----------



## SuperMatt

mac_in_tosh said:


> And true to form, Trump continued his praise of Putin saying at a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser that he was "pretty smart" in "taking over a country for $2 worth of sanctions." Also, that this wouldn't have happened if the 2020 election wasn't rigged, etc. etc.
> 
> It's ironic to hear Republicans attacking Biden for being weak vs. Russia when for four years they were silent as Trump never said one word of criticism of Putin and clearly admired him.



And they refused to remove him from office for blackmailing the Ukrainian president by withholding defensive weapons in exchange for dirt on Hunter Biden. That was never a good look, but especially now...


----------



## SuperMatt

shadow puppet said:


> I had to look up what thermobaric bombs were.  They don't sound good.
> 
> As the author of this tweet explained:
> 
> _"Thermobaric bombs are known as vacuum bombs. They suck oxygen into the blast and can cause awful internal injuries, especially to the lungs."
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497338480061526018/_



If Russia is observed committing war crimes, does that mean that western countries could intervene?


----------



## leman

And the probably weirdest news of the day: no idea if true, but there are videos that partly corroborate the story. Anyway, here it goes: it has been reported that a juvenile gang (!!) has hijacked an armored vehicle if a Russian infiltration unit who got lost in Kyiv earlier this morning. The boys got interested in the cool-looking tank  and went to have a look, Russians grabbed their machine guns and were promptly hit in the head with pavement stones


----------



## leman

shadow puppet said:


> I had to look up what thermobaric bombs were.  They don't sound good.
> 
> As the author of this tweet explained:
> 
> _"Thermobaric bombs are known as vacuum bombs. They suck oxygen into the blast and can cause awful internal injuries, especially to the lungs."
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497338480061526018/_



These are indeed grim news and some of the most awful weapons invented. I though those were primarily used to clear out fortified bunkers? Using them  in a city would have horrifying consequences…


----------



## leman

SuperMatt said:


> If Russia is observed committing war crimes, does that mean that western countries could intervene?




They have been committing war crimes from the very start. Using vehicles marked with OSCE symbols to cover their forces. Infiltration using stolen uniforms. Misrule attacks on civil population. Attempts to assassinate government officials (groups of infiltrators were arrested who were carrying kill lists with names and addresses).


----------



## shadow puppet

SuperMatt said:


> If Russia is observed committing war crimes, does that mean that western countries could intervene?



This guy, a former White House staffer who's usually accurate on his take (still privy to a good amount of inside intel), feels NATO would get involved.


----------



## User.45

leman said:


> These are indeed grim news and some of the most awful weapons invented. I though those were primarily used to clear out fortified bunkers? Using them  in a city would have horrifying consequences…



That unfortunately would be a logical progression and a way to win despite the low morale. However, that would further lower morale. Again, I think Putin really fucked this one up.


----------



## User.45

DT said:


> The courage and resistance is just goddam amazing.  I know there was a request to not deviate into US politics, but what the Ukrainian people are doing vs. the baby-fits of anti-maskers is such a stunning dichotomy, it has to be mentioned.




The contrast is certainly quite stark...:


> Even as the artillery barrages intensified, not everyone was ready to hide. Walking with intention toward the source of the artillery booms on the outskirts of Kharkiv was Roman Balakelyev, dressed in camouflage, a double-barreled shotgun slung over his shoulder.
> 
> “I live here, this is my home. I’m going to defend it,” said Mr. Balakelyev, who also pulled out a large knife he had strapped to his back as if to show it off. “I don’t think the Russians understand me like I understand them.”





> A short while later, Mr. Balakelyev reached the edge of the city, where the Ukrainian troops were huddled around the abandoned Russian troop transports. They watched as he passed. No one moved to stop him. One soldier uttered: “Intent on victory.”
> 
> Mr. Balakelyev, his gaze fixed and his shotgun ready, headed down the road in the direction of the booms and a tall billboard that read: “Protect the future: UKRAINE-NATO-EUROPE.”


----------



## Scepticalscribe

shadow puppet said:


> I had to look up what thermobaric bombs were.  They don't sound good.
> 
> As the author of this tweet explained:
> 
> _"Thermobaric bombs are known as vacuum bombs. They suck oxygen into the blast and can cause awful internal injuries, especially to the lungs."
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497338480061526018/_



As did I.

However, the more such (evil, a word I do not use lightly) threats are employed, the less likely - even to a credulous Russian audience (and the response of some Russians has been nothing short of magnificent) - that one can persuade Ukrainians (our Slavic brethren) of any justification for this.

By the way - and @yaxomoxay might share my curiosity on this matter (I wrote a paper for Brussels on the history, theology and splits of the various Orthodox Churches in Ukraine - there are a few - and Georgia, & Russia and their influence, past and present on matters of identity, and on which of them are answerable to - or subordinate to - issues of autonomy, so-called "autocephalous status" (and independence) loom large here - some of the others, and why, when I served with the EU mission in Georgia over a decade ago), I'd love to hear what the Russian Orthodox Church (which derives its legitimacy from its links - historic and theological - with Ukraine) thinks of all this, not least as one of the main historic roles of the Russian Orthodox Church has been to serve as a theological support for the most egregious expressions of Russian nationalism (and autocracy, and Orthodoxy).

It is increasingly clear that the Russians (or, Mr Putin, to be more precise) did not expect the Ukrainians to resist so strenuously; that is what comes from cultivating a court of terrified sycophants.


P_X said:


> That unfortunately would be a logical progression and a way to win despite the low morale. However, that would further lower morale. Again, I think Putin really fucked this one up.



Agreed.

It seems that Mr Putin thought that the Ukrainians would curl up and roll over.

Has anyone taken a look at - or, rather, a listen to - the stunning clip from the extraordinary defenders of Snake Island when threatened by a Russian warship earlier today?

Wow.


----------



## leman

P_X said:


> That unfortunately would be a logical progression and a way to win despite the low morale. However, that would further lower morale. Again, I think Putin really fucked this one up.




The thing is, Russians call Kyiv the “mother of all Russian cities”, it is the cradle of the eastern Slav civilization. It feels that trying to burn that city in the name of liberating it would be too much even for Putin.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> As did I.
> 
> However, the more such (evil, a word I do not use lightly) threats are employed, the less likely - even to a credulous Russian audience (and the response of some Russians has been nothing short of magnificent) - that one can persuade Ukrainians (our Slavic brethren) of any justification for this.
> 
> By the way - and @yaxomoxay might share my curiosity on this matter (I wrote a paper for Brussels on the history, theology and splits of the various Orthodox Churches in Ukraine - there a re a few - and Georgia, & Russia and their influence, past and present on matters of identity, when I was deployed with the EU mission in Georgia), I'd love to hear what the Russian Orthodox Church (which derives its legitimacy from its links - historic and theological - with Ukraine) thinks of al this, not least as one of the main historic roles of the Russian Orthodox Church has been to serve as a theological support for the most egregious expressions of Russia nationalism (and autocracy, ad Orthodoxy).
> 
> It is increasingly clear that the Russians (or, Mr Putin, to be more precise) did not expect the Ukrainians to resist so strenuously; that is what comes from cultivating a court of terrified sycophants.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> It seems that Mr Putin thought that the Ukrainians would curl up and roll over.
> 
> Has anyone taken a look at - or, rather, a listen to - the stunning clip from the extraordinary defenders of Snake Island when threatened by a Russian warship earlier today?
> 
> Wow.





I do share you curiosity about the Russian Orthodox Church as they are strangely very quiet. 

I can tell you, as a matter of pure curiosity, that there are rumors that the Vatican will make the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church a patriarchate which would make the Ukrainian eastern church a sui iuris church, obtaining the highest “level” (wrong term but you get the meaning) an eastern rite church could obtain. As far as I know the request has been made last week and the Vatican is seriously considering it. It might not be much of a practical “war” gesture, but if it happens the symbolic meaning will not escape Eastern Christians. It will - and this is my evaluation - probably infuriate the Russian Orthodox Church.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Has anyone taken a look at - or, rather, a listen to - the stunning clip from the extraordinary defenders of Snake Island when threatened by a Russian warship earlier today?
> 
> Wow.



Oh yes. It's a weird feeling, but I feel incredibly proud of these young men.



leman said:


> The thing is, Russians call Kyiv the “mother of all Russian cities”, it is the cradle of the eastern Slav civilization. It feels that trying to burn that city in the name of liberating it would be too much even for Putin.



All I can say, I expected this invasion to not happen based on logic. Still nobody can identify a clear logical endgame.
I rolled my eye a little about an editorial claiming that Putin's main weakness is that he needs to look strong all the time. I shouldn't have. It's like a bar fight you threaten bystanders to not get involved, but your threats immediately lose their oomph when you can't knock out the smallest guy in the bar.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Oh, and for an example of polite, yet serious (and hard-hitting) public service broadcasting, take a look at David McCullagh's (who is a fine historian and impressive broadcaster) interview - on RTÉ (Irish state broadcasting) this evening with the Russian Ambassador to Ireland, Mr Yuriy Filatov.  

Impressive.


----------



## lizkat

shadow puppet said:


> I had to look up what thermobaric bombs were.  They don't sound good.
> 
> As the author of this tweet explained:
> 
> _"Thermobaric bombs are known as vacuum bombs. They suck oxygen into the blast and can cause awful internal injuries, especially to the lungs."
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497338480061526018/_





leman said:


> These are indeed grim news and some of the most awful weapons invented. I though those were primarily used to clear out fortified bunkers? Using them  in a city would have horrifying consequences…





P_X said:


> That unfortunately would be a logical progression and a way to win despite the low morale. However, that would further lower morale. Again, I think Putin really fucked this one up.




Putin's running off a script that has played well in his head,  but actors on the other side as he brings his play to the world stage have completely gone up on their lines and roles:   not laying down arms,  even blowing up their own bridges,  old ladies and children mouthing off and fighting back.   Who's Putin going to blame for this train wreck?   All those "yassah, boss, go for it" sycophants in his televised ministers' meeting the other day?  Those are the guys that melt away when the cards don't play out as expected.  Suddenly they hear a different dinner bell...

I don't think the Russians are stupid enough to use thermobaric bombs in Kyiv.  Or maybe I just hope Putin is smarter than that.  He's not suicidal, and it's not like he can't be found later if he orders such a monstrous act. He purchases loyalty and those who have been bought once to shield and defend him can be bought again to turn him in.  It's too risky.  He's a guy who likes to enjoy himself, so he's not likely sure he'd have the guts to kill himself before being rounded up and hauled off to The Hague.  He wants to convert Ukraine into a puppet state, not lay waste to civilians at risk of his own hide.


----------



## Huntn

quagmire said:


> Ukraine hasn't been admitted to NATO yet from what I have read and understand is they haven't met all the conditions.
> 
> 1. a European nation must demonstrate a commitment to democracy, individual liberty and support for the rule of law
> 
> Ukraine ranks 117 out of 180 countries in terms of corruption and would be the lowest member according to this index.
> 
> 2. contributing to the collective defense of NATO nations.
> 
> Ukraine military until very recently wasn't all that great in terms of capability. It's why the current situation isn't turning out to be like Crimea in 2014. They are more capable today than in 2014. Though still dealing with a lot of old equipment.
> 
> 3. Must be anonymous for acceptance. The obvious criteria that hasn't been met. European countries like Germany aren't sure if they should pull that trigger by bringing NATO onto Russia's border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NATO Won’t Let Ukraine Join Soon. Here’s Why.
> 
> 
> Ukraine has pressed for membership to defend against Russia. But President Biden and European leaders are not ready for that step.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Thanks, I appreciate it. Corruption could have been a real issue. As far as contributing to collective defense, their strategic position on the map should have been a plus, as a buffer, unless NATO considered this a liability.


----------



## Huntn

DT said:


> I'm certainly not making light of the horrific situation, but this is apparently a thing
> 
> View attachment 11971



What does it say?


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> This scenario makes two major assumptions:
> 1. Putin who was insane enough to start the invasion is going to switch back to rational on the instant
> 2. Putin can afford the hit his strongman reputation took if Zelensky stayed in power.
> 
> The narrative switch this would take also gives me whiplash. So the "nazis" who committed "genocide" against Russians suddenly become acceptable genocidal nazis?



I heard several times today the questioning about the rationality of Putin, that what he’s doing is not in the best long term interests of Russia, hence questions about his mental state.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I do share you curiosity about the Russian Orthodox Church as they are strangely very quiet.
> 
> I can tell you, as a matter of pure curiosity, that there are rumors that the Vatican will make the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church a patriarchate which would make the Ukrainian eastern church a sui iuris church, obtaining the highest “level” (wrong term but you get the meaning) an eastern rite church could obtain. As far as I know the request has been made last week and the Vatican is seriously considering it. It might not be much of a practical “war” gesture, but if it happens the symbolic meaning will not escape Eastern Christians. It will - and this is my evaluation - probably infuriate the Russian Orthodox Church.



Fascinating.

Absolutely fascinating.

I'd love to see this happen.

My interest in this was piqued by a small (tiny) footnote to a report which I read - I still remember sitting, stunned, at my desk in my office in the EU HQ, which was next door to Lavrenti Beria's villa, when I read this - which had reported - as a foot-noted aside - that the Patriarchate in Moscow (Moscow!) had turned down a request by the Orthodox churches in South Ossetia and Abkhazia to transfer their theological loyalty to Moscow rather than Tbilisi.

Reading that, I was absolutely fascinated - normally the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian state (ever since the time of the Tsars) have had a disgustingly symbiotic relationship - so why - on this occasion - was the (Moscow Patriarchate) church taking a different stance to that promoted by the Russian government - and I thought this merited further examination and exploration, and asked to be allowed spend some time thinking about, researching, analysing - and writing about - this.

While my superiors were a bit puzzled - I was supposed to spend my time editing (I was one of the few native English speakers on the staff) reports, and analysing current political stuff and current breaches (among other things) of the Sarkozy-Medvedev agreement - they were surprisingly tolerant of my desire to take a flying leap into Orthodox Church history and re-visit the theology of the early middle ages, around a thousand years earlier.

Anyway, I found it an extraordinarily instructive, illuminating - (and, to my surprise, my superiors insisted on sending what I wrote to Brussels - I had merely intended to make them aware of stuff I thought they should know - whereupon Brussels made clear that they "liked" - to use a modern term - my report) exercise, and a very useful one as well.

So, the (deafening) silence of the Moscow Patriarchy on current events (especially when informed by their past history) is......to put it mildly, rather telling.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> Oh, and for an example of polite, yet serious (and hard-hitting) public service broadcasting, take a look at David McCullagh's (who is a fine historian and impressive broadcaster) interview - on RTÉ (Irish state broadcasting) this evening with the Russian Ambassador to Ireland, Mr Yuriy Filatov.
> 
> Impressive.



Thank you for that info.   I also appreciated what the Irish representative to the UN, Geraldine Byrne Nason, had to say the other night at the security council meeting.  Like some of that evening's other speakers whose nations are temporary members of the Security Council and have experienced oppression and war,  the ambassador was eloquent on the need to stand by Ukraine rather than simply acquiesce to this blatant aggression by Putin.  

"This is the second time in less than ten years that the Russian Federation has violated Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is a flagrant violation of international law.​​In taking this unilateral step, Russia has abandoned the Minsk Agreements and cast into doubt all the diplomatic efforts of past weeks.​​Ireland commends Ukraine for the restraint it has shown in the face of Russia’s military build-up at its border and the provocation of the recognition of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.”​


----------



## shadow puppet

lizkat said:


> I don't think the Russians are stupid enough to use thermobaric bombs in Kyiv.  Or maybe I just hope Putin is smarter than that.  He's not suicidal, and it's not like he can't be found later if he orders such a monstrous act. He purchases loyalty and those who have been bought once to shield and defend him can be bought again to turn him in.  It's too risky.  He's a guy who likes to enjoy himself, so he's not likely sure he'd have the guts to kill himself before being rounded up and hauled off to The Hague.  He wants to convert Ukraine into a puppet state, not lay waste to civilians at risk of his own hide.



I hope, with everything in me, you are correct in your assumption.  

Seeing this photo of a bomb shelter below a kindergarten in central Ukraine has been haunting me ever since laying eyes on it.  I get it.  I grasp this is a precautionary preemptive.  But it still sickens me no end.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497271775083782145/


----------



## shadow puppet

Huntn said:


> What does it say?



The gist of it below:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497331353301528589/


----------



## lizkat

shadow puppet said:


> The gist of it below:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497331353301528589/




Heh, some creative resistance out there already.


----------



## Pumbaa

Huntn said:


> What does it say?



Nothing interesting, I think.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497284271232458755/


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> While I certainly can’t dispute or confirm Mr Putin’s health condition, I am getting increasingly frustrated about this issue (not you telling us, of course).
> 
> there’s this journalistic fetish about leaders being sick and this is sometimes used to justify the “it’s a crazy decision” position, bringing it down to a personal level instead of the geopolitical. Trump is sick. Biden is sick. Putin is sick. Draghi is sick. Pope Francis is sick. Holy shit.
> 
> Again, not attacking you for reporting your personal experience. I personally heard the Pope Francis one before it hit the newspapers months ago by not one, not two, but three people in his inner circle. Didn’t take them too seriously because the Vatican has more gossip than the National Enquirer.



Funny you brought up a pope. Do you remember John Paul 2 whose Parkinson's diagnosis was hidden for 12 years? There are just diseases that have linear paths (and most cancers isn't one of those). While I agree that rumors have to be treated like rumors, the thing about leaders with authoritarian tendencies (including Trump) are way more likely to make decisions motivated by personal stuff than those with less authoritarian styles. That's actually one of the key weaknesses of authoritarianism. Not everything makes geopolitical sense. 

BTW, Trump probably has MCI compounded by whatever psychiatric condition he has I'm not qualified to diagnose. In fact if it weren't for the "bleach moment" that was purely driven by his psychopathology, he'd still be president. So let's not minimize the conditions leaders may have that impact their ability to lead.


----------



## Zoidberg

DT said:


> I'm certainly not making light of the horrific situation, but this is apparently a thing
> 
> View attachment 11971



Well, to be fair, one would be amiss if they forgot Ukraine’s long history of  contributions to the adult film industry.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Fascinating.
> 
> Absolutely fascinating.
> 
> I'd love to see this happen.
> 
> My interest in this was piqued by a small (tiny) footnote to a report which I read - I still remember sitting, stunned, at my desk in my office in the EU HQ, which was next door to Lavrenti Beria's villa, when I read this - which had reported - as a foot-noted aside - that the Patriarchate in Moscow (Moscow!) had turned down a request by the Orthodox churches in South Ossetia and Abkhazia to transfer their theological loyalty to Moscow rather than Tbilisi.
> 
> Reading that, I was absolutely fascinated - normally the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian state (ever since the time of the Tsars) have had a disgustingly symbiotic relationship - so why - on this occasion - was the (Moscow Patriarchiate) church taking a different stance to that promoted by the Russian government - and I thought this merited further examination and exploration, and asked to be allowed spend some time thinking about, researching, analysing - and writing about - this.
> 
> While my superiors were a bit puzzled - I was supposed to spend my time editing reports on, and analysing current political stuff and current breaches (among other things) of the Sarkozy-Medvedev agreement - they were surprisngly tolerant of my desire to take a flying leap into Orthodox Church history and re-visit the theology of the early middle ages, around a thousand years earlier.
> 
> Anyway, I found it an extraordinarily instructive, illuminating - (and, to my surprise, my superiors insisted on sending what I wrote to Brussels - I had merely intended to make them aware of stuff I thought they should know - whereupon Brussels made clear that they "liked" - to use a modern term - my report) exercise, and a very useful one as well.
> 
> So, the (deafening) silence of the Moscow Patriarchy on current events (and their past history) is......to put it mildly, rather telling.



I’d love to read your report!!

Independently on the views on religion itself and the - sadly often - corrupt religious institution (which includes the one I belong to), this stuff is important. It sets the underlying tone, and it usually aids in moving the ethical and moral needle of a large part of the population (even those who don’t believe, or heck even dislike the Pope for example will weight his opinions and acts).

I will keep an eye open towards the Church-State relationship in both Ukraine and Russia and I will let you know if I hear anything.

For now I can attach here the Weekly edition in English of the Osservatore Romano (Vatican newspaper) released today as you might find something of interest. There isn’t much related to Ukraine as of course the events just unfolded, but the pontiff’s request for fasting “for Peace” on Ash Wednesday is quite a strong as a “non direct” rebuke of Russia one can do.

Edit: trying to attach a file but it’s says it’s too big. About 1.9MB


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> Exactly. Also, prior conflicts he entered with the support of a troll army second to none. His trolls are nowhere this time around. I'm still amazed.



I can assure you they are active on Twitter, but they seem very organic (ie very real useful idiots, not brute-force bot armies) so I suspect the big propaganda operation is being spread on Telegram, which has seen a large increase in users in Europe since the emergence of QAnon.

It’s not out in the open until the Telegram channel participants spread it on other social media.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> Funny you brought up a pope. Do you remember John Paul 2 whose Parkinson's diagnosis was hidden for 12 years? There are just diseases that have linear paths (and most cancers isn't one of those). While I agree that rumors have to be treated like rumors, the thing about leaders with authoritarian tendencies (including Trump) are way more likely to make decisions motivated by personal stuff than those with less authoritarian styles. That's actually one of the key weaknesses of authoritarianism. Not everything makes geopolitical sense.
> 
> BTW, Trump probably has MCI compounded by whatever psychiatric condition he has I'm not qualified to diagnose. In fact if it weren't for the "bleach moment" that was purely driven by his psychopathology, he'd still be president. So let's not minimize the conditions leaders may have that impact their ability to lead.



I won’t comment on health issues, but yes. Some are going to be ill for real. Putin might or might be not be ill. I am just saying to be very careful. 

And why did you have to bring John Paul II? Now I am on the brink of weeping at the idea of what he’d think and how saddened he’d be about all of this.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> I can assure you they are active on Twitter, but they seem very organic (ie very real useful idiots, not brute-force bot armies) so I suspect the big propaganda operation is being spread on Telegram, which has seen a large increase in users in Europe since the emergence of QAnon.



Fair enough, I couldn't stomach twitter. Anytime I log in it offers me trollservative shit and I nope TF out.


----------



## shadow puppet

P_X said:


> BTW, Trump probably has MCI compounded by whatever psychiatric condition he has I'm not qualified to diagnose. In fact if it weren't for the "bleach moment" that was purely driven by his psychopathology, he'd still be president. So let's not minimize the conditions leaders may have that impact their ability to lead.



Nor can we discount his infamous "covfeve" hissy tweet.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> I do share you curiosity about the Russian Orthodox Church as they are strangely very quiet.
> 
> I can tell you, as a matter of pure curiosity, that there are rumors that the Vatican will make the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church a patriarchate which would make the Ukrainian eastern church a sui iuris church, obtaining the highest “level” (wrong term but you get the meaning) an eastern rite church could obtain. As far as I know the request has been made last week and the Vatican is seriously considering it. It might not be much of a practical “war” gesture, but if it happens the symbolic meaning will not escape Eastern Christians. It will - and this is my evaluation - probably infuriate the Russian Orthodox Church.




Well the Russian ambassador to the Vatican has now had an opportunity to provide any western rite input from the Pope himself to Putin, after Pope Francis dropped in to have a chat with that ambassador and stayed for about half an hour.  It was a virtually unprecedented kind of meeting in modern times of war.  Sadly, nothing that was said appears to have made any particular changes in Putin's behavior, although it's possible he might hesitate now to put so many civilians at risk in Ukraine as his power grab continues.   The Ukrainians had previously indicated they were not averse to papal mediation in the conflict.









						Pope Francis visits Russian embassy as invasion of Ukraine continues
					

In a visit with few if any precedents, Pope Francis met with the Russian ambassador to the Holy See this morning to express concerns about Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.




					www.americamagazine.org


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy




----------



## Pumbaa

shadow puppet said:


> The gist of it below:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497331353301528589/




No screenshots with the claimed Ukrainian flags is a red flag. I’m more inclined to believe this:









						It appears that the viral tweet claiming P*rnHub is blocking viewers in Russia is not true
					

Trust but verify.




					twitchy.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

lizkat said:


> Well the Russian ambassador to the Vatican has now had an opportunity to provide any western rite input from the Pope himself to Putin, after Pope Francis dropped in to have a chat with that ambassador and stayed for about half an hour.  It was a virtually unprecedented kind of meeting in modern times of war.  Sadly, nothing that was said appears to have made any particular changes in Putin's behavior, although it's possible he might hesitate now to put so many civilians at risk in Ukraine as his power grab continues.   The Ukrainians had previously indicated they were not averse to papal mediation in the conflict.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pope Francis visits Russian embassy as invasion of Ukraine continues
> 
> 
> In a visit with few if any precedents, Pope Francis met with the Russian ambassador to the Holy See this morning to express concerns about Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.americamagazine.org



Wow I completely missed this news! Wow


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I’d love to read your report!!
> 
> Independently on the views on religion itself and the - sadly often - corrupt religious institution (which includes the one I belong to), this stuff is important. It sets the underlying tone, and it usually aids in moving the ethical and moral needle of a large part of the population (even those who don’t believe, or heck even dislike the Pope for example will weight his opinions and acts).
> 
> I will keep an eye open towards the Church-State relationship in both Ukraine and Russia and I will let you know if I hear anything.
> 
> For now I can attach here the Weekly edition in English of the Osservatore Romano (Vatican newspaper) released today as you might find something of interest. There isn’t much related to Ukraine as of course the events just unfolded, but the pontiff’s request for fasting “for Peace” on Ash Wednesday is quite a strong as a “non direct” rebuke of Russia one can do.
> 
> Edit: trying to attach a file but it’s says it’s too big. About 1.9MB



Any chance of attaching it in two files?


----------



## User.45

Pumbaa said:


> No screenshots with the claimed Ukrainian flags is a red flag. I’m more inclined to believe this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It appears that the viral tweet claiming P*rnHub is blocking viewers in Russia is not true
> 
> 
> Trust but verify.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> twitchy.com



YET!


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> Fair enough, I couldn't stomach twitter. Anytime I log in it offers me trollservative shit and I nope TF out.



Yeah, you have to be selective with who you follow, and as soon as someone reliable gains some traction (eg over, say, 10000 followers) the trolls/useful idiots start reply-spamming. But Twitter has recently included options so that only people you follow can reply to your tweets and some better moderation that has greatly reduced the noise.

It also helps that they have moved to Telegram channels to get their daily/constant fix of outrage.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Yeah, you have to be selective with who you follow, and as soon as someone reliable gains some traction (eg over, say, 10000 followers) the trolls/useful idiots start reply-spamming. But Twitter has recently included options so that only people you follow can reply to your tweets and some better moderation that has greatly reduced the noise.



I follow the NASA, some physicians and Moog. Zero politicians. My slate is almost completely blank.


----------



## Pumbaa

P_X said:


> YET!



нет!


----------



## shadow puppet

Pumbaa said:


> No screenshots with the claimed Ukrainian flags is a red flag. I’m more inclined to believe this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It appears that the viral tweet claiming P*rnHub is blocking viewers in Russia is not true
> 
> 
> Trust but verify.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> twitchy.com



Ah well.  Still, it was quite creative & I would have loved if true!


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> Wow I completely missed this news! Wow




Yah, it could still figure importantly in how negotiations are set up...   or so we could hope.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Any chance of attaching it in two files?



Genius!


----------



## Pumbaa

shadow puppet said:


> Ah well.  Still, it was quite creative & I would have loved if true!



That’s more or less the problem. People want X to be true so they avoid questioning X. So easy for misinformation to spread…

It would certainly be nice if PornHub took action and imposed wanktions, eh, sanctions.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> By the way - and @yaxomoxay might share my curiosity on this matter (I wrote a paper for Brussels on the history, theology and splits of the various Orthodox Churches in Ukraine - there are a few - and Georgia, & Russia and their influence, past and present on matters of identity, and on which of them are answerable to - or subordinate to - issues of autonomy, so-called "autocephalous status" (and independence) loom large here - some of the others, and why, when I served with the EU mission in Georgia over a decade ago), I'd love to hear what the Russian Orthodox Church (which derives its legitimacy from its links - historic and theological - with Ukraine) thinks of all this, not least as one of the main historic roles of the Russian Orthodox Church has been to serve as a theological support for the most egregious expressions of Russian nationalism (and autocracy, and Orthodoxy).



There is a small Georgian Orthodox community in my neighborhood. They hold services early on Sundays at an Episcopal church I used to attend. The musical and ceremonial aspects of the services are beautiful. The services, especially for holidays, can last for hours.

I had to learn a piece of music in Georgian for work. Since the language has a completely different alphabet, I had to search for a phonetic guide online to even get started. I spoke to the priest after one of their services, asking for help perfecting the pronunciation of the song (which was to be performed for Georgians visiting America). He was very kind and got his whole family involved in helping me navigate the intricacies of properly pronouncing the text of the song.

After a year of holding their services at the church, the congregation brought a huge Georgian feast to the coffee hour after the Episcopal service to show their thanks. It was delicious, and I learned they had the former head chef from the Georgian embassy prepare it.

It was a great experience to interact with the local Georgian community. I can only imagine how they are feeling today with everything happening in Ukraine.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> There is a small Georgian Orthodox community in my neighborhood. They hold services early on Sundays at an Episcopal church I used to attend. The musical and ceremonial aspects of the services are beautiful. The services, especially for holidays, can last for hours.
> 
> I had to learn a piece of music in Georgian for work. Since the language has a completely different alphabet, I had to search for a phonetic guide online to even get started. I spoke to the priest after one of their services, asking for help perfecting the pronunciation of the song (which was to be performed for Georgians visiting America). He was very kind and got his whole family involved in helping me navigate the intricacies of properly pronouncing the text of the song.
> 
> After a year of holding their services at the church, the congregation brought a huge Georgian feast to the coffee hour after the Episcopal service to show their thanks. It was delicious, and I learned they had the former head chef from the Georgian embassy prepare it.
> 
> It was a great experience to interact with the local Georgian community. I can only imagine how they are feeling today with everything happening in Ukraine.



Thanks for sharing this beautiful story!


----------



## User.45

> Two Chinese state-owned banks will restrict financing for Russian commodity purchases, suggesting there are limits to Beijing's support for Moscow as the Kremlin confronts severe economic sanctions over its attack of Ukraine.
> Offshore units of Industrial & Commercial Bank of China have stopped issuing U.S. dollar-denominated letters of credit for purchases of physical Russian commodities ready for export, while the Bank of China has also limited funding, according to Bloomberg News, citing people familiar with the matter.











						Chinese banks restrict lending to Russia, dealing blow to Moscow
					

Two Chinese state-owned banks will restrict financing for Russian commodity purchases, suggesting limits to Beijing's support as the Kremlin confronts economic sanctions over its attack of Ukraine.




					www.foxbusiness.com
				




(bloomberg's paywalled, otherwise I'd just cite that without Fox)


----------



## Macky-Mac

P_X said:


> Chinese banks restrict lending to Russia, dealing blow to Moscow
> 
> 
> Two Chinese state-owned banks will restrict financing for Russian commodity purchases, suggesting limits to Beijing's support as the Kremlin confronts economic sanctions over its attack of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxbusiness.com




somewhat surprisingly China abstained on the UN SC vote to condemn Russia today......Russia of course vetoed it


----------



## Citysnaps

Nice to see Tucker Carlson's recent professed love (a bit of an exaggeration) for Putin was picked up by Russia Today (RT.com).


----------



## shadow puppet

Pumbaa said:


> That’s more or less the problem. People want X to be true so they avoid questioning X. So easy for misinformation to spread…



Yes, I do get about questioning.  Forgive me.  Was only trying to find a bit of levity in an otherwise depressing and sobering situation.


----------



## User.45

Macky-Mac said:


> somewhat surprisingly China abstained on the UN SC vote to condemn Russia today......Russia of course vetoed it



This is one of the more surprising set of events. 


shadow puppet said:


> Yes, I do get about questioning.  Forgive me.  Was only trying to find a bit of levity in an otherwise depressing and sobering situation.



Not that it really matters. It's just pornhub. There are other avenues to get some Fs. Ask Russian Warship, she knows.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Reports tonight suggest that Kazakhstan, one of Russia's traditional (and closest) allies (bear in mind that Russia came to the rescue of attempts to remove the current administration in Kazakhstan as recently as January of this year) - and a southern (oil rich) neighbour -  is, according to reports, - denying a request for its troops to join the offensive in Ukraine, officials said Friday.

Additionally, the former Soviet republic said it is not recognizing the Russia-created breakaway republics upheld by Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, as a pretext for its aggression in Ukraine. 

Interesting, to say the least.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Reports tonight suggest that Kazakhstan, one of Russia's traditional (and closest) allies (bear in mind that Russia came to the rescue of attempts to remove the current administration in Kazakhstan as recently as January of this year) - and a southern (oil rich) neighbour -  is, according to reports, - denying a request for its troops to join the offensive in Ukraine, officials said Friday.
> 
> Additionally, the former Soviet republic said it is not recognizing the Russia-created breakaway republics upheld by Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, as a pretext for its aggression in Ukraine.
> 
> Interesting, to say the least.



Sauce:









						One of Russia's closest allies denies request for troops
					

Germany also said it was considering a "targeted" approach to disconnecting Russia from the SWIFT banking system as punishment for its invasion of Ukraine.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And the reports about Kazakhstan (which is by no means wedded to western nostrums, and, even more telling, actually "owes" Russia in crude Mafia measurements of reciprocity) denying Russia's request are revealing.

To those who think that Russia can be hurt only by the (fierce) application of raw (i.e. military) power: No.

This is important, and others (in the post Soviet space - none of them remotely resembling democracies) may well choose to follow suit.

Cue red faces (at the very least) in Moscow.

It is one thing to try to suppress snotty Slavs (whom you may seek to "eliminate", "annihilate", "obliterate" out of an excess of frustrated - if rejected - fraternal love), but, when never democratic Asiastics (whom you have always despised, deep in your shrivelled Russian imperialist heart) reject you, even when they owe you, well, what can one say.

Life is not fair.


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> somewhat surprisingly China abstained on the UN SC vote to condemn Russia today......Russia of course vetoed it




Not that surprising to me.   China is not ready to disconnect its economy from all the western supply chains and piss off its middle class citizens who have become accustomed to buying western goods.   The west has more options in those matters than China does at the moment,  and China is also a bit overextended financially in its efforts to expand influence in South America and more lately Pakistan and Afghanistan. 

Sure China is watching how the Russia v Ukraine aggression plays out because there could be tips on what the west tolerates and doesn't  go for at all, when China next tries to advance its eventual plan to incorporate Taiwan.    But they play an even longer game than Putin does, by decades or more,  so there's a limit to how buddy-buddy China will be with Russia this time around, pipeline projects notwithstanding.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Macky-Mac said:


> somewhat surprisingly China abstained on the UN SC vote to condemn Russia today......Russia of course vetoed it



No, not surprisingly.  Not at all.

Might I remind you of Lord Palmerston's - who (for reference) served as British Prime Minister between the years 1855-1858 and 1859-1865 - barbed (almost acerbic, but not inaccurate) observation - which is what China's policy suggests to me, in other words, China is not an ally of Russia's, it is just that they have some interests in common...

Anyway, Lord Palmerston (@yaxomoxay will relate to this) once observed: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> Not that surprising to me.   China is not ready to disconnect its economy from all the western supply chains and piss off its middle class citizens who have become accustomed to buying western goods.   The west has more options in those matters than China does at the moment,  and China is also a bit overextended financially in its efforts to expand influence in South America and more lately Pakistan and Afghanistan.
> 
> Sure China is watching how the Russia v Ukraine aggression plays out because there could be tips on what the west tolerates and doesn't  go for at all, when China next tries to advance its eventual plan to incorporate Taiwan.    But they play an even longer game than Putin does, by decades or more,  so there's a limit to how buddy-buddy China will be with Russia this time around, pipeline projects notwithstanding.



Interesting article from the Council on Foreign Relations regarding the tightrope China is trying to walk:









						Why China Is Struggling to Deal With Russia’s War in Ukraine
					

China is one of Russia’s closest partners, but supporting the invasion of Ukraine would seriously damage Beijing’s ties with wealthy democracies and alienate Chinese citizens who oppose the invasion.




					www.cfr.org


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> No, not surprisingly.  Not at all.
> 
> Might I remind you of Lord Palmerston's - who (for reference) served as British Prime Minister between the years 1855-1858 and 1859-1865 - barbed (almost acerbic, but not inaccurate) observation - which is what China's policy suggests to me, in other words, China is not an ally of Russia's, it is just that they have some interests in common...
> 
> Anyway, Lord Palmerston (@yaxomoxay will relate to this) once observed: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."



I am not familiar with Lord Palmerston but yeah, he ain’t wrong.

And yes, it applies to China spectacularly.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I am not familiar with Lord Palmerston but yeah, he ain’t wrong.
> 
> And yes, it applies to China spectacularly.




Lord Palmerston's (subsequently well-known, in fact, infamous, if not notorious - because it expressed an uncomfortable truth) quote was the (famous, perhaps infamous) British (realpolitik) response to pointed questions as to why British foreign policy in the nineteenth century wasn't more motivated by ethical, or moral, considerations.

And, it has surfaced frequently in the intervening years - not least because it is all too accurate (and that is not a criticism) - as a sort of political short hand to describe British foreign policy in certain contexts or settings ever since.

Now, on occasion, circumstances decreed that it (foreign policy) was motivated by matters other than crude self-interest, or commercial profit; expanding electoral franchises in the nineteenth century introduced other considerations to the political matrix - the detestation of middle class Britain (and some of working class Britain) for slavery did serve as a bit of a brake on what might have been an instinctive aristocratic preference for the feudal society of the South in the early 1860s.

Nevertheless, I cannot think of a better (or more eloquent) way with which to express Chinese motivation under the current political circumstances.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> No, not surprisingly.  Not at all.
> 
> Might I remind you of Lord Palmerston's - who (for reference) served as British Prime Minister between the years 1855-1858 and 1859-1865 - barbed (almost acerbic, but not inaccurate) observation - which is what China's policy suggests to me, in other words, China is not an ally of Russia's, it is just that they have some interests in common...
> 
> Anyway, Lord Palmerston (@yaxomoxay will relate to this) once observed: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."




well not surprising to you then, but perhaps to Putin.....Lord Palmerston's "_some interests in common_" could just as easily apply as the explanation if China had voted with Russia against the resolution.

It may be that China considered that reaction to the situation wasn't going quite as expected, your info about Kazakhstan as one example, and decided it might be just as well to avoid involvement since Russia was going to cast a veto anyway

The Kazakhstan situation is particularly interesting. I imagine Putin is thoroughly pissed off at them right now


----------



## leman

Kyiv is holding! The heroic lads and ladies of Ukrainian army are doing Gods work.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

Every time I open the news or see BBC notifications come up on my iPhone, it’s just unbelievable. Chatting on Teams with some Polish colleagues yesterday and they are very worried. The fact the Russians are actively targeting any civilians they see is shocking and I think there will be war crimes lodged in the Hague after this. Horrendous.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And, from one of the dying embers of what was once part of an excellent (and well-informed) media in Russia:


"The independent Novaya Gazeta paper said it has been told to stop calling Russia's invasion an "invasion." Vladimir Gerdo / TASS
Russia's communications regulator on Saturday ordered media to remove reports describing Moscow's attack on Ukraine as an "assault, invasion, or declaration of war" or face being blocked and fined.

In a statement, Roskomnadzor accused a number of independent media outlets including television channel Dozhd and the country's top independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta of spreading "unreliable socially significant untrue information" about the shelling of Ukrainian cities by the Russian army and civilian deaths.

On Thursday, Russian leader Vladimir Putin unleashed a full-scale invasion of Ukraine that has killed dozens of people, forced more than 50,000 to flee Ukraine in just 48 hours and sparked fears of a greater conflict in Europe."

So, not an "invasion"?

"An armed intervention", anyone?


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

theSeb said:


> 'No more words!' - Poland football team refuse to play World Cup qualifier against Russia — Metro
> 
> 
> The president of the Polish FA has slammed Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good, good.




Yes, I have just read this.


----------



## leman

Ukrainian soldier inspecting an abandoned Russian armor (to make it clear, this is not a destroyed machine, it’s how it is)

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497516099017101315/

Rough translation, sans expletives (the guy is funny as hell btw) : “so guys, it turns out the Russian shit is even worse then ours… have a look inside and weep… seconds strongest army in the world, morherfuckers… let’s look here in the tower… only partial payload… that there is fucked… no equipment… radio some old crap… what a pathetic peace of shit”


----------



## Zoidberg

So I saw some sunflower emojis regarding Ukraine on social media. I had no idea what they mean, so I googled them

It turns out they stem from this video. The sunflower is Ukraine's national flower, and the lady in the video is telling the Russian soldier to put sunflower seeds in his pocket, so that when they kill him, at least some flowers will grow from his body.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496866811110834176/

That's one of the most badass things I've heard. The babushkas there are metal.


----------



## Zoidberg

leman said:


> Ukrainian soldier inspecting an abandoned Russian armor (to make it clear, this is not a destroyed machine, it’s how it is)
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497516099017101315/
> 
> Rough translation, sans expletives (the guy is funny as hell btw) : “so guys, it turns out the Russian shit is even worse then ours… have a look inside and weep… seconds strongest army in the world, morherfuckers… let’s look here in the tower… only partial payload… that there is fucked… no equipment… radio some old crap… what a pathetic peace of shit”



I read an article that explained how, while Russia has way more tanks than Ukraine, many of Ukraine's tanks are actually similar but better and newer than the Russian ones, because the Soviet tank factory that had been set up to manufacture the newer versions was in Ukraine (just like how Ukraine got to keep the Antonov factory, including the large cargo carriers).



leman said:


> Kyiv is holding! The heroic lads and ladies of Ukrainian army are doing Gods work.



So far, it seems Ukraine is still holding out much better than Putin thought it would, and with Biden's order a few hours ago to give them hundreds of millions in military aid (which I've seen referred to as "the good stuff" that would not be destined for export normally) and a solid supply line from Poland, this could go on for a while. This must be what Marco Rubio meant yesterday when he tweeted "Tonight and for weeks to come Ukraine has some surprise welcome gifts for their uninvited guests".

What worries me is that Putin's best (and only?) pathway to winning the war was a successful Blitzkrieg (Crimea was theirs pretty much before lunchtime) and that seems to be unlikely now, because even if they "take" Kyiv, the insurgence could last much longer if the morale to fight remains. This could make him say in for a penny, in for a pound and decide to use increasingly larger and more brutal bombs.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> I read an article recently, about how, while Russia has way more tanks than Ukraine, many of Ukraine's tanks are actually similar but better and newer than the Russian ones, because the Soviet tank factory that had been set up to manufacture the newer versions was in Ukraine (just like how Ukraine got to keep the Antonov factory, including the large cargo carriers).
> 
> 
> God's work indeed. So far, it seems Ukraine is still holding out much better than Putin thought it would, and with Biden's order a few hours ago to give them hundreds of millions in military aid (which I've seen it referred to as "the good stuff" that would not be destined for export normally) and a solid supply line from Poland, this could go on for a while. This must be what Marco Rubio meant yesterday when he tweeted "Tonight and for weeks to come Ukraine has some surprise welcome gifts for their uninvited guests".
> 
> What worries me is that Putin's best (and only?) pathway to winning the war was a successful Blitzkrieg (Crimea was theirs pretty much before lunchtime) and that seems to be unlikely now, because even if they "take" Kyiv, the insurgence could last much longer if the morale to fight remains. *This could make him say in for a penny, in for a pound and decide to use increasingly larger and more brutal bombs.*



Apparently he is already there. Putin is sending in the flame throwers… thermobaric missiles.

He's not going to stop. Until he is stopped.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> So I saw some sunflower emojis regarding Ukraine on social media. I had no idea what they mean, so I googled them
> 
> It turns out they stem from this video. The sunflower is Ukraine's national flower, and the lady in the video is telling the Russian soldier to put sunflower seeds in his pocket, so that when they kill him, at least some flowers will grow from his body.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496866811110834176/
> 
> That's one of the most badass things I've heard. The babushkas there are metal.



These words may be louder than guns. Every one of these pounds in the heads of the invaders that they are the baddies.
The Expanse had one line that matches up: Live shamed and die empty!!!



Zoidberg said:


> God's work indeed. So far, it seems Ukraine is still holding out much better than Putin thought it would, and with Biden's order a few hours ago to give them hundreds of millions in military aid (which I've seen it referred to as "the good stuff" that would not be destined for export normally) and a solid supply line from Poland, this could go on for a while. This must be what Marco Rubio meant yesterday when he tweeted "Tonight and for weeks to come Ukraine has some surprise welcome gifts for their uninvited guests".



Good, good, good.



Zoidberg said:


> What worries me is that Putin's best (and only?) pathway to winning the war was a successful Blitzkrieg (Crimea was theirs pretty much before lunchtime) and that seems to be unlikely now, because even if they "take" Kyiv, the insurgence could last much longer if the morale to fight remains. This could make him say in for a penny, in for a pound and decide to use increasingly larger and more brutal bombs.



Yup, this is what I was saying before the invasion. The more the enemy and the world is prepared, the less likely Blitzkrieg succeeds. It also requires a motivated and rested army. German soldiers started up with a steady supply of amphetamine and advanced without sleep for many days. This is day #3 for Russians. Very few major breakthroughs. This already reflects really poorly on the russian army.

It's only a matter of days for Putin to start indiscriminate bombardment.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

leman said:


> Ukrainian soldier inspecting an abandoned Russian armor (to make it clear, this is not a destroyed machine, it’s how it is)
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497516099017101315/
> 
> Rough translation, sans expletives (the guy is funny as hell btw) : “so guys, it turns out the Russian shit is even worse then ours… have a look inside and weep… seconds strongest army in the world, morherfuckers… let’s look here in the tower… only partial payload… that there is fucked… no equipment… radio some old crap… what a pathetic peace of shit”




That looks like that found it in a Chernobyl vehicle grave yard it’s so old . I would imagine a lot of their tanks and other vehicles are from the 1980’s.


----------



## User.45

So to be clear who is putin's biggest bitch in Europe


----------



## Arkitect

P_X said:


> So to be clear who is putin's biggest bitch in Europe
> 
> 
> View attachment 11990



Not correct.

Hungary has agreed and that was admittedly a surprise.

However, Germany and France Belgium et al are not yet on board.


----------



## ericwn

I am not surprised that the Ukrainian army doesn’t make it smooth sailing for the Russian troops. Ukraine has one of the biggest forces in Europe if I remember that correctly. 

However labelling killing one another god’s work makes me wonder what god you folks are referring to. Certainly not one in the Christian faith. 

Either way, any day that Putin doesn’t succeed is a win.


----------



## User.45

ericwn said:


> However labelling killing one another god’s work makes me wonder what god you folks are referring to. Certainly not one in the Christian faith.



Are you referring to the eye-for-an-eye dude? Old Testament is totally down with that.

These people are literally defending their homes. I'm fine with the verbiage and I'm a pacifist.


----------



## ericwn

P_X said:


> Are you referring to the eye-for-an-eye dude? Old Testament is totally down with that.
> 
> These people are literally defending their homes. I'm fine with the verbiage and I'm a pacifist.




Yes, the shall not kill guy-cult. And Christianity by definition leans heavily on the story of the guy on the cross. The turn the other cheek guy. 

I’m fine with self defence but leave religion out of it, that’s just silly.


----------



## User.45

ericwn said:


> Yes, the shall not kill guy-cult. And Christianity by definition leans heavily on the story of the guy on the cross. The turn the other cheek guy.
> 
> I’m fine with self defence but leave religion out of it, that’s just silly.



Oh, you're referring to the New Testament guy. Yeah, I like him more. Your point is well taken though.


----------



## Arkitect

ericwn said:


> Yes, the shall not kill guy-cult. And Christianity by definition leans heavily on the story of the guy on the cross. The turn the other cheek guy.
> 
> I’m fine with self defence *but leave religion out of it, that’s just silly.*



Amen to that!

I understand emotions run high, but let's leave the fictional deities out of this.
Sticking to facts is far more helpful.

Besides, which Orthodox god are we gunning for here? The Russian one or the Ukrainian one? Because last time I looked it's the same fairy story.

I find it as distasteful when sports men/women do the prayer thanks when they win. Seriously? Go pray in private.

And yes, I am a fucking card carrying Atheist.


----------



## MarkusL

This US Army Blackhawk apparently went all the way to Medyka just inside Poland's border with Ukraine without shutting off their civilian transponder as they got closer. They have been hanging out around there ever since the invasion started and I don't think they are doing anything particularly interesting, but they have usually shut off the civilian transponder long before getting this close to the border. I wonder if this means they are now less worried about Russian interference this far to the west, compared to yesterday.





Although I will admit that following this war on flightradar24 is a bit like reading tea leaves.


----------



## Zoidberg

MarkusL said:


> This US Army Blackhawk apparently went all the way to Medyka just inside Poland's border with Ukraine without shutting off their civilian transponder as they got closer. They have been hanging out around there ever since the invasion started and I don't think they are doing anything particularly interesting, but they have usually shut off the civilian transponder long before getting this close to the border. I wonder if this means they are now less worried about Russian interference this far to the west, compared to yesterday.
> 
> View attachment 11996
> 
> Although I will admit that following this war on flightradar24 is a bit like reading tea leaves.



It's still amazing, though, that now anyone with the internet has unlimited access to maps and information better than what any world leader had until recently, sometimes in close to real time. I've seen the maps they used in WW2 in museums and they were terribly inaccurate in comparison.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## leman

ericwn said:


> However labelling killing one another god’s work makes me wonder what god you folks are referring to. Certainly not one in the Christian faith.




We are all going to die one day. But some of us can choose how to die. Some choose to die bearing arms into  a peaceful country, being an instrument of destruction to  their freedom, identity and culture. And some choose to die defending their culture, values and freedom.

What is happening in Ukraine - and Russia - right now is terrible. All the killing is terrible. But there us no justice on the side of the invaders. No conflict out of mutual interest. This is naked, purely evil, unprovoked one-sided aggression, based on ambitions of a single man and his friends. I do not condone killing, and I feel truly sorry for all the Russian kids that were pulled into this unjust conflict and given these criminal orders. But as long as Ukrainians are doing what they must to defend their rights - even if it means killing these boys - they are doing Gods work in my book. And as long as it means that the Russian Neofascist empire is closer to failure, I will celebrate every single downed Russian military plane and every single burned Russian armor.

P.S. Just in case there is any confusion, I am an atheist and “Gods work” is a colloquial expression. No need to bring your faith into it.


----------



## MarkusL

Zoidberg said:


> It's still amazing, though, that now anyone with the internet has unlimited access to maps and information better than what any world leader had until recently, sometimes in close to real time. I've seen the maps they used in WW2 in museums and they were terribly inaccurate in comparison.



There are still lots of things they are not showing us. But I think the most interesting thing I have seen so far is the pattern of which countries apparently don't want their airspace used for these missions. For some reason the air refueling missions from Ramstein all make this detour around Czechia even though it is a NATO member.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> And they refused to remove him from office for blackmailing the Ukrainian president by withholding defensive weapons in exchange for dirt on Hunter Biden. That was never a good look, but especially now...



Oh yeah, Ukraine was definitely touched  by the former President‘s poison.


----------



## ericwn

theSeb said:


> I feel like you skipped the Old Testament entirely. Anyway, let’s keep the Jebus loving out of this tragedy.




I did not. I referred straight to the probably most important of the 10 commandments. But to take your suggestion one step further let’s keep all involved talking about religion out of it. It has no place here. Neighbours shouldn’t kill one another. Full stop.


----------



## ericwn

leman said:


> We are all going to die one day. But some of us can choose how to die. Some choose to die bearing arms into a peaceful country, being an instrument of destruction to their freedom, identity and culture. And some choose to die defending their culture, values and freedom.
> 
> What is happening in Ukraine - and Russia - right now is terrible. All the killing is terrible. But there us no justice on the side of the invaders. No conflict out of mutual interest. This is naked, purely evil, unprovoked one-sided aggression, based on ambitions of a single man and his friends. I do not condone killing, and I feel truly sorry for all the Russian kids that were pulled into this unjust conflict and given these criminal orders. But as long as Ukrainians are doing what they must to defend their rights - even if it means killing these boys - they are doing Gods work in my book. And as long as it means that the Russian Neofascist empire is closer to failure, I will celebrate every single downed Russian military plane and every single burned Russian armor.
> 
> P.S. Just in case there is any confusion, I am an atheist and “Gods work” is a colloquial expression. No need to bring your faith into it.




I agree with your statements and for me English is not a native language, my point is entirely to leave any religious involvement at the door. Weapons, killing and religion are a moronic mix. 

And I say that both as an atheist as well as a pacifist.


----------



## leman

ericwn said:


> I agree with your statements and for me English is not a native language, my point is entirely to leave any religious involvement at the door. Weapons, killing and religion are a moronic mix.
> 
> And I say that both as an atheist as well as a pacifist.




Than we are in no disagreement. My statement wasn’t meant to be religios of any kind. Just a colloquial expression we use. Not a native speaker either  Anyway, happy to clear it up and yes, fully agree with your sentiment.


----------



## Zoidberg

ericwn said:


> I did not. I referred straight to the probably most important of the 10 commandments. But to take your suggestion one step further let’s keep all involved talking about religion out of it. It has no place here. Neighbours shouldn’t kill one another. Full stop.



I think you’re reading too much into it, it’s just a saying (but I have edited the G-word out nonetheless)


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> So to be clear who is putin's biggest bitch in Europe
> 
> 
> View attachment 11990



A word in the ear for Hungary: Have you forgotten 1956?


Arkitect said:


> Not correct.
> 
> Hungary has agreed and that was admittedly a surprise.
> 
> However, Germany and France Belgium et al are not yet on board.
> View attachment 11994



Maybe they (the Hungarians) have finally remembered 1956.

My German sister-in-law tells me (citing Speigel and other "good" sources) that this is being agonised over, in Germany.

However, I would expect it to be agreed (and Cyprus has a questionable and  quite incestuous relationship with Russians bearing monies - Orthodox Christian ties giving rise to a degree of cultural tolerance that is nauseating at times) the longer this appalling invasion continues.


----------



## yaxomoxay

ericwn said:


> However labelling killing one another god’s work makes me wonder what god you folks are referring to. Certainly not one in the Christian faith.




Bad guy dead ain’t a bad thing in Christianity. Just fyi. 

At any rate, it seems that the Russians are having more issues than expected.


----------



## Huntn

leman said:


> We are all going to die one day. But some of us can choose how to die. Some choose to die bearing arms into  a peaceful country, being an instrument of destruction to  their freedom, identity and culture. And some choose to die defending their culture, values and freedom.
> 
> What is happening in Ukraine - and Russia - right now is terrible. All the killing is terrible. But there us no justice on the side of the invaders. No conflict out of mutual interest. This is naked, purely evil, unprovoked one-sided aggression, based on ambitions of a single man and his friends. I do not condone killing, and I feel truly sorry for all the Russian kids that were pulled into this unjust conflict and given these criminal orders. But as long as Ukrainians are doing what they must to defend their rights - even if it means killing these boys - they are doing Gods work in my book. And as long as it means that the Russian Neofascist empire is closer to failure, I will celebrate every single downed Russian military plane and every single burned Russian armor.
> 
> P.S. Just in case there is any confusion, I am an atheist and “Gods work” is a colloquial expression. No need to bring your faith into it.



Just my non critical observation, I’d never use the term God’s work because it’s misused so often as in of _course God is on our side_, or asking _whose side is God on (?) _when bad guys win which seems to be fairly common.

Plus I don’t know God. Some of us presume to know what it stands for if it indeed exists as we imagine it, but it could be a sadistic son of a bitch, the Earth with all it’s pain could be a learning experience, or the Earth Simulator could equate  to one of the most popular vacation places that souls flock to knowing  beforehand that the trip to the Jungle has its up and downs.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> Bad guy dead ain’t a bad thing in Christianity. Just fyi.
> 
> At any rate, it seems that the Russians are having more issues than expected.



The more the better.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> My German sister-in-law tells me (citing Speigel and other "good" sources) that *this is being agonised over, in Germany.*



Apparently none more than former Chancellor Schröder… So many fingers in so many Pirogi…








Scepticalscribe said:


> However, I would expect it to be agreed (and Cyprus has a questionable and  quite incestuous relationship with Russians bearing monies - Orthodox Christian ties giving rise to a degree of cultural tolerance that is nauseating at times) the longer this appalling invasion continues.



100% agree.

Edit:
And this is why I despair that the EU/USA/UK aka "The West" will be of any useful help:






Vergogna, Italia!

And add to that list… Belgian diamonds.
Schande!

FFS!


----------



## ericwn

yaxomoxay said:


> Bad guy dead ain’t a bad thing in Christianity. Just fyi.
> 
> At any rate, it seems that the Russians are having more issues than expected.




Certainly not a bad thing if the book claims that the big guy did it. 

If folks on Earth do it to themselves it’s hardly a thing that’s celebrated in that faith. 

I said my parts above and will leave it at that. The more problems and setbacks the aggressor gets the better for Ukraine.


----------



## Zoidberg

An agreement has been reached to cut them from SWIFT, apparently.

Edit to add: it’s reported by Reuters, so it is probably accurate, but it is not official yet, so take it with a grain of salt.









						Cutting Russia off from SWIFT a "matter of days" - euro zone central banker
					

A decision to cut Russia off from the global SWIFT payment system will be taken in a matter of days, the governor of a central bank within the euro zone told Reuters on Saturday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## ericwn

Huntn said:


> Just my non critical observation, I’d never use the term God’s work because it’s misused so often as in of _course God is on our side_, or asking _whose side is God on(?)_ when bad guys win which seems to be fairly common.
> 
> Plus I don’t know God. Some of us presume to know what it stands for if it indeed exists as we imagine it, but it could be a sadistic son of a bitch, the Earth with all it’s pain could be learning experience, or the Earth Simulator could equate to one of the most popular vacation places that souls flock to knowing beforehand that the trip to the Jungle has its up and downs.




Couldn’t have said it better.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> An agreement has been reached to cut them from SWIFT, apparently.



YEEEEAAAHHH.

Better late than never. I think everybody's getting emboldened by Russia having an surprisingly difficult time with the invasion.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Interesting stuff about the Black Sea:

Around an hour ago, Mr Zelensky tweeted ( "I thank my friend Mr. President of  @RTErdogan and the people of  for their strong support. The ban on the passage of  warships to the Black Sea and significant military and humanitarian support for  are extremely important today. The people of  will never forget that!")

thanking Turkey for closing the Black Sea to Russian ships, (possibly hoping to force, or persuade Turkey's hand by doing so).

Just a few minutes ago, a senior (unnamed) official - speaking for the Turks denied having done this: ""President Erdogan didn't promise to close the straits," the official, who is directly familiar with the call, said. "Turkey hasn't made a decision to close the straits to Russian ships yet."

Moreover, earlier in the week, the Turkish Foreign Minister, Mr Mevlut Cavusoglu, had said that Russia wold still be able to send its ships through the straits even if Turkey closes them.

Under the 1936 Montreux Convention, Turkey has control over the passage of vessels between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, making it an essential player in the current conflict between Ukraine and Russia.  "Under (the) Montreux Convention on straits, Russia has a right to return its ships to its ports in Black Sea," Cavusoglu said in a TV interview. "Even in the wartime, Russia has a right to do it."

Russia is not the only actor able to display their mastery of social media with unsettling tweets; I'd imagine that Mr Zelensky's cheeky tweet caused something akin to cardiac arrests in the Kremlin.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> Apparently none more than former Chancellor Schröder… So many fingers in so many Pirogi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 100% agree.
> 
> Edit:
> And this is why I despair that the EU/USA/UK aka "The West" will be of any useful help:
> 
> 
> View attachment 12000
> 
> And add to that list… Belgian diamonds.
> 
> FFS!



Agree completely re Shröder (and so did my sister-in-law); a thoroughly compromised - and ethically questionable - character.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> An agreement has been reached to cut them from SWIFT, apparently.



That'd be great news, but do you have a link for that?

None of the news sites I follow have reported that.


----------



## Zoidberg

Arkitect said:


> That'd be great news, but do you have a link for that?
> 
> None of the news sites I watch have that.











						Cutting Russia off from SWIFT a "matter of days" - euro zone central banker
					

A decision to cut Russia off from the global SWIFT payment system will be taken in a matter of days, the governor of a central bank within the euro zone told Reuters on Saturday.




					www.reuters.com
				




Note, not an official decision (hence my wording), but still leaked from the horse’s mouth


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> Interesting stuff about the Black Sea:
> 
> Around an hour ago, Mr Zelensky tweeted ( "I thank my friend Mr. President of  @RTErdogan and the people of  for their strong support. The ban on the passage of  warships to the Black Sea and significant military and humanitarian support for  are extremely important today. The people of  will never forget that!")
> 
> thanking Turkey for closing the Black Sea to Russian ships, (possibly hoping to force, or persuade Turkey's hand by doing so).
> 
> Just a few minutes ago, a senior (unnamed) official - speaking for the Turks denied having done this: ""President Erdogan didn't promise to close the straits," the official, who is directly familiar with the call, said. "Turkey hasn't made a decision to close the straits to Russian ships yet."
> 
> Moreover, earlier in the week, the Turkish Foreign Minister, Mr Mevlut Cavusoglu, had said that Russia wold still be able to send its ships through the straits even if Turkey closes them.
> 
> Under the 1936 Montreux Convention, Turkey has control over the passage of vessels between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, making it an essential player in the current conflict between Ukraine and Russia.  "Under (the) Montreux Convention on straits, Russia has a right to return its ships to its ports in Black Sea," Cavusoglu said in a TV interview. "Even in the wartime, Russia has a right to do it."
> 
> Russia is not the only actor able to display their mastery of social media with unsettling tweets; I'd imagine that Mr Zelensky's tweet caused something akin to cardiac arrests in the Kremlin.



I also read that and said to myself… _"Hmmmm. Really?" WTF!?"_
For now I am going to file that under *"Not gonna happen."*






Zoidberg said:


> Cutting Russia off from SWIFT a "matter of days" - euro zone central banker
> 
> 
> A decision to cut Russia off from the global SWIFT payment system will be taken in a matter of days, the governor of a central bank within the euro zone told Reuters on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note, not an official decision (hence my wording), but still leaked from the horse’s mouth



Thanks. But I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## SuperMatt

I worry a bit about what Russia will do next. Let’s say their ground forces are unable to advance and take Kyiv. Can they afford the embarrassment of leaving without taking Kyiv? Will they siege and bombard the city from the air for weeks/months until they can take it? If they start heavily bombing civilians from the air, will the West create a no-fly zone?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I also read that and said to myself… _"Hmmmm. Really?" WTF!?"_
> For now I am going to file that under *"Not gonna happen."*




But, it is hilarious (and wonderfully cheeky, - what chutzpah! - and wonderfully confident) to take the online war to the Russians in such a way; they have been so busy threatening others that they are utterly nonplussed when a political leader in a city under armed assault responds in such a manner.  

It - if only for a short while - must have unsettled and shocked Moscow.  


Arkitect said:


> Thanks. But I'm not holding my breath.



Actually, I think it inevitable - to my mind, the only reaining question is how soon it wil occur; whatever about commerce, public opinion (which political elites are answerable to in democracies) and the growing horror of the sheer viciousness of the Russian assault, and the conflict in Ukraine, will demand that this step be taken.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> Will they siege and bombard the city from the air for weeks/months until they can take it?



I'm afraid that is the most likely scenario. This is why it's so crucial that the world stands together in deterring Putin from doing it.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> I'm afraid that is the most likely scenario. This is why it's so crucial that the world stands together in deterring Putin from doing it.



I think that at this point the problem is that no matter what, if the West intervenes militarily on the soil or sky over Ukraine, the war can and will extend to other countries.


----------



## Arkitect

SuperMatt said:


> I worry a bit about what Russia will do next. Let’s say their ground forces are unable to advance and take Kyiv. Can they afford the embarrassment of leaving without taking Kyiv? Will they siege and bombard the city from the air for weeks/months until they can take it? If they start heavily bombing civilians from the air, will the West create a no-fly zone?




The will keep on bombing. Putin will not — he cannot — turn back without winning — or being defeated.


Scepticalscribe said:


> But, it is hilarious (and wonderfully cheeky, - what chutzpah! - and wonderfully confident) to take the online war to the Russians in such a way; they have been so busy threatening others that they are utterly nonplussed when a political leader in a city under armed assault responds in such a manner.
> 
> It - if only for a short while - must have unsettled and shocked Moscow.
> 
> Actually, I think it inevitable - to my mind, the only reaining question is how soon it wil occur; whatever about commerce, public opinion (which political elites are answerable to in democracies) and the growing horror of the sheer viciousness of the Russian assault, and the conflict in Ukraine, will demand that this step be taken.



True. Perhaps inevitable, but… I still think it is going to take a long time. I am just not very gung-ho about the global response so far.


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> I'm afraid that is the most likely scenario. This is why it's so crucial that the world stands together in deterring Putin from doing it.



NATO should create a no-fly zone immediately if that happens. We saw that Russia was more than happy to help Syria bomb its own schools and hospitals for months/years. They would have no problem doing it to the “drug addicts” in Ukraine.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> NATO should create a no-fly zone immediately if that happens. We saw that Russia was more than happy to help Syria bomb its own schools and hospitals for months/years. They would have no problem doing it to the “drug addicts” in Ukraine.



To create a no-fly zone you’d have to be ready to shoot down Russian planes. Which could extend the conflict.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> I think that at this point the problem is that no matter what, if the West intervenes militarily on the soil or sky over Ukraine, the war can and will extend to other countries.



I read an article in Vox about how the threat of nuclear war is being wielded by Putin to keep other countries from interfering. The idea of nuclear weapons deterring war? It’s more like it deters one nuclear power from standing against another even if they are massacring their neighbors.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> To create a no-fly zone you’d have to be ready to shoot down Russian planes. Which could extend the conflict.



I agree. However, it could be a step that shows resolve and opposition without ramping up (too far) the risk of nuclear war.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> I read an article in Vox about how the threat of nuclear war is being wielded by Putin to keep other countries from interfering. The idea of nuclear weapons deterring war? It’s more like it deters one nuclear power from standing against another even if they are massacring their neighbors.



While I can’t foresee a full blown nuclear war, the use of small tactical nukes is not impossible imo.


----------



## Zoidberg

Arkitect said:


> Thanks. But I'm not holding my breath.



That’s always a good attitude to have these days. I’ll edit my post to add some emphasis on the “apparently”


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> While I can’t foresee a full blown nuclear war, the use of small tactical nukes is not impossible imo.



That still meets the criteria of nuclear war. 



yaxomoxay said:


> I think that at this point the problem is that no matter what, if the West intervenes militarily on the soil or sky over Ukraine, the war can and will extend to other countries.



Agree. The only way this situation won't spiral out is Putin getting ousted.


----------



## yaxomoxay




----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> I read an article in Vox about how the threat of nuclear war is being wielded by Putin to keep other countries from interfering. The idea of nuclear weapons deterring war? It’s more like it deters one nuclear power from standing against another even if they are massacring their neighbors.






Zoidberg said:


> Cutting Russia off from SWIFT a "matter of days" - euro zone central banker
> 
> 
> A decision to cut Russia off from the global SWIFT payment system will be taken in a matter of days, the governor of a central bank within the euro zone told Reuters on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note, not an official decision (hence my wording), but still leaked from the horse’s mouth



Analogy
One neighbor sends thugs to invade another neighbor‘s home to trash and murder it’s occupants with a few escaping out the back door,  ideally the perp would be brought to justice by the rest of the neighbors.

Complicating the situation, the mastermind perp sits at home with a nuke in his basement while his henchman do the trashing. So as hostages to this malfeasance, the other neighbors don’t want to see the neighborhood go up in a mushroom cloud, and will resist a frontal assault unless the perp goes after any of the homes belonging to the Neighborhood Co-defense Association. This is their _See You In Hell _line in the sand because they have some nukes of their own.

But if the idea is to resist, better than nothing is to shut off the bad guy‘s access to commerce and social activities. We don’t want this guy in our shops or showing up at our garden parties, while hoping in frustration he’s not going to threaten Armageddon any way.

Thinking he has calculated the NCDA limits as to what the neighbors will accept, and unless the  bad guy is completely deranged and wants to live, with the resulting commerce and social pain, difficulty feeding the family and inability to pay his mortgage, this might eventually make the other family members rise up and depose him.

In the mean time, the neighbors set up lodging and assistance for the refugees.

———
During my video game activities, I have two games I am active in one from Russia (Metro Exodus) and the other from Belarus (World of Warships) and I have to keep telling myself that not all Russians are bad.  My impression is that Belarus is aligned with Mother Russia.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> While I can’t foresee a full blown nuclear war, the use of small tactical nukes is not impossible imo.



Not impossible, but I don’t see a circumstance in a straight up Russian-Ukraine fight were one would be needed by Russia. Now Ukraine, that might be different, if they had any in their arsenal, but still you would be trashing your own country by doing so, but not an impossible decision if one is desperate enough, if you feel you are staring at death anyway. Now transfer this scenario to a desperate Russian leader if it ever comes down to that, which is very scary territory.


----------



## Macky-Mac

MarkusL said:


> This US Army Blackhawk apparently went all the way to Medyka just inside Poland's border with Ukraine without shutting off their civilian transponder as they got closer. They have been hanging out around there ever since the invasion started and I don't think they are doing anything particularly interesting, but they have usually shut off the civilian transponder long before getting this close to the border. I wonder if this means they are now less worried about Russian interference this far to the west, compared to yesterday.
> 
> View attachment 11996
> 
> Although I will admit that following this war on flightradar24 is a bit like reading tea leaves.





I suspect it does indeed mean they aren't currently worried about Russian interference this far west. Leaving the civilian transponder on might have been a mistake by the crew....or it might have been deliberate.

After yesterday's NATO meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Sweden, Finland and the EU, it seems clear that military supplies are currently being sent to Ukraine......so maybe the helicopter was observing some of the transfer?

from Al Jazeera's reporting;


> _NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday that the alliance was deploying thousands of combat-ready troops to Ukraine’s neighbours, as well as continuing to send weapons to Ukraine including air defences after Russia’s attack....
> 
> ....Some of the 30 NATO allies also announced the types of weapons they would supply Ukraine, Stoltenberg said, without giving specific details...._


----------



## yaxomoxay

Italian news reporting Russian troops close to the Ukraine-Poland border.


----------



## yaxomoxay

A few months ago I purchased a beautiful handmade komboskini from a guy in Kiev, which I use almost every day. I contacted him, and I am glad to report that he’s fine.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Very interesting take on the reasons for the invasion, including some points not yet discussed in this thread:


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> A few months ago I purchased a beautiful handmade komboskini from a guy in Kiev, which I use almost every day. I contacted him, and I am glad to report that he’s fine.



Is he still in Kiev?


----------



## Huntn

TBL said:


> Very interesting take on the reasons for the invasion, including some points not yet discussed in this thread:



Summary please.


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> Italian news reporting Russian troops close to the Ukraine-Poland border.



Certainly the Russians would be expected to try to seize border control....perhaps the helicopter (that MarkusL reported) was looking for these Russian troops that were reported. There are 4 NATO countries that border Ukraine so it'll take a lot of Russian troops to actually close the border.

Meanwhile, having previously said it wouldn't supply weapons to Ukraine, it appears the Germany has shifted its position. From The Guardian's ongoing coverage;


> *Germany* approved the delivery of 400 RPGs to *Ukraine* by the *Netherlands*, marking a shift in policy from its previous position of not shipping weapons.



and Al Jazeera's coverage;


> Berlin discussing export of RPGs to Ukraine via a third country​Germany’s government is in talks over approving the delivery of 400 rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) to Ukraine via a third country but no final decision on whether to do so has been taken, the country’s defence ministry says.




edit;
Germany to provide more military aid to Ukraine.....more from the Guardian's ongoing coverage;


> *Germany will send 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 stinger missiles to Ukraine, the German chancellor said on Saturday.*
> Olaf Scholz said the Russian invasion marked a “turning point”, and added: “It is our duty to do our best to help Ukraine defend against the invading army of Putin.”




and regarding SWIFT;


> *Germany has suggested it could support banning Russia’s access to Swift*, the world’s main international payments network, after previously opposing the measure.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Huntn said:


> Summary please.




1) Russia fears Ukraine joining NATO could mean NATO forces help Ukraine retake Crimea, which gives Russia little defense in the Black Sea and causes them to lose control over oil drilling in and around the peninsula. 1b) Ukraine has cut off Crimea’s water supply, Crimea is drought-prone, and Russia intends to restore the flow from the Dnieper. 2) Ukraine has huge oil reserves in the east and west that haven’t been drilled. Ukraine could become #2 petro-state in Europe if Western oil companies help Ukraine drill that oil and gas, making Europe much less reliant on Russian oil and gas.

But I encourage anyone interested to watch it for themselves.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Huntn

TBL said:


> 1) Russia fears Ukraine joining NATO could mean NATO forces help Ukraine retake Crimea, which gives Russia little defense in the Black Sea and causes them to lose control over oil drilling in and around the peninsula. 1b) Ukraine has cut off Crimea’s water supply, Crimea is drought-prone, and Russia intends to restore the flow from the Dnieper. 2) Ukraine has huge oil reserves in the east and west that haven’t been drilled. Ukraine could become #2 petro-state in Europe if Western oil companies help Ukraine drill that oil and gas, making Europe much less reliant on Russian oil and gas.
> 
> But I encourage anyone interested to watch it for themselves.



Thanks! I’ll watch it later today…


----------



## Huntn

theSeb said:


> No fuel and lost behind enemy lines: How Russia's mighty army got bogged down in Ukraine — The Telegraph
> 
> 
> Casualty numbers thought to be higher than Russia had expected with hundreds of tanks and other armoured vehicles destroyed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is interesting to me, purely because when I was discussing the possibility of Russian invasion a few weeks ago on another forum we touched upon this subject. Cool initial attack plans are cool. Fighting a war and keeping the supply lines going is the difficult part. Some people were speculating whether Russia would have enough money and be able to support an ongoing war effort beyond a few weeks, if Ukraine didn’t immediately concede.



I don’t think it will be enough, but I hope Ukraine turns into a hell hole for Vlad.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

theSeb said:


> No fuel and lost behind enemy lines: How Russia's mighty army got bogged down in Ukraine — The Telegraph
> 
> 
> Casualty numbers thought to be higher than Russia had expected with hundreds of tanks and other armoured vehicles destroyed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is interesting to me, purely because when I was discussing the possibility of Russian invasion a few weeks ago on another forum we touched upon this subject. Cool initial attack plans are cool. Fighting a war and keeping the supply lines going is the difficult part. Some people were speculating whether Russia would have enough money and be able to support an ongoing war effort beyond a few weeks, if Ukraine didn’t immediately concede.




They have more than enough money (and can call on vast reserve funds).

However, the old tired but true military cliché - "no plan survives contact with the enemy" - may offer an explanation, as can arrogance, hubris, and a misguided belief that Ukrainians would welcome being "liberated" from their democracy by an invasion force, a hail of ballistic missiles, endless lies, and wave after wave of vicious and vengeful propaganda.

For those who prefer facts to theory, I might remind readers of Russia's (well, it was the USSR at the time) disastrous (and enormously embarrassing) Winter War with Finland in the winter 1939-1940.

Moreover, to describe the current leadership of Ukraine as neo-Nazis is not just wrong, and historically illiterate, it is risible; besides, - and this is interesting - Mr Zelensky is Jewish.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> They have more than enough money (and can call on vast reserve funds).
> 
> However, the old tired but true military cliché - "no plan survives contact with te enemy" - may offer an explanation, as can arrogance, hubris, and a misguided belief that Ukrainians would welcome being "liberated" from their democracy by an invasion force, a hail of ballistic missiles, endless lies, and wave after wave of vicious and vengeful propaganda.



As the 20th century poet, Mike Tyson said, "everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouf."



Scepticalscribe said:


> For those who prefer facts to theory, I might remind readers of Russia's (well, it was the USSR at the time) disastrous (and enormously embarrassing) Winter War with Finland in the winter 1939-1940.



It does seem that Ukrainians dish it to Russia like the Finnish dished it to the USSR.



Scepticalscribe said:


> Moreover, to describe the current leadership of Ukraine as neo-Nazis is not just wrong, and historically illiterate, it is risible; besides, - and this is interesting - Mr Zelensky is Jewish.



Putin knew that replicating the German aggression in 1939, he'll be called a nazi, so the denazification slogan just intended to dampen and distract from the 1939 analogy.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> As the 20th century poet, Mike Tyson said, "everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouf."



Sorry but I laughed harder at this than I should have, even scared my wife.

I also feel for Zelensky, they will take him out but he'll go down as a martyr and a man who stood by his people with no real help from the outside world. It's a sad way to go.


[deleted by user] from
      gifs


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Sorry but I laughed harder at this than I should have, even scared my wife.
> 
> I also feel for Zelensky, they will take him out but he'll go down as a martyr and a man who stood by his people with no real help from the outside world. It's a sad way to go.
> 
> 
> [deleted by user] from
> gifs



Zelenksy has been doing an outstanding job. Morale is super high and if he took off morale would have plummeted immediately. Instead we get this:









						Ukraine Crisis - 'Putin Will Meet Hell' Says Former President Petro Poroshenko G... | Gfycat
					

Watch and share Ukraine Crisis - 'Putin Will Meet Hell' Says Former President Petro Poroshenko GIFs by deuxalpha on Gfycat




					gfycat.com
				




(watch the guy on the left at ~3rd second; these people are not scared anymore)


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> Is he still in Kiev?



Yes.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> Sorry but I laughed harder at this than I should have, even scared my wife.



Shit I lol’d too  


Eric said:


> I also feel for Zelensky, they will take him out but he'll go down as a martyr and a man who stood by his people with no real help from the outside world. It's a sad way to go.
> 
> 
> [deleted by user] from
> gifs



Pope Francis called him to show support. Not much in the big order of things, but hopefully it will increase morale - and hope - a bit.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Roman Abramovich has handed over the "stewardship and care" of Chelsea football club (which he still owns) to a charitable foundation in a clear distancing act, one undoubtedy designed to defuse fan outrage over Ukraine, (which would have had an impact on Chelsea), and pre-empt any possible (if unlikely) negative actions by the football authorities.

And Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic have joined the Baltic states (and the UK) in banning Russian flights over the airspace, which is surely an inconvenience.

The thing here, of course, is that we can expect Russia to retaliate and reciprocate, for it is, of course, by far the largest country on the planet, which will mean longer flights, and higher fares, and probably a reduction in air travel as some routes may well become no longer viable.

Re SWIFT, the reports I am seeing from Germany suggest that the German authorities are inching closer to seeking to curtail, or restrict, or limit, Russia's access to the SWIFT system.  That is still not a complete exclusion, but I would expect to see restrictions - and limits on access - imposed over the coming days, at the very least.


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> Shit I lol’d too
> 
> Pope Francis called him to show support. Not much in the big order of things, but hopefully it will increase morale - and hope - a bit.



TBH it feels like we're all hanging him out to dry with an "atta boy". He has shown himself to be a standup courageous man, it's a shame to see it play out like this.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> TBH it feels like we're all hanging him out to dry with an "atta boy". He has shown himself to be a standup courageous man, it's a shame to see it play out like this.



Yes, this is what we’re doing more or less. Evidently, We have been doing it for years, just not in plain sight.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Actions can have consequences:

A small - but growing - number of European countries (the Baltic states, Czech republic, Slovakia, Poland, Romania and the UK) have denied access to their airspace to Russian airlines.

And a report tonight suggests that this is just beginning to bite.

(From Twitter, and the Washington Post): The chairman of Russia’s lower house of parliament had his plane turned back mid-flight by Sweden and then Finland, making him the first top Russian official to face Europe’s denial of airspace permissions in response to the invasion.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Macky-Mac said:


> Certainly the Russians would be expected to try to seize border control....perhaps the helicopter (that MarkusL reported) was looking for these Russian troops that were reported. There are 4 NATO countries that border Ukraine so it'll take a lot of Russian troops to actually close the border.
> 
> Meanwhile, having previously said it wouldn't supply weapons to Ukraine, it appears the Germany has shifted its position. From The Guardian's ongoing coverage;
> 
> and Al Jazeera's coverage;
> 
> 
> edit;
> Germany to provide more military aid to Ukraine.....more from the Guardian's ongoing coverage;
> 
> 
> and regarding SWIFT;



Call me cynic, but this race to send weapons to Ukraine seems a bit too late and some sort of BS aimed more at chilling domestic politics than actually help Ukraine. 

These shipments are massive. Russia has air supremacy. There is no way that once in Ukrankan soil Russia won’t destroy most of them. Hope I am wrong.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Call me cynic, but this race to send weapons to Ukraine seems a bit too late and some sort of BS aimed more at chilling domestic politics than actually help Ukraine.
> 
> These shipments are massive. Russia has air supremacy. There is no way that once in Ukrankan soil Russia won’t destroy most of them. Hope I am wrong.



I do agree –to a point– with your cynical observation, but regarding the other thing, just last night, the US was offering Zelenskyy a ride to get out (implying they could still fly in and out), and Russia lost at least another helicopter and two fighter jets this afternoon, in addition to a second plane packed with paratroopers earlier. And that's in the regions they have the most control over. So while they are the ones flying around, they do not have air supremacy (yet). The weapons shipments are also believed to include AA weapons (there were pictures floating around of Avengers – basically eight Stingers slapped on a Humvee– being flown to Poland this past week) which will make it harder for the Russians to stay in the air.

Make no mistake, I'm not optimistic: I believe the president will probably not make it another week, and the Russians will attempt to raze down everything they find on their path, but up until now it was supposed to be the "easy" part where they threw the Ukrainian army into disarray, and that clearly hasn't worked well. What comes now is going to be reminiscent of Sarajevo, but potentially much worse, given the size of the cities and of the Russian forces.

For reference, these are the weapons that the Russians are now moving into Ukraine:


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> Call me cynic, but this race to send weapons to Ukraine seems a bit too late and some sort of BS aimed more at chilling domestic politics than actually help Ukraine.
> 
> These shipments are massive. Russia has air supremacy. There is no way that once in Ukrankan soil Russia won’t destroy most of them. Hope I am wrong.




I agree about this aid being "a bit too late" and that in many cases it's because of concern about public sentiment. Germany's about face is a particularly obvious example.

Russia certainly expected to immediately gain air supremacy by now, but from news reports, they seem to still be struggling to achieve it.  If they have it, I'd be expecting to see a lot more news about massive bombing.

And if you recall, Russia had clear air supremacy in Afghanistan back in the 1980s but it didn't win the war for them

All that said, I'm not optimistic about the situation.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Call me cynic, but this race to send weapons to Ukraine seems a bit too late and some sort of BS aimed more at chilling domestic politics than actually help Ukraine.
> 
> These shipments are massive. Russia has air supremacy. There is no way that once in Ukrankan soil Russia won’t destroy most of them. Hope I am wrong.



Actually, I think it is a bit more nuanced than that.

Yes, outraged public opinion matters (these are democracies, after all), but I would also argue that much of the political leadership in Europe (those who who have been neither bought nor bullied by Russian interests) find themselves genuinely shocked as they had never, ever, thought that things would come to this.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Actually, I think it is a bit more nuanced than that.
> 
> Yes, outraged public opinion matters (these are democracies, after all), but I would also argue that much of the political leadership in Europe (those who who have been neither bought nor bullied by Russian interests) find themselves genuinely shocked as they had never, ever, thought that things would come to this.



Yes, but.... are they not supposed to be experts working with proper intelligence and diplomatic channels? How come they don't constantly contemplate the different range of possible outcomes and draft plans, contingencies and agreements to respond to each well in advance? This has been months in the making, and it's been obvious for a while that Putin was going to invade at least part of Ukraine. Why are they still debating which sanctions to impose like it took them by surprise?


----------



## Cmaier

Zoidberg said:


> Yes, but.... are they not supposed to be experts working with proper intelligence and diplomatic channels? How come they don't constantly contemplate the different range of possible outcomes and draft plans, contingencies and agreements to respond to each? This has been months in the making, and it's been obvious for a while that Putin was going to invade at least part of Ukraine. Why are they still debating which sanctions to impose like it took them by surprise?



Politicians always want to follow the wind of popular opinion nowadays.


----------



## Zoidberg

Cmaier said:


> Politicians always want to follow the wind of popular opinion nowadays.



That I know, but I'm appalled by their lack of responsiveness.

To be fair, I have been pleasantly surprised by the relative unanimity in the international response to the invasion, I'm complaining about the lack of coordination in the actual retaliation.


----------



## SuperMatt

Zoidberg said:


> That I know, but I'm appalled by their lack of responsiveness.
> 
> To be fair, I have been pleasantly surprised by the relative unanimity in the international response to the invasion, I'm complaining about the lack of coordination in the actual retaliation.



And this is with Biden banging the drums for a long time, and telling them all to have sanctions prepared.

2017-2020 was a very bad time for US relations with NATO and other allies. Brexit has been a disaster, Poland has been leaning towards fascism (some say), and France has some serious issues with the far-right too.

I wish Brexit hadn’t happened, and that American diplomacy hadn’t been cut off at the knees by the previous administration. But this is where we are. It is encouraging to see that adversity is reminding NATO members why the treaty exists.

Perhaps this will wake Russians up and the nation will move towards actual democracy in the future.


----------



## Zoidberg

SuperMatt said:


> And this is with Biden banging the drums for a long time, and telling them all to have sanctions prepared.
> 
> 2017-2020 was a very bad time for US relations with NATO and other allies. Brexit has been a disaster, Poland has been leaning towards fascism (some say), and France has some serious issues with the far-right too.
> 
> I wish Brexit hadn’t happened, and that American diplomacy hadn’t been cut off at the knees by the previous administration. But this is where we are. It is encouraging to see that adversity is reminding NATO members why the treaty exists.
> 
> Perhaps this will wake Russians up and the nation will move towards actual democracy in the future.



Yes, exactly. Trump did everything he could to specifically sap Ukraine's capabilities in the last months of his presidency (it is now obvious who gave him that idea), but Biden has shown great resolve in trying to help.
Brexit is the best example, but all of Europe has been under cultural and political attack from Russia for over a decade now. As a European, I am not pleased that, being that this is happening at our own doorstep, we have to count -again- on the US to do anything about it, while treasonous politicians are freely allowed to actively work against our own interests.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Nothing new or surprising, but TFG’s praise of Putin with virtually zero concern for the Ukrainians is beyond sick, and I can’t believe republicans aren’t condemning him. Not only that, the usual far-right lunatics are shrugging their shoulders and using it as argument against the southern border. We have inflation, the biggest European war since WWII and these folks are still whining about immigration, which has nothing to do with either.

You look at what the Ukrainians are going through, you realize how sick Putin is and how one man can have so much power, and everything the republicans are taking part in here in the States makes you sick.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

The White House, the EU Commission, Canada and some European countries (France, Germany, UK) have just announced the expulsion of "selected Russian banks" from SWIFT.

Yes, to my mind, it doesn't go half far enough, but, at least it is a start, and is something to build further on.


----------



## User.45

Resharing because this is comic gold. Just watch the guy on the left.


----------



## Eric

Well played.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/t24g5o


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Well played.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/t24g5o



Yes this is what I've been laughing at more than I probably should. But it's such a good comparison.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

A tweet from tonight: "My hotel in Moscow asked me to settle the bill early because they aren’t sure if credit cards are going to work once SWIFT sanctions kick in."


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I fail to see an end game scenario where Putin doesn't end up dead, imprisoned, or in exile (will probably have to be a island fortress because I can't think of any country who would keep him safe).  He's made his intentions clear.  It doesn't end here and he won't "my bad" it.  It's doubtful, but I hope this comes at the hand of the Russian people because that would probably be the least casualty scenario.  Also, if it doesn't come from the Russian people then they are going to be in a world of hurt for decades.  The trust is gone.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I fail to see an end game scenario where Putin doesn't end up dead, imprisoned, or in exile (will probably have to be a island fortress because I can't think of any country who would keep him safe).  He's made his intentions clear.  It doesn't end here and he won't "my bad" it.  It's doubtful, but I hope this comes at the hand of the Russian people because that would probably be the least casualty scenario.  Also, if it doesn't come from the Russian people then they are going to be in a world of hurt for decades.  The trust is gone.




Quite candidly, I'm not so sure that such an outcome could come from the Russian people - Mr Putin's control of the state and security apparatus strikes me as probably too extensive for that.

However, it might yet come from sections of the Russian elite, that space where political-military-security-siloviki-oligarch groups overlap and where their interests, lives, lifestyles - and possibly, their very existence - is threatened by these (deranged and delusional and murderous) actions on the part of Mr Putin.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Quite candidly, I'm not so sure that such an outcome could come from the Russian people - Mr Putin's control of the state and security apparatus strikes me as probably too extensive for that.
> 
> However, it might yet come from sections of the Russian elite, that space where political-military-security-siloviki-oligarch groups overlap and where their interests, lives, lifestyles - and possibly, their very existence - is threatened by these (deranged and delusional and murderous) actions on the part of Mr Putin.



Always a good time to recommend watching The Death of Stalin.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> find themselves genuinely shocked as they had never, ever, thought that things would come to this.



and I am shocked that they are shocked tbh. I think that since it was a matter of when rather a matter of if, they probably thought they could keep kicking the can further.


----------



## Thomas Veil

If Russia is bombing Kyiv because they're convinced it's full of neo-Nazis, they're aiming at the wrong target. CPAC is in Orlando this weekend.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497797398898176000/


----------



## Eric

Looks like it could be the beginning of an ugly financial collapse in Russia.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497888112185253889/


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Looks like it could be the beginning of an ugly financial collapse in Russia.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497888112185253889/



Good. Let the entire country go bankrupt and let’s see how long Putin maintains his support.


----------



## Arkitect

*sigh*
Putin is really going all in.
With all the bald faced lies he and his government are prepared to spout, what about small nuclear blast somewhere in Russia, and then blame the Ukraine?
And then of course they would just *have* to retaliate.

I would not put it past him.



> Putin orders nuclear deterrence forces on high alert​*Russian* president Vladimir Putin has ordered military command to put nuclear deterrence forces on high alert after aggressive statements by *Nato* countries, Reuters reports.



From the Guardian


----------



## Edd

Eric said:


> Looks like it could be the beginning of an ugly financial collapse in Russia.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497888112185253889/



PR like that could prompt Vlad the Nazi Slayer to blackout Twitter in Russia.


----------



## Arkitect

Edd said:


> PR like that could prompt Vlad the Nazi Slayer to blackout Twitter in Russia.



Agree.
Frankly, I am surprised Twitter is still allowed to function in Russia.


----------



## User.45

Arkitect said:


> *sigh*
> Putin is really going all in.
> With all the bald faced lies he and his government are prepared to spout, what about small nuclear blast somewhere in Russia, and then blame the Ukraine?
> And then of course they would just *have* to retaliate.
> 
> I would not put it past him.
> 
> 
> From the Guardian



No news there and at this point, it's mainly irrelevant because we are past the times of rational thoughts and proportional action with Putin.

Kharkiv holds. Kiev holds. Internet holds. Supplies coming for Ukrainians. Russia has supply problems and will allegedly run out in less than a week. SWIFT ban. International consensus against Russia's actions. 


> *Ukrainian* forces have repelled a *Russian* attempt to seize *Kharkiv*, the city’s governor claimed on Sunday, following fierce fighting and street battles with advancing Russian troops.





> Kharkiv’s governor Oleh Synyehubov said Ukrainian soldiers were now “cleaning up” the eastern city. He said Russian soldiers were surrendering in groups of five to ten and throwing their equipment in the middle of the road.





> “Control over Kharkiv is completely ours!” Synyehubov posted on Facebook. “A complete cleansing of the city from the enemy is happening. The Russian enemy is absolutely demoralised.”




Putin's strongman status is indeed his weakness. If he's not winning, he's losing and he is losing big time right now.


----------



## Arkitect

P_X said:


> No news there and at this point, it's mainly irrelevant because we are past the times of rational thoughts and proportional action with Putin.
> 
> Kharkiv holds. Kiev holds. Internet holds. Supplies coming for Ukrainians. Russia has supply problems and will allegedly run out in less than a week. SWIFT ban. International consensus against Russia's actions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin's strongman status is indeed his weakness. If he's not winning, he's losing and he is losing big time right now.



This puts it quite well…


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Good. Let the entire country go bankrupt and let’s see how long Putin maintains his support.




As one person put it on Reddit, not sure how accurate this is but seems plausible.





This is from the link posted at the end
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497858150573170688/


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Two thoughtful articles in today's Observer (more or less the Sunday edition of the Guardian) by former Attorney General Dominic Grieve (one of the few from a Tory background to be informed by an ethical perspective), and by Vladimir Sorokin, which are both very much worth reading.

And - on the possible reach of "soft power" sanctions, the International Judo Federation has suspended Mr Putin's honorary president (and ambassador) status.

This will sting; long before he served with the KGB, long before he was well known in any capacity, indeed even in his student days, Mr Putin was genuinely exceptionally talented at judo, and, as a young man, was thought to be just at - or around - or close to, international status - he was ranked in the top 10-14 in the country (and this was a country the size of the USSR) - and was a judo champion in his native St Petersburg.


----------



## User.45

Arkitect said:


> This puts it quite well…
> 
> View attachment 12076



Exactly. And that's the issue with threats. They only work if the threatened believe their decisions can alter the chances of the threats being realized.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> And - on the possible reach of "soft power" sanctions, the International Judo Federation has suspended Mr Putin's honorary president (and ambassador) status.



Ippon!


----------



## User.45

Keeps piling on:


> Britain’s foreign secretary, Liz Truss, said on Sunday that she would support Britons who want to go to Ukraine to take up arms to resist the Russian invasion, in an intervention likely to escalate tensions with Moscow.





> When asked in a BBC interview about a call from President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine for foreigners to join his country’s fight against Russia, Ms. Truss said those resisting the Russians were “fighting for freedom and democracy not just for Ukraine but for the whole of Europe.”





> Asked specifically whether she would support Britons going to Ukraine to fight, she responded: “Absolutely, if that is what they want do to.”











						What Happened on Day 4 of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
					

Fierce Ukrainian resistance continued to keep Russian forces from gaining control of key cities. World opposition to the Russian invasion hardened, with the E.U. banning Russian aircraft from its airspace.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Herdfan

So did Ukraine actually destroy their nuclear weapons like they were supposed to in 1994?

Zelensky seems much more level-headed than Putin for sure.  But if Russian forces start to take over and there is no good end for Ukraine, if they have them does he punish Russia on the way out?


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> So did Ukraine actually destroy their nuclear weapons like they were supposed to in 1994?
> 
> Zelensky seems much more level-headed than Putin for sure.  But if Russian forces start to take over and there is no good end for Ukraine, if they have them does he punish Russia on the way out?



Are you completely insane?


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Are you completely insane?




I hope not.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I fail to see an end game scenario where Putin doesn't end up dead, imprisoned, or in exile (will probably have to be a island fortress because I can't think of any country who would keep him safe).  He's made his intentions clear.  It doesn't end here and he won't "my bad" it.  It's doubtful, but I hope this comes at the hand of the Russian people because that would probably be the least casualty scenario.  Also, if it doesn't come from the Russian people then they are going to be in a world of hurt for decades.  The trust is gone.




Lots of good articles and discussions around the internet explaining why this may be the beginning of the end for Putin. He has his supporters, but even some of them draw the line at killing innocent people for virtually no reason. Putin has drawn the ire of the world… I think he had more to lose than gain. This is a vanity project.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> Good. Let the entire country go bankrupt and let’s see how long Putin maintains his support.



I am not sure a bankrupt Russia is what we need tbh. After 20 years of Putin, it would become the perfect scenario for a military coup and the installation of an ever harsher regime.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Keeps piling on:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Happened on Day 4 of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
> 
> 
> Fierce Ukrainian resistance continued to keep Russian forces from gaining control of key cities. World opposition to the Russian invasion hardened, with the E.U. banning Russian aircraft from its airspace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com




Yes and no.

Last night, it transpired that the UK govt (in a tweet since removed) were insisting that any Ukrainian refugees seeking refuge, or sanctuary, in the UK would still be subject to the (post-Brexit) visa regime of the United Kingdom, and that exceptions would not be made for Ukraine; the Foreign Office advised them that they could apply for visas in "the normal way" - in other words, apply through the seasonal workers' scheme (as is done by seasonal fruit pickers, for example).

Indeed, there were reports of visas being denied to Ukrainian spouses of Britons.

Now, two things: The UK is no longer a member of the EU (and so is not present at the meetings where whatever decisions are taken get taken; this means that while EU decisions have no effect on the UK, conversely, the UK has no input into EU decisions), and worse, may be viewed (not unreasonably) as a not entirely reliable partner, partly on account of threatening to tear up treaties, and partly on account of the pernicious influence of the Londonograd laundromat. 

However, I would expect the position of the Foreign Office re granting visas to Ukrainians (or abolishing the requirement for Ukrainians to seek - and be granted - visas before being admitted to the UK) to change over the coming days.



Needless to say, the reaction (on Twitter) was explosive.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> Exactly. And that's the issue with threats. They only work if the threatened believe their decisions can alter the chances of the threats being realized.



That’s why I mentioned nukes yesterday. I don’t exclude Putin’s use of tactical nukes.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> This puts it quite well…
> 
> View attachment 12076



Yes, this is ominous, a horrible case of doubling down.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes, this is ominous, a horrible case of doubling down.



“Ukraine delenda est”, I guess. 

To be honest what he is doing is not unexpected.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Looks like Zelensky accepted a meeting with Russia, without conditions. I guess Zelensky will sign his surrender.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> “Ukraine delenda est”, I guess.
> 
> To be honest what he is doing is not unexpected.



Sure, it is not unexpected, but we can still be shocked by it. That is different from being surprised by it.



yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Zelensky accepted a meeting with Russia, without conditions. I guess Zelensky will sign his surrender.



I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> Last night, it transpired that the UK govt (in a tweet since removed) were insisting that any Ukrainian refugees seeking refuge, or sanctuary, in the UK would still be subject to the (post-Brexit) visa regime of the United Kingdom, and that exceptions would not be made for Ukraine; the Foreign Office advised them that they could apply for visas in "the normal way" and that it was possible to apply for the sort of temporary work visas of the sort that people seeking work as fruit pickers are invited to fill out.
> 
> Indeed, there were reports of visas being denied to Ukrainian spouses of Britons.
> 
> Now, two things: The UK is no longer a member of the EU (and so is not present at the meetings where whatever decisions are taken get taken; this means that while EU decisions have no effect on the UK, conversely, the UK has no input into EU decisions), and worse, may be viewed (not unreasonably) as a not entirely reliable partner, partly on account of threatening to tear up treaties, and partly on account of the pernicious influence of the Londonograd laundromat.
> 
> However, I would expect the position of the Foreign Office re granting visas to Ukrainians (or abolishing the requirement for Ukrainians to seek - and be granted - visas before being admitted to the UK) to change over the coming days.
> 
> 
> 
> Needless to say, the reaction (on Twitter) was explosive.



I don't share those concerns. Ukrainian refugees appearing in the UK en masse would take longer than public opinion shaping further to support Ukraine.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I am not sure a bankrupt Russia is what we need tbh. After 20 years of Putin, it would become the perfect scenario for a military coup and the installation of an ever harsher regime.



Agreed.  

Rather, a Russia with a strong and stable middle class (and one has been growing over the past twenty five years) is what we need.

It will be interesting to see whether elements of the elite (not just the security siloviki, but the military and oligarchic elites) - either in Russia itself, or, (more safely) abroad, begin to distance themselves from Mr Putin.

Interestingly, the co-founder of Alfa Bank, (which has been sanctioned to the extent that it cannot issue shares, and cannot finace debt on international money markets), the Ukrainian born, Mikhail Fridman, (as reported in both the Telegraph, and more credibly, the FT) - the FT quotes him as follows:

"Mikhail Fridman, one of Russia’s richest men, said the war in Ukraine was a “tragedy” and called on the “bloodshed” to end after President Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion of the country."

And Oleg Deripaska - the founder and former owner of Rusal - once, reputedly, Russia's richest individual, - also called for peace, writing, "Peace is very important! Negotiations must begin at once!" (also quoted in the FT).

Okay, Fridman is based in London, while Deripaska has Cypriot citizenship (while Abramovich, who used to be close to Deripaska, and, for the record, - who is also Jewish - has Israeli citizenship) have the space and the physical, geographical distance to be able to voice their thoughts; Still, it is significant that some of the oligarchs are now distancing themselves (one may be unkind enough to suspect financial motives for this conversion to the virtues of peace, but war is not good for commerce, while enforced isolation and policed pariah status are even less so).


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Zelensky accepted a meeting with Russia, without conditions. I guess Zelensky will sign his surrender.



Sources? Never mind.



> “We agreed that the Ukrainian delegation would meet with the Russian delegation without preconditions on the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, near the Pripyat River,” Mr. Zelensky announced on his official Telegram channel, describing a phone call Sunday with President Aleksandr G. Lukashenko of Belarus.
> Mr. Lukashenko “has taken responsibility for ensuring that all planes, helicopters and missiles stationed on Belarusian territory remain on the ground during the Ukrainian delegation’s travel, talks and return,” Mr. Zelensky continued.
> Details of exactly when the meeting would take place or who would participate were not immediately clear. Mr. Zelensky earlier on Sunday had rejected holding talks in Belarus — as Russia has been demanding — because Russia staged part of its invasion from Belarus after amassing troops in the country for months. But Mr. Zelensky’s stance shifted after he held a phone call with Mr. Lukashenko, who is Mr. Putin’s closest international ally.
> The Russian delegation, led by a former Russian culture minister, Vladimir Medinsky, is already in Belarus.











						As fighting rages, Zelensky authorizes talks with Russian officials.
					






					www.nytimes.com
				




This will be interesting. Why would Zelensky surrender now?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Sources? Never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As fighting rages, Zelensky authorizes talks with Russian officials.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This will be interesting. Why would Zelensky surrender now?



The sources I am seeing (one in UAE - Khaleej Times, quoting Russian sources, one in Bishkek, citing Novosti, a Russian agency) all seem to quote Russian sources.

The fact that Belarus - and some sources today state that Belarus intends to explicitly aid the Russian assault/attack - has offered a location (in the town of Gomel, near the Belarussian border with Ukraine) for talks to take place, and has guaranteed the security of the Ukrainian delegation, concerns me.

Gomel is one of the most radioactive places on the planet.  The direction of the wind, on the day (night) Chernobyl exploded, (in Ukraine, which lies to the south), in 1986, meant that much of the radioactive material blew over the border into Belarus, immediately north of Ukraine. 

For what it is worth, I have observed several elections in Belarus, and the first time I observed an election in that country, in 2004, I was deployed to Gomel.

To my mind, the question is not "why would Zelensky surrender now?" but why on earth would he trust (the bona fides of) Belarus?

A brief reminder from the distant past:  The Prime Minister of Hungary, the leader of the country in 1956 (who had been a highly regarded & respected reformer deposed earlier in 1954 but was re-instated - to popular acclaim-  in 1956), was a man named Imre Nagy.

After the defeat of the Hungarians, - the Hungarian uprising of 1956 - Yugoslavia (while communist, an independent and non-aligned country) had offered Imre Nagy asylum, or sanctuary, in the Yugoslav embassy; en route - in a Yugoslav embassy bus - to (possible) sanctuary in Romania, the Yugoslav embassy bus was stopped by Soviet forces - the Yugoslav diplomats were beaten up and thrown off the bus - while its remaining occupants were forcibly kidnapped, whereupon Mr Nagy disappeared into the Soviet Union, where he was tried (in secret - the Soviets didn't dare broadcast it, as his demeanour at his trial, dignified, eloquent and impossibly courageous, and his refusal to recant, made clear his unapologetic support for the Hungarian Revolution), and subsequently executed, murdered, his rehabilitation and reburial occurring only in 1989 in Hungary, immediately preceding the collapse of communist rule in that state.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> The sources I am seeing (one in UAE - Khaleej Times, quoting Russian sources, one in Bishkek, citing Novosti, a Russian agency) all seem to quote Russian sources.
> 
> The fact that Belarus - and some sources today state that Belarus intends to explicitly aid the Russian assault/attack - has offered a location (in the town of Gomel, near the Belarussian border with Ukraine) for talks to take place, and has garanteed the security of the Ukrainian delegation.
> 
> Gomel is one of the most radioactive places on the planet.
> 
> For what it is worth, I have observed several elections in Belarus, and the first time I observed an election in that country, in 2004, I was deployed to Gomel.
> 
> To my mind, the question is not "why would Zelensky surrender now?" but why on earth would he trust (the bona fides of) Belarus?
> 
> A brief reminder from the distant past:  The Prime Minister of Hungary, the leader of the country in 1956 (who had been a highly regarded & respected reformer deposed earlier in 1954 but was re-instated - to popular acclaim-  in 1956), was a man named Imre Nagy.
> 
> Immediately after the defeat of the Hungarians, Yugoslavia (while communist, an independent and non-aligned country) had offered Imre Nagy asylum, or sanctuary, in the Yugoslav embassy; en route - in a Yugoslav embassy bus - to (possible) sanctuary in Romania, the Yugoslav embassy bus was stopped by Soviet forces, its occupants forcibly kidnapped whereupon Mr Nagy disappeared into the Soviet Union, where he was tried (in secret - they couldn't dare broadcast it, as his demeanour at his trial, dignified, eloquent and impossibly courageous, made clear his unapologetic support for the Hungarian Revolution), and subsequently executed, murdered, his rehabilitation and reburial occurring only in 1989 in Hungary, immediately preceding the collapse of communist rule in that state.



Zelensky will definitely get a nice park dedicated to him in Colorado too. "The Ukrainian Freedom Park"




__





						Hungarian Freedom Park | The Cultural Landscape Foundation
					






					www.tclf.org


----------



## Renzatic

Some idiot actually had the bald faced audacity to post this on Facebook today...


----------



## Alli

yaxomoxay said:


> I am not sure a bankrupt Russia is what we need tbh. After 20 years of Putin, it would become the perfect scenario for a military coup and the installation of an ever harsher regime.



Time to let Nevalny out of jail and into the presidency.


----------



## Eric

Herdfan said:


> So did Ukraine actually destroy their nuclear weapons like they were supposed to in 1994?
> 
> Zelensky seems much more level-headed than Putin for sure.  But if Russian forces start to take over and there is no good end for Ukraine, if they have them does he punish Russia on the way out?



Wait, is this a talking point from Fox News? Look man, I get you're hard core Conservative but making excuses for Putin is deplorable, come on man, you're better than this. Turn that shit off, get out of that bubble of misinformation and look at the real world around you.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Wait, is this a talking point from Fox News? Look man, I get you're hard core Conservative but making excuses for Putin is deplorable, come on man, you're better than this. Turn that shit off, get out of that bubble of misinformation and look at the real world around you.



Yep, the idea that Ukraine somehow hid nuclear weapons from the world for almost 30 years is laughable. But then, Republicans believe all sorts of lies. They have been listening to Trump so long, they are completely out of touch with reality.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Yep, the idea that Ukraine somehow hid nuclear weapons from the world for almost 30 years is laughable. But then, Republicans believe all sorts of lies. They have been listening to Trump so long, they are completely out of touch with reality.



Only thing I can think of is it was a talking point on the Fucker Carlson show.


----------



## Thomas Veil

I don't see anything about Zelensky surrendering, nor does he have any reason to, so I don't know why he'd be meeting Putin. The absurd part of my mind speculates that he's arranging to get Putin close enough so Zelensky or someone in his entourage can take a shot at him. 



Herdfan said:


> So did Ukraine actually destroy their nuclear weapons like they were supposed to in 1994?
> 
> Zelensky seems much more level-headed than Putin for sure.  But if Russian forces start to take over and there is no good end for Ukraine, if they have them does he punish Russia on the way out?



Nukes were removed from Ukraine.

Even so, Zelensky would not want to either (a) become a mass murderer by aiming them at Russia, or (b) do the same by detonating them in Ukraine in a super-scorched earth policy, killing his own citizens who are still there and creating a nuclear cloud that might drift over Europe.



P_X said:


> Keeps piling on:
> 
> 
> 
> Britain’s foreign secretary, Liz Truss, said on Sunday that she would support Britons who want to go to Ukraine to take up arms to resist the Russian invasion, in an intervention likely to escalate tensions with Moscow.
Click to expand...


Now there's an idea for our American militias. You want to play soldier? Hop on a plane for Poland, cross the border and have at it.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> I guess Zelensky will sign his surrender.



Nah.
Russia’s former foreign minister:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497949890084753411/


----------



## SuperMatt

Thomas Veil said:


> I don't see anything about Zelensky surrendering, nor does he have any reason to, so I don't know why he'd be meeting Putin. The absurd part of my mind speculates that he's arranging to get Putin close enough so Zelensky or someone in his entourage can take a shot at him.
> 
> 
> Nukes were removed from Ukraine.
> 
> Even so, Zelensky would not want to either (a) become a mass murderer by aiming them at Russia, or (b) do the same by detonating them in Ukraine in a super-scorched earth policy, killing his own citizens who are still there and creating a nuclear cloud that might drift over Europe.
> 
> 
> Now there's an idea for our American militias. You want to play soldier? Hop on a plane for Poland, cross the border and have at it.



I think Putin is in trouble. He wants to hold the talks. Zelensky sees a chance to get some things that he wants while Putin is on the ropes. That’s what I think, but I could be wrong.


----------



## User.45

Renzatic said:


> Some idiot actually had the bald faced audacity to post this on Facebook today...
> 
> View attachment 12081




LOLs. THis is sooo good. Strongman Putin "tired"?! It appears that Russian trolls have a supply problem too.


----------



## DT

Thomas Veil said:


> Now there's an idea for our American militias. You want to play soldier? Hop on a plane for Poland, cross the border and have at it.





No time, they have to post Tik-Tok videos of their firearms,  correct people on message boards about firing rates of various rifles,  wash and polish their trucks because they got a little dirt on 'em.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Nah.
> Russia’s former foreign minister:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497949890084753411/



scroll down. that was 8H ago and the update is 1H ago going with talks. This is why sourcing statements is important.


----------



## Zoidberg

Eric said:


> Wait, is this a talking point from Fox News? Look man, I get you're hard core Conservative but making excuses for Putin is deplorable, come on man, you're better than this. Turn that shit off, get out of that bubble of misinformation and look at the real world around you.



It’s cognitively very hard to accept that you’ve been fooled. That’s why so many people who get conned keep sending money, sometimes for years: doubling down on denial of reality is easier on the mind than admitting that they’ve been been lied to.


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> scroll down. that was 8H ago and the update is 1H ago going with talks. This is why sourcing statements is important.



sorry, what?


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> sorry, what?



This is the newest tweet:
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497934792708562952/

The source comment was about @yaxomoxay dropping this without a reference, so one cannot verify or timestamp the statement.

Also:


----------



## User.45

...with a grain of salt, of course.


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> View attachment 12083
> 
> 
> ...with a grain of salt, of course.



I’d also like to see the Ukraine  figures for a better perspective, if they are accurate.


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> This is the newest tweet:
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497934792708562952/
> 
> The source comment was about @yaxomoxay dropping this without a reference, so one cannot verify or timestamp the statement.
> 
> Also:



Yes, my answer was about how Zelenskyy is not going to go there to surrender.

The Russians don’t expect him to surrend anyway. It’s a trap. Either:
- Zelenskyy goes and they kill him
- They use the brief respite to launch another attack, or to gain time to bring more weapons.
- Zelenskyy sends someone not worth killing, the Russians make some outlandish demands, they get rejected, and they use that as a pretext to escalate.

Coming from the guys who said just  over a week ago that they were reducing the numbers at the border, I’m inclined to believe it will be the third option.


----------



## User.45

Huntn said:


> I’d also like to see the Ukraine  figures for a better perspective, if they are accurate.



One thing I didn't think of. Russian Army has 150K soldiers around Ukraine. There are millions of armed Ukrainians.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Yes, my answer was about how Zelenskyy is not going to go there to surrender.
> 
> The Russians don’t expect him to surrend anyway. It’s a trap. Either:
> - Zelenskyy goes and they kill him
> - They use the brief respite to launch another attack, or to gain time to bring more weapons.
> - Zelenskyy sends someone not worth killing, the Russians make some outlandish demands, they get rejected, and they use that as a pretext to escalate.
> 
> Coming from the guys who said just  over a week ago that they were reducing the numbers at the border, I’m inclined to believe it will be the third option.



Agree. Taking it as a sign of surrender is a very premature conclusion in the absence of additional information.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> Yes, my answer was about how Zelenskyy is not going to go there to surrender.
> 
> The Russians don’t expect him to surrend anyway. It’s a trap. Either:
> - Zelenskyy goes and they kill him
> - They use the brief respite to launch another attack, or to gain time to bring more weapons.
> *- Zelenskyy sends someone not worth killing, the Russians make some outlandish demands, they get rejected, and they use that as a pretext to escalate.*
> 
> Coming from the guys who said just  over a week ago that they were reducing the numbers at the border, I’m inclined to believe it will be the third option.



Option 3 for me as well.



P_X said:


> One thing I didn't think of. Russian Army has 150K soldiers around Ukraine. There are millions of armed Ukrainians.



Occupying an actively resisting population seldom ends well for the occupiers.


----------



## Huntn

Zoidberg said:


> Yes, my answer was about how Zelenskyy is not going to go there to surrender.
> 
> The Russians don’t expect him to surrend anyway. It’s a trap. Either:
> - Zelenskyy goes and they kill him
> - They use the brief respite to launch another attack, or to gain time to bring more weapons.
> - Zelenskyy sends someone not worth killing, the Russians make some outlandish demands, they get rejected, and they use that as a pretext to escalate.
> 
> Coming from the guys who said just  over a week ago that they were reducing the numbers at the border, I’m inclined to believe it will be the third option.



I would think that this would break so many negotiation protocols that I can’t imagine the reaction, but I think the best place would be in a neutral territory where security could be guaranteed,


----------



## Arkitect

This is more like it.
Hopefully EU and other nations have put the initial shock behind them and will now be acting faster.


> The German railway, Deutsche Bahn, has said that refugees with a Ukraine passport or identity card will be able to travel free on long-distance trains from Poland to Germany.



Link


----------



## SuperMatt

Mike Pompeo is quite popular in Russia these days.

Yet another traitor from the Trump administration.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1496191658387517443/





__





						Trump, former secretary of state Mike Pompeo praise Putin while bashing Biden
					





					www.msn.com
				




Also, he looks like he got stomach stapling surgery or something… lost a LOT of weight really fast.


----------



## Zoidberg

Huntn said:


> I would think that this would break so many negotiation protocols that I can’t imagine the reaction, but I think the best place would be in a neutral territory where security could be guaranteed,



They have already done it several times in the past.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Herdfan said:


> So did Ukraine actually destroy their nuclear weapons like they were supposed to in 1994?
> 
> .......



Yes.

In early 2013, shortly before I travelled to Kabul, I visited the decommissioned Pervomaisk missile base in Ukraine.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Arkitect said:


> Option 3 for me as well.



I hope you're right. But Navalny went back to Russia voluntarily, eyes wide open, and look where he is now.


----------



## Macky-Mac

regarding negotiations;

I seriously doubt that Ukraine is about to surrender.

Both sides have been calling for negotiations since this started ......and both sides have been blaming the other side for not agreeing to have negotiations.

Al Jazeera's report;


> President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says Kyiv will send a delegation of officials for talks “without preconditions” with Moscow at the Ukraine-Belarus border.




It may be that the first negotiations will be merely each side defiantly making demands with no progress towards peace, but frankly negotiations are the way out of this crisis for both sides.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Re "talks", personally, I would prefer to see any such talks take place in a genuinely neutral (if geographically close) venue; Turkey would seem to me to be ideal for the purpose.

I do not trust Belarus, let alone its leader, or its bona fides, at all.

Failing that, my preference would be for third parties (i.e. diplomats from - for example - west Europe, and/or China) to accompany any team sent by Mr Zelensky, above all, if it includes himself.

Elsewhere, the number of countries closing their airspace to Russia is growing.

As of now, in addition to the Baltic states, Poland, UK, Finland, Ireland, Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic and Slovenia, others - such as Germany, Italy, and France have joined the countries closing their airspace to Russia.


----------



## Arkitect

Thomas Veil said:


> I hope you're right. But Navalny went back to Russia voluntarily, eyes wide open, and look where he is now.



But in his case martyrdom was always going to be an option.

In Zelenskyy's case (if he should go personally, which I doubt) there is backup and him dying or being held captive does not mean Ukraine capitulates. I would suspect quite the contrary.

But hell, when you're dealing with crazy people, all bets are off. 

Meanwhile…


> Missiles launched into Ukraine from Belarus​Iskander missiles were launched from Belarus into Ukraine around 17:00 (15:00 GMT), an adviser to Ukraine's interior minister says.
> It comes after President Zelensky's office announced today that Ukrainian and Russian officials are due to meet for talks on the Belarusian border with Ukraine - although they have not said when.



So much for Belarusian "neutrality".


----------



## MEJHarrison

Renzatic said:


> Some idiot actually had the bald faced audacity to post this on Facebook today...
> 
> View attachment 12081




Wonder if that person has any relation to 'isawit'?  This is from FoxNews last week.  You know it's bad when the crazies on Fox say you're confused.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> But in his case martyrdom was always going to be an option.
> 
> In Zelenskyy's case (if he should go personally, which I doubt) there is backup and him dying or being held captive does not mean Ukraine capitulates. I would suspect quite the contrary.
> 
> But hell, when you're dealing with crazy people, all bets are off.
> 
> Meanwhile…
> 
> So much for Belarusian "neutrality".



This is the - my - concern, or problem, with Belarus.

I do not see how they can credibly offer "a location" for negotiations and "safety guarantees" to Mr Zelensky and his party, if they themselves (almost uniquely in the world) are also an enthusiastic party to the aggression, assault and attack on Ukraine.


----------



## Arkitect

MEJHarrison said:


> Wonder if that person has any relation to 'isawit'?  This is from FoxNews last week.  You know it's bad when the crazies on Fox say you're confused.
> 
> View attachment 12087



Oh good lord.

Always with the Jesus!
Though that is insane… Jesus/Trump/Putin.

There are some very disturbed people around… and some really should not be near a keyboard.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> This is the - my - concern, or problem, with Belarus.
> 
> I do not see how they can credibly offer "a location" for negotiations and "safety guarantees" to Mr Zelensky and his party, if they themselves (almost uniquely in the world) are also an enthusiastic party to the aggression, assault and attack on Ukraine.



Killing Zelensky during a diplomatic meeting would be a very serious breach of all diplomatic rules, and customs, and a serious breach on how foreign politics is done. I don’t think that even Hitler or Stalin attempted that. 

If Zelensky were to be killed during the talks, I’d expect no less than WW3.


----------



## mac_in_tosh

Arkitect said:


> Oh good lord.
> 
> Always with the Jesus!
> Though that is insane… Jesus/Trump/Putin.
> 
> There are some very disturbed people around… and some really should not be near a keyboard.



Trump is mean-spirited, a pathological liar, a con artist and he has cheated on his finances and each of his three wives. He also, to my knowledge, never goes to church. That these people somehow identify him as being religious just shows how deluded and sick they are.

And now there are idiots at CPAC telling the deplorables there that they believe the last election was stolen. This despite Trump losing dozens of court cases and every recount. They only believe it (if they really do) because the pathological liar said so.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Arkitect said:


> Oh good lord.
> 
> Always with the Jesus!
> Though that is insane… Jesus/Trump/Putin.
> 
> There are some very disturbed people around… and some really should not be near a keyboard.



That’s why at Mass this morning the reading from the first letter of St Paul to the Corinthians stated: “thou shall see the revelation of Jesus in Trump and Putin.”

I hate when they do that. I truly do.


----------



## Pumbaa

yaxomoxay said:


> Killing Zelensky during a diplomatic meeting would be a very serious breach of all diplomatic rules, and customs, and a serious breach on how foreign politics is done. I don’t think that even Hitler or Stalin attempted that.
> 
> If Zelensky were to be killed during the talks, I’d expect no less than WW3.



How about a false flag operation then, with “Ukraine” attacking the Russian delegation or Belarus before the meeting?


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> Re "talks", personally, I would prefer to see any such talks take place in a genuinely neutral (if geographically close) venue; Turkey would seem to me to be ideal for the purpose.
> 
> I do not trust Belarus, let alone its leader, or its bona fides, at all.




At this point it's not clear that this initial meeting will be anything other than a show by both sides for public relations purposes. Perhaps a positive result would be a decision to have a ceasefire and let actual negotiations begin.....somewhere safe as Belarus is not to be trusted at all.

A neutral 3rd party site would definitely be required. As you say, perhaps Turkey, or a couple of days ago it was reported that Ukraine was asking Israel to facilitate negotiations


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Killing Zelensky during a diplomatic meeting would be a very serious breach of all diplomatic rules, and customs, and a serious breach on how foreign politics is done. I don’t think that even Hitler or Stalin attempted that.
> 
> If Zelensky were to be killed during the talks, I’d expect no less than WW3.



You’d be mistaken, it’s been done before. And you will never guess by whom… three times.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Pumbaa said:


> How about a false flag operation then, with “Ukraine” attacking the Russian delegation or Belarus before the meeting?



There would still be too much suspicion on Putin and friends. I don’t think that he’s that crazy. It would also mean the end of all diplomatic ties for Russia, they’d end up in a worse situation than North Korea.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Killing Zelensky during a diplomatic meeting would be a very serious breach of all diplomatic rules, and customs, and a serious breach on how foreign politics is done. I don’t think that even Hitler or Stalin attempted that.
> 
> If Zelensky were to be killed during the talks, I’d expect no less than WW3.



But kidnapped and subsequently murdered (with a disgusting judicial fig leaf) is entirely possible, (which is why I referred to the fate of Imre Nagy - who, in 1956 was the legitimate Prime Minister of Hungary, for, he was kidnapped at gunpoint (by the Russians/Soviets) having just left the Yugoslav embassy, while accompanied by Yugoslav diplomats - who themselves were beaten up - taken to the Soviet Union (i.e. Russia), put on trial - which the Russians couldn't engineer into a "show trial" and subsequently executed, which, in fact, in this case, means murdered).

Bear in mind that this is a country which gave orders for the murder (in the UK) of Alexander Litvinenko, and - also in the UK - attempted to poison the Skripals.

 If Mr Putin has persuaded himself - yes, it is delusional, deranged, demented - but, if he has persuaded himself that Ukraine is an illegitimate country, one that should always have been a part of Russia, then he will also have had no difficulty in persuading himself that Ukrainians should be subject to Russian legal authority, and subsequent legal sanctions.

Personally, I'd prefer to have third parties - and independent witnesses - present at all times, during any such talks, or negotiations.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> You’d be mistaken, it’s been done before. And you will never guess by whom… three times.



I admit my ignorance here.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> But kidnapped and subsequently murdered (with a disgusting judicial fig leaf) is entirely possible, (which is why I referred to the fate of Imre Nagy - he was kidnapped at gunpoint (by the Russians/Soviets) having just left the Yugoslav embassy, while accompanied by Yugoslav diplomats - who themselves were beaten up - taken to the Soviet Union (i.e. Russia), put on trial - which the Russiand couldn't engineer into a "show trial" and executed, which, in fact, means murdered).
> 
> Bear in mind that this is a country which gave orders for the murder (in the UK) of Alexander Litvinenko, and - also in the UK - attempted to poison the Skripals.
> 
> If Mr Putin has persuaded himself - yes, it is delusional, deranged, demented - but, if he has persuaded himself that Ukraine is an illegitimate country, one that should always have been a part of Russia, then he will also have had no difficulty in persuading himself that Ukrainians should be subject to Russian legal authority, and subsequent legal sanctions.
> 
> Personally, I'd prefer to have third parties - and independent witnesses - present at all times, during any such talks, or negotiations.



I don’t disagree with it, but killing the head of another government is not the same as killing an important politician with government roles, a diplomat, or a defector. It’s a whole different level.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> I admit my ignorance here.



By the Soviets in (off the top of my head, I don’t remember the dates) the 40s, the early 50s, and as recently as the mid 90s.

(With the caveat that it was not the President of Ukraine, obviously, but still, it was the person who went to negotiate in good faith).


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> By the Soviets in (off the top of my head, I don’t remember the dates) the 40s, the esrly 50s, and as recently as the mis 90s.



They killed heads of state during diplomatic maneuvers?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> There would still be too much suspicion on Putin and friends. I don’t think that he’s that crazy. It would also mean the end of all diplomatic ties for Russia, they’d end up in a worse situation than North Korea.




If he is prepared to attack all of Ukraine, including Lviv, which was never, not in any universe, or realm, real, imagined or pure fantasy, remotely Russian, prepared to threaten Finland and Sweden (two sovereign, independent, democratic states), prepared to threaten the world with nuclear weapons or nuclear contamination by radiation, I would argue that he is capable of doing anything.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> If he is prepared to attack all of Ukraine, including Lviv, which was never, not in any universe, real, imagined or pure fantasy, Remotely Russian, prepared to threaten Finalnd and Sweden (two sovereign, independent, democratic states), prepared to threaten the world with nuclear weapons or nuclear contamination by radiation, I would argue that he is capable of doing anything.



Well… I hope I am right. I’d see as more probable a nuclear war than the murder of a head of state in that way. 

At any rate, Europe better send Putin the message that if Zelensky catches a cold, troops will enter and defend Ukraine.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> They killed heads of state during diplomatic maneuvers?



Their envoys, and in the 90s, they used the phone he used for the meeting to basically geolocate him and bomb him.

Whether it was the head of state or an envoy is irrelevant. When the kgb mafia asks for a meeting, you don’t trust their good faith.

For Putin, promises are made to be broken.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> They killed heads of state during diplomatic maneuvers?



The Yugoslavs (Yugoslav diplomatic staff, who were genuinely neutral) had negotiated safe conduct for Imre Nagy, who was still the legitimate head of the government of Hungary, when he was kidnapped and subsequently murdered.

I've read the transcript of his "trial" and watched the video that was shot at the time; it is extraordinary.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> The Yugoslavs (Yugoslav diplomatic staff, who were genuinely neutral) had negotiated safe conduct for Imre Nagy, who was still the legitimate head of government of Hungary, when he was kidnapped and subsequently murdered.
> 
> I've read the transcript of his "trial" and watched the video that was shot at the time; it is extraordinary.



I don’t want to derail the thread, but I guess I should read more about the trial as it seems quite interesting. I remember the Soviets doing some crappy stuff, but I didn’t remember this specific instance.


----------



## JayMysteri0

An unfortunate truth I've begun seeing pop up in articles this weekend.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497950573605228555/



> "You're on your own": African students stuck in Ukraine seek refuge or escape route
> 
> 
> When Percy Ohene-Yeboah peered down from his high-rise apartment in the city of Kharkiv in eastern Ukraine on Thursday morning, the street below was clogged with traffic. People hurried along the sidewalks, wheeling suitcases behind them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com





> As reality dawned, and with nowhere to turn, the 24-year-old, packed a bag and ran to the nearest underground train station for shelter, one of thousands of African students stranded in Ukraine during a Russian invasion, with no idea of how to escape.
> 
> "In a situation like this, you're on your own. You've got to find the best way to find refuge for yourself," he told Reuters by phone from the basement of a church where he eventually settled on Thursday night.
> 
> Cities under siege across Ukraine are home to tens of thousands of African students studying medicine, engineering and military affairs. Morocco, Nigeria and Egypt are among the top 10 countries with foreign students in Ukraine, together supplying over 16,000 students, according to the education ministry. Thousands of Indian students are also trying to flee.
> 
> What was meant to be a cheaper alternative to studying in Western Europe or the United States has turned overnight into a war zone as Russian tanks, planes and ships launch the biggest European invasion of another nation since World War Two.






> Africans say they are facing racial discrimination in Ukraine
> 
> 
> Africans in Ukraine allege that they are facing racial discrimination from Ukraine's security agencies | OpIndia News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.opindia.com





> Nigerian students trying to escape war-hit Ukraine have alleged that there is racial discrimination among evacuees trying to leave the country via neighbouring countries. Journalist Stephanie Hegarty of BBC published a series of tweets explaining the ordeal of the students. She said that a Nigerian medical student told her that while she was waiting to cross the border, the Ukrainian soldiers did not allow black people to cross and sent them back. She said, “They have to let ‘Ukrainians’ through first”.





> Poland border force spokesperson had said they were allowing anyone to enter Poland from Ukraine. A similar problem was faced by Indian students stranded at the Poland-Ukraine border. Reportedly, the Indian students have not been allowed the cross the border and were told, “When your govt has not cooperated with us, why should we cooperate with you?”
> 
> A Twitter user Damilare_arah shared a video that showed African people being stopped by Ukrainians from boarding a train. He said, “The official visuals of Ukrainians blocking Africans from getting on trains.”




https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497665799435296773/

The shitshow for some, never truly ends no matter where they go.

Throw a vain autocrat with delusions of never ending grandeur, and things only ever worse.


----------



## Macky-Mac

from Al Jazeera's reporting......a statement about by Ukraine's' FM;



> ‘We will not give up a single inch of our territory’: Ukrainian foreign minister​Kuleba says Ukraine will “not give up a single inch of … territory” after agreeing to talks with Russia.
> 
> “We go there [to the talks] to listen to what Russia wants to say, we are going without any … preliminary agreement on what the outcome of these talks can be. We are going there to listen and to say what we think of this war and Russia’s actions,” Ukraine’s foreign minister said in a live video address.
> 
> “Between now and the moment that the talks are wrapped up, [Belarusian President Alexander] Lukashenko assured President Zelenskyy that no Belarusian military force will be used against Ukraine,” he added.
> 
> “We can only hope that Lukashenko will stick to his word. And between now and the moment when these talks are wrapped up, we will continue to fiercely defend our country, to defeat Russian forces if they try to continue their offensive operations.
> 
> “We will continue to defeat them in the territories that they have taken under their control – we will not stop, until we defend our country entirely. So there is nothing bad in talking as such, and if the outcome of these talks is peace, that should be welcomed.
> 
> “But we will not, and I want to make it very clear, we will not give up a single inch of our territory.”


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t want to derail the thread, but I guess I should read more about the trial as it seems quite interesting. I remember the Soviets doing some crappy stuff, but I didn’t remember this specific instance.



To be honest, I believe that Putin’s original idea for Ukraine was very similar to the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan in 1979, when the commandos attacked the presidential palace by surprise and killed the head of state (and hus family). The kicker: _he was actually their ally_, but they wanted someone weaker and more dependent on them.

So their plan was probably to go in, kill Zelensky, replace him with someone else, and put the Ukrainians in front of a _fait accompli _by the end of the day… That went well 

So the lessons are: don’t trust Putin. Don’t trust anyone who’s chummy with Putin (they are either useful idiots or dangerous SOBs). Don’t drink their tea. Stay away from windows. Actually, just stay away from the Russians altogether.


----------



## lizkat

This is interesting.  Anecdotal but verified instance of a Russian official with a dim view of the invasion.









						Russian official apologizes to Ukraine at climate science meeting
					

The scientists are preparing a report on the global impact of climate change.




					www.politico.eu


----------



## Arkitect

JayMysteri0 said:


> An unfortunate truth I've begun seeing pop up in articles this weekend.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497950573605228555/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497665799435296773/
> 
> The shitshow for some, never truly ends no matter where they go.
> 
> Throw a vain autocrat with delusions of never ending grandeur, and things only ever worse.



That is appalling.
A refugee is a refugee… I don't understand how this works. How can they pick and choose who gets priority to get to safety? 

What I do know about human nature is… when the pressure is on, the fractures show very easily. None more so than race.


----------



## SuperMatt

Arkitect said:


> That is appalling.
> A refugee is a refugee… I don't understand how this works. How can they pick and choose who gets priority to get to safety?
> 
> What I do know about human nature is… when the pressure is on, the fractures show very easily. None more so than race.



It seems like the Ukrainian refugees are being welcomed with open arms so far. Syrian refugees were treated as possible terrorists by many European nations (and the U.S. too).


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> Well… I hope I am right. I’d see as more probable a nuclear war than the murder of a head of state in that way.
> 
> At any rate, Europe better send Putin the message that if Zelensky catches a cold, troops will enter and defend Ukraine.




Speaking of catching a cold, I'm starting to wonder whether Putin has become a fan of The Rapture... and so figures he can play a part in some twisted version of it with his ability to use nukes.  I have to hope the guys who take the commands would look at each other and say such a command is a bridge and a half too far.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Killing Zelensky during a diplomatic meeting would be a very serious breach of all diplomatic rules, and customs, and a serious breach on how foreign politics is done. I don’t think that even Hitler or Stalin attempted that.
> 
> If Zelensky were to be killed during the talks, I’d expect no less than WW3.






Macky-Mac said:


> At this point it's not clear that this initial meeting will be anything other than a show by both sides for public relations purposes. Perhaps a positive result would be a decision to have a ceasefire and let actual negotiations begin.....somewhere safe as Belarus is not to be trusted at all.
> 
> A neutral 3rd party site would definitely be required. As you say, perhaps Turkey, or a couple of days ago it was reported that Ukraine was asking Israel to facilitate negotiations



Once started, such talks can go on forever.

They may achieve little, but at least the fighting and killing has been stopped.

The ones in Georgia - ages ago, I used to be involved in helping to put together TPs (talking points) for some of those meetings - are still - in fits and starts - taking place.


Zoidberg said:


> You’d be mistaken, it’s been done before. And you will never guess by whom… three times.



Exactly.


yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t want to derail the thread, but I guess I should read more about the trial as it seems quite interesting. I remember the Soviets doing some crappy stuff, but I didn’t remember this specific instance.



As you know, I used to teach the history and politics of Russia/Soviet Union and central and eastern Europe; this was my specialty.

However, until last Thursday, I would have agreed with you (@yaxomoxay).

Until last Thursday, I would have leaned towards the 'neo-realist' approach, assumed that I was dealing with rational actors, and acted accordingly.

Someone earlier - must check the post (was it @Zoidberg?) wondered about the "experts" and "advisers", and why they didn't "know".

If they knew - or suspected - and I did wonder and warn about Ukraine and have done so since my time in Georgia - they, most of them, - and I include myself - never thought it would come to this.

For, in the past, I have been one of those advisers, and, until last Thursday, I would have assumed that Mr Putin was simply throwing shapes, making threats for the purposes of securing diplomatic or economic or political advantage (a sort of chess); now, I have long thought - and wrote here and elsewhere - that I believed that his aim was to cripple Ukraine by putting such pressure on political fault lines that it would crack, and split in two.

And, had he confined himself - and his deluded ambitions - to eastern Ukraine, I believe that he would have gotten away with it; we would have accepted it, because some in the east of the country do define themselves as culturally compatible with Russian rule.

However, never did I think he would be so deluded as to attack - in such a manner - the entire country; and the nature of the threats he has been making ever since, lead me to conclude that there are no limits to what he can be - or is - capable of.

The other thing to note is the long, tragic, murderous path of assassination and intimidation of Russian civil society that has been occurring over the past twenty years.  To those who ask why Russians aren't protesting (and some are, with extraordinary courage), I might mention that a critical civil society has been eviscerated over the past  twenty years, many of its most able, ethical, and prominent members murdered.

We recall the well known names, but some of the finest people in Russia - including lawyers (Sergei Magnitsky), politicians (the outstanding Galina Starovoitova, and, of course, Boris Nemtsov), bankers, yes, bankers, (a deputy chairman of the central bank, who was cracking down on corruption, Andrei Kozlov), journalists (Anna Politkovskaya) were killed, brutally murdered, in those years.  That must take an enormous toll of any society.


----------



## Arkitect

SuperMatt said:


> It seems like the Ukrainian refugees are being welcomed with open arms so far. Syrian refugees were treated as possible terrorists by many European nations (and the U.S. too).



Yes, but this was more about the plight of non-Ukrainians finding themselves trapped in the refugee exodus. Ukrainians are allowed to pass but students from African nations or India are told to get back… Pretty shameful.



Scepticalscribe said:


> Once started, such talks can go on forever.
> 
> They may achieve little, but at least the fighting and killing has been stopped.



Though in this case I suspect Putin is envisioning more a set of demands laid before the Ukrainian delegation. Sign or die.
Kind of like (the parallels never stop!) Hitler in the railway carriage at Compiègne.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Once started, such talks can go on forever.
> 
> They may achieve little, but at least the fighting and killing has been stopped.
> 
> The ones in Georgia - ages ago, I used to be involved in helping to put together TPs (talking points) for some of those meetings - are still - in fits and starts - taking place.
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> As you know, I used to teach the history and politics of Russia/Soviet Union and central and eastern Europe; this was my specialty.
> 
> However, until last Thursday, I would have agreed with you.
> 
> Until last Thursday, I would have leaned towards the 'neo-realist' approach, assumed that I was dealing with rational actors, and acted accordingly.
> 
> Someone earlier - must check the post (was it @Zoidberg?) wondered about the "experts" and "advisers", and why they didn't "know".
> 
> If they knew - or suspected - and I did wonder and warn about Ukraine and have done so since my time in Georgia - they, most of them, - and I include myself - never thought it would come to this.
> 
> For, in the past, I have been one of those advisers, and, until last Thursday, I would have assumed that Mr Putin was simply throwing shapes, making threats for the purposes of securing diplomatic or economic advantage (a sort of chess); now, I have long thought - and wrote here and elsewhere - that I believed that his aim was to cripple Ukraine by putting such pressure on political fault lines that it would crack, and split in two.
> 
> And, had he confined himself - and his deluded ambitions - to eastern Ukraine, I believe that he would have gotten away with it; we would have accepted it, because some in the east of the country do define themselves as culturally compatible with Russian rule.
> 
> However, never did I think he would be so deluded as to attack - in such a manner - the entire country; and the nature of the threats he has been making ever since, lead me to conclude that there are no limits to what he capable of.
> 
> The other thing to note is the long, tragic, murderous path of assassination and intimidation of Russian civil society that has been occurring over the past twenty years.  To those who ask why Russians aren't protesting (and some are, with extraordinary courage), I might mention that a critical civil society has been eviscerated over the past  twenty years, many of its most able, ethical, and prominent members murdered.
> 
> We recall the well known names, but some of the finest people in Russia - including lawyers (Sergei Magnitsky), politicians (the outstanding Galina Starovoitova, and, of course, Boris Nemtsov), bankers, yes, bankers, (a deputy chairman of the central bank, who was cracking down on corruption, Andrei Kozlov), journalists (Anna Politkovskaya) were killed in those years.  That must take an enormous toll of any society.



Yes, it was me who wondered why the experts failed to anticipate this possibility.

The thing is, I know I’m just an armchair commentator at best: my experience is nil, and my knowledge is limited to what I read, so I –perhaps naively– expected actual experts who do this for a living, to have plans for every possible outcome (even though of course full invasion and nuclear threats wouldn’t be amongst the most probable outcomes).

So there is still room in the geopolitical arena for someone to apply bayesian inference…Interesting… I might send my cv 

As for Putin, i saw a tweet by Marco Rubio (one of the remaining sane Republicans, even though he often tries to appeal to the recent Republican insanity) that makes a lot of sense as time passes:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497393912821915648/

Followed by:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497968757091807234/

It may truly be that Putin’s behaviour is not a tactic, and that he has actually lost his mind, and that’s terrifying.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Arkitect said:


> That is appalling.
> A refugee is a refugee… I don't understand how this works. How can they pick and choose who gets priority to get to safety?
> 
> What I do know about human nature is… when the pressure is on, the fractures show very easily. None more so than race.



Supposedly it's happening on both sides of borders.  Leaving Ukraine and / or trying to enter anywhere elsewhere.  As there is a thread where some places see "true" refugees as "European", and all others as well... 

Survival & desperation tend to bring out the ugliness in us all, having a madman just decide to invade your country "because", won't help.

I realize it's an unpleasant thing to see & hear when everything is preferable about the heroism of those staying to fight, but it's an unpleasant truth that never ends.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> It may truly be that Putin’s behaviour is not a tactic, and that he has actually lost his mind, and that’s terrifying.



Personally, while it _might _be true that he’s erratic, I think it would be a very serious mistake thinking that he’s not calculating to OCD levels.


----------



## Pumbaa

yaxomoxay said:


> Personally, while it _might _be true that he’s erratic, I think it would be a very serious mistake thinking that he’s not calculating to OCD levels.



To me, the thought of a combination of the two is the most frightening. I mean, combining his documented skills with a dose of being erratic is no bueno. Does not help me sleep.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Pumbaa said:


> To me, the thought of a combination of the two is the most frightening. I mean, combining his documented skills with a dose of being erratic is no bueno. Does not help me sleep.



Exactly.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Personally, while it _might _be true that he’s erratic, I think it would be a very serious mistake thinking that he’s not calculating to OCD levels.



So far his invasion has been terribly executed. The Russians are leaving behind many tanks in perfect shape because they ran out of gas. They have taken and lost airports and cities. They have accomplished none of the main goals that normally would be done in a day.

It could be that he’s senile (oh the irony, after the smear campaign against Hillary Clinton). It could be that he has some incurable cancer and he doesn’t care. It could be that his paranoia has led him to isolate himself and he’s now only surrounded by the most sycophantic of his advisors, and that he’s got a distorted vision of reality.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Yes, it was me who wondered why the experts failed to anticipate this possibility.
> 
> The thing is, I know I’m just an armchair commentator at best: my experience is nil, and my knowledge is limited to what I read, so I –perhaps naively– expected actual experts who do this for a living, to have plans for every possible outcome (even though of course full invasion and nuclear threats wouldn’t be amongst the most probable outcomes).
> 
> So there is still room in the geopolitical arena for someone to apply bayesian inference…Interesting… I might send my cv
> 
> As for Putin, i saw a tweet by Marco Rubio (one of the remaining sane Republicans, even though he often tries to appeal to the recent Republican insanity) that makes a lot of sense as time passes:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497393912821915648/
> 
> Followed by:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497968757091807234/
> 
> It may truly be that Putin’s behaviour is not a tactic, and that he has actually lost his mind, and that’s terrifying.



The other reason - @Zoidberg - is that sometimes, your superiors do not wish to hear bad news, or, an analysis that projects a negative outcome.

On at least two separate occasions, when I served in Somalia (with the EU) in a very senior capacity, I had my knuckles rapped by the Head of Mission - to whom I reported, and who made it clear I was to expect no support - that my reports to Brussels were thought to have been "very negative".

The first secretary of the German Embassy, with whom I was friendly, - we used to have a gloomy monthly beer together - told me that Berlin expressed dismay at the tone and content of his reports, too.

And we used to look at each another, raise our respective beer glasses by way of toasting one another, and sigh: "But, we are only calling it as it is, and reporting what we see."

In any case, I suspect that "the west", or - in the case of my superiors (the EU) when I served in Georgia, Afghanistan and Somalia, or some of my superiors, (the OSCE) when I served as an election observer - have poured so much (by way of money, goodwill, resources, time, sometimes personnel) into some of these places or situations, that they find it difficult to credit, or accept, that such lavish and generous "investment" yields so little, or does not show some (measurable, tangible) success, or can be shown to have been worthwhile in some way.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> The other reason - @Zoidberg - is that sometimes, your superiors do not wish to hear bad news, or, an analysis that projects a negative outcome.
> 
> On at least two separate occasions, when I served in Somalia (with the EU) in a very senior capacity, I had my knuckles rapped by the Head of Mission - to whom I reported, and who made it clear I was to expect no support - that my reports to Brussels were thought to have been "very negative".
> 
> The first secretary of the German Embassy, with whom I was friendly, - we used to have a gloomy monthly beer together - told me that Berlin expressed dismay at the tone and content of his reports, too.
> 
> I suspect that 'the west", or - in the case of my superiors when I served in Georgia, Afghanistan and Somalia - the EU, or some of my superiors (the OSCE) when I served as an election observer - have poured so much (by way of money, goodwill, resources, time, sometimes personnel) into some of these places or situations, that they find it difficult to credit, or accept, that such lavish and generous "investment" yields so little, or does not show some (measurable, tangible) success, or can be shown to have been worthwhile in some way.



That makes a lot of sense.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Looks like Russia can’t completely block internet in Ukraine 









						SpaceX Starlink user terminals arrive in Ukraine, officials says — CNN Business
					

A shipment of Starlink user terminals — small antennas that allow customers to access SpaceX's satellite-based internet service — arrived in Ukraine Monday, providing a back stop for Ukrainians who may see their traditional service interrupted amid the Russian invasion.




					apple.news


----------



## Scepticalscribe

The EU has announced that it is closing its airspace to Russian aircraft, and will purchase weapons for Ukraine.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> The EU has announced that it is closing its airspace to Russian aircraft, and will purchase weapons for Ukraine.



I think we all support this, the question is what will they do when a Russian plane provocatively enters that airspace? This could lead to a much bigger escalation, but I think it has to be done.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And the EU has also taken the decision to ban the Russia state-backed channels RT and Sputnik (and their subsidiaries).


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> And the EU has also taken the decision to ban the Russia state-backed channels RT and Sputnik (and their subsidiaries).



FINALLY!!

I don’t have anything against free press, I get my news from a variety of sources, from across the –sane– spectrum, but that was  straight up weaponised agitprop garbage, nothing to do with journalism.

During the height of the Syrian refugee crisis, in the same week, RT Spain pushed out articles about how the –then– Spanish government was heartless for not accepting refugees and letting innocent children drown at sea, while RT UK (the UK DID accept refugees) published articles about how terrorists where hiding amongst the refugees. They are weapons of propaganda in an information war, with the sole purpose of weakening the Western democracies, and as such should not be tolerated.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> The Yugoslavs (Yugoslav diplomatic staff, who were genuinely neutral) had negotiated safe conduct for Imre Nagy, who was still the legitimate head of the government of Hungary, when he was kidnapped and subsequently murdered.
> 
> I've read the transcript of his "trial" and watched the video that was shot at the time; it is extraordinary.











						Show trial - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



This is a good point, people not understanding how Show Trials worked during those times don't understand the level of animus there is in the East against Russian rule and communism.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> It seems like the Ukrainian refugees are being welcomed with open arms so far. Syrian refugees were treated as possible terrorists by many European nations (and the U.S. too).



No surprises there unfortunately. My father could tell stories... To emphasize though, these student are paying good money for their education there so they are definitely significant contributors to Ukraines economy. 



yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Russia can’t completely block internet in Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SpaceX Starlink user terminals arrive in Ukraine, officials says — CNN Business
> 
> 
> A shipment of Starlink user terminals — small antennas that allow customers to access SpaceX's satellite-based internet service — arrived in Ukraine Monday, providing a back stop for Ukrainians who may see their traditional service interrupted amid the Russian invasion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Some pointed it out on Reddit that Starlink receiver terminals are necessary as implied by Musk's tweet. So those need to arrive there similarly to weapons and aid. Hopefully it will, so Musk doesn't have to call people "pedos."



Pumbaa said:


> To me, the thought of a combination of the two is the most frightening. I mean, combining his documented skills with a dose of being erratic is no bueno. Does not help me sleep.





yaxomoxay said:


> Personally, while it _might _be true that he’s erratic, I think it would be a very serious mistake thinking that he’s not calculating to OCD levels.



Statistically speaking, he is less likely to be erratic than just having a new set of personal circumstances that explain his behavior. For the very reason, because I doubt he didn't calculate with the assault going this way.


----------



## User.45

Armed Forces of Ukraine - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





Lamenting a little further. So Ukraine has 245K active military personnel, 220K reserve. 7M fit for service. that's more than formidable


----------



## User.45

A Nuclear electromagnetic pulse (nEMP) attack could be executed by detonating a special nuke at an altitude of couple of hundred miles and it could strike out the electronics of an entire continent. If Putin used nukes, I'd expect them to be used for something like this.




__





						Nuclear electromagnetic pulse - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> A Nuclear electromagnetic pulse (nEMP) attack could be executed by detonating a special nuke detonated at an altitude of couple of hundred miles could strike out the electronics of an entire continent. If Putin used nukes, I'd expect them to be used for something like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nuclear electromagnetic pulse - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Time to back up my most precious pictures to DVD and print them.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> I don’t want to derail the thread, but I guess I should read more about the trial as it seems quite interesting. I remember the Soviets doing some crappy stuff, but I didn’t remember this specific instance.




Just the Stalinist purges of Ukrainian intellectuals and later on plain citizens --shipping to Siberia or not bothering and just killing them and dumping into mass graves--  were enough to cause Ukrainians on balance today to have memory_ en famille_ of why it's worth the candle to resist Putin's aggression now. Stuff like that went on in all the border countries and those the USSR sucked up as time went on.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Time to back up my most precious pictures to DVD and print them.



Imagined printing home movies.


----------



## Eric

Romney continues to be a standup guy against the nutjobs in his party.









						Mitt Romney says Americans who support Putin are ‘almost treasonous’
					

High profile media figures including Tucker Carlson have repeatedly stressed their indifference to the fate of Ukraine




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Herdfan

Eric said:


> I think we all support this, the question is what will they do when a Russian plane provocatively enters that airspace? This could lead to a much bigger escalation, but I think it has to be done.




If it is commercial airliner, I would hope they would escort it to the nearest airport and force it to land.  Remove the passengers and seize the plane.


----------



## Pumbaa

Herdfan said:


> If it is commercial airliner, I would hope they would escort it to the nearest airport and force it to land.  Remove the passengers and seize the plane.



Out of curiosity, how do you force an airplane to land?


----------



## Herdfan

Pumbaa said:


> Out of curiosity, how do you force an airplane to land?




Fighter jet escort under threats of shooting it down.  A true commercial pilot will comply as they take the safety of the souls aboard seriously.


----------



## Pumbaa

Herdfan said:


> Fighter jet escort under threats of shooting it down.  A true commercial pilot will comply as they take the safety of the souls aboard seriously.



And if they refuse? Then what?


----------



## Zoidberg

Pumbaa said:


> And if they refuse? Then what?



You can find the entire procedure for interceptions online

It’s not like they can refuse. Just like if the Police asks you pull over, it’s not optional.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

From Twitter, courtesy an ex WH staffer: 

"Unconfirmed rumors that Valery Gerasimov, Russia’s Chief of the General Staff (the highest ranking officer of Russia’s armed forces) has been fired by Putin."

I also saw a clip (also on Twitter) that featured an officer from Belarus - a Lieutenant-Colonel in uniform (in other words, not a dissident or political person who disputed the outcome of the contentious presidential election of 2020) - who advised his audience that many members of the Belarus army "are lying in the forest" about to enter Ukraine (in support of the Russian invasion) and that "some of them will not return home."  "This is not our war," he concluded.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> From Twitter, courtesy an ex WH staffer:
> 
> "Unconfirmed rumors that Valery Gerasimov, Russia’s Chief of the General Staff (the highest ranking officer of Russia’s armed forces) has been fired by Putin."
> 
> I also saw a clip (also on Twitter) that featured an officer from Belarus - a Lieutenant-Colonel in uniform (in other words, not a dissident or political person who disputed the outcome of the contentious presidential election of 2020) - who advised his audience that many members of the Belarus army "are lying in the forest" about to enter Ukraine (in support of the Russian invasion) and that "some of them will not return home."  "This is not our war," he concluded.



So much for the peace talks, what a surprise…


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> So much for the peace talk, what a surprise…




Actually, what it suggests to me - if true - is that elements (senior elements) of the armed forces are unhappy with - not just how the invasion of Ukraine is progressing (or, not progressing, as the case may be) - but are also profoundly uncomfortable with nuclear threats, especially if coming from the mouth (and mind) of a possibly unstable (perhaps increasingly unhinged) boss whom they are expected to obey.

If matters continue to deteriorate so dramatically (Turkey is contemplating closing the straits) for Russia (militarily, economically, commercially, politically, diplomatically - has one country, other than the complicit and compromised Belarus, even offered the vaguest whisper of support?), a palace coup, once unthinkable, may well become somewhat less impossible to contemplate.


----------



## Eric

Great to see everyone uniting behind this.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/MadeMeSmile/comments/t2y66c


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Significant about Switzerland, agreed.

What many don't realise about Switzerland is how much their trade law is in conformity with that of the EU - it is difficult for their export businesses to conduct trade within the EU, otherwise.

And, also tonight, word from the Russian central bank: BREAKING -  The Russian central bank has ordered market players to reject foreign clients' bids to sell Russian securities from 0400 GMT on Monday, according to a central bank document seen by Reuters. The bank did not reply to a Reuters request for comment."

Expect the value of the rouble (already falling) to tumble further when markets open tomorrow.


----------



## User.45

Paypwalled, but corroborating the rumors I've heard about Turkey closing Bosporus traffic to Russian Warships








						Turkey to implement pact limiting Russian warships to Black Sea
					

NATO member Turkey changed its rhetoric to call Russia's assault on Ukraine a "war" on Sunday and pledged to implement parts of an international pact that would potentially limit the transit of Russian warships from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Runs For Fun

P_X said:


> Paypwalled, but corroborating the rumors I've heard about Turkey closing Bosporus traffic to Russian Warships
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Turkey to implement pact limiting Russian warships to Black Sea
> 
> 
> NATO member Turkey changed its rhetoric to call Russia's assault on Ukraine a "war" on Sunday and pledged to implement parts of an international pact that would potentially limit the transit of Russian warships from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com







__





						12ft |
					






					12ft.io


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Paypwalled, but corroborating the rumors I've heard about Turkey closing Bosporus traffic to Russian Warships
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Turkey to implement pact limiting Russian warships to Black Sea
> 
> 
> NATO member Turkey changed its rhetoric to call Russia's assault on Ukraine a "war" on Sunday and pledged to implement parts of an international pact that would potentially limit the transit of Russian warships from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com




Yes, they have been coming around to this throughout the day.


----------



## User.45

Runs For Fun said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12ft |
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12ft.io



Grazie mille!



Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes, they have been coming around to this throughout the day.



Pretty remarkable.


----------



## Pumbaa

This Sunday Sweden announced it will send 5000 anti-armor rocket launchers (and body armor kits, helmets, and field rations) to Ukraine. The Parliament will vote on Monday, expected to get majority approval without drama. The opposition will likely take the opportunity to whine a bit about the government having taken too long to act, only sending AT4 and whatever, but then vote “Yes”.

As far as I know this will be the first time since the 1939 Winter War weapons will be sent to an active war zone.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498019713942704128/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497758977328697346/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498091276205535232/
THIS guy is EVERYWHERE a hot meal is needed, seemingly no matter the conditions.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Pumbaa said:


> This Sunday Sweden announced it will send 5000 anti-armor rocket launchers (and body armor kits, helmets, and field rations) to Ukraine. The Parliament will vote on Monday, expected to get majority approval without drama. The opposition will likely take the opportunity to whine a bit about the government having taken too long to act, only sending AT4 and whatever, but then vote “Yes”.
> 
> As far as I know this will be the first time since the 1939 Winter War weapons will be sent to an active war zone.



An exceptionally important point, agreed.

I don't know whether our American readers actually understand just quite how extraordinary - and transformative - all of this is to European political culture and society.

And equally extraordinary is the case of Germany, exporting arms (for the first time since 1945) to a conflict zone (one, moreover, heavy with historical resonance for Germany), and doubling their defence budget overnight.

And most extraordinary is the case of the EU.

I have worked with the EU, worked for several EU CSDP missions; the EU doesn't do armed conflict.  And doesn't support, fund, or equip belligerents.

In  general, the EU sends civilian "capacity-building" missions to conflict areas or war zones, generally operating under an armed umbrella supplied by someone else (NATO, the US, etc for example); the EU supports (and funds) the building of a civilian infrastructure - courts, prosecution services, police, human, civil, and women's rights, whereas people like me advise on (and report on) political matters.

But, this is unprecedented - for the EU to agree to send arms - especially at such short notice.  (And, by the way, I'm in wholehearted agreement with this).


----------



## Scepticalscribe

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498019713942704128/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1497758977328697346/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498091276205535232/
> THIS guy is EVERYWHERE a hot meal is needed, seemingly no matter the conditions.




Condoleeza Rice is absolutely right, though I hadn't known that she said it.

I said the same to brothers on the phone tonight.


----------



## Eric

Zelensky is taking the internet by storm, people love the guy and you can see why. He was told he should leave and has been standing by and fighting with his own people this entire time without backing down an inch, a true leader.

Oh and he's also not an uptight psychopath...


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/t2ts3e


----------



## Huntn

An article in the *Washington Post* said that Putin’s biggest fear is a more unified Europe, how ironic…as Europe comes together over this outrage. Germany just announced increased defense spending, BP just cancelled a $multi-B project with Russia, Germany cancelled a pipeline, A European ban on Russian commercial flights is going into effect,  Delta Airlines just canceled their partnership with their former Russia airline partner, and more. Everyone is in love with Ukraine, the domestic Russian opposition is energized.

How will he ever find respect now? Is this the equivalent of stepping on a rake or falling off a cliff?


----------



## Huntn

Scepticalscribe said:


> Significant about Switzerland, agreed.
> 
> What many don't realise about Switzerland is how much their trade law is in conformity with that of the EU - it is difficult for their export businesses to conduct trade within the EU, otherwise.
> 
> And, also tonight, word from the Russian central bank: BREAKING -  The Russian central bank has ordered market players to reject foreign clients' bids to sell Russian securities from 0400 GMT on Monday, according to a central bank document seen by Reuters. The bank did not reply to a Reuters request for comment."
> 
> Expect the value of the rouble (already falling) to tumble further when markets open tomorrow.



Isn’t by stock market standards that‘s a little crooked? I mean they could close the market for a BIG tumble, but remain open and disallow selling? _Oh yes you can buy into the Russian market and then you are obligated for life…_


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Huntn said:


> Is this the equivalent of stepping on a rake or falling off a cliff?




Yes, I think that it is.

And - as a European - I will also add a word or two of praise re President Biden; thus far, he has been exemplary - sharing intelligence, calling it correctly, consulting allies, speaking with a measured, moderate, mature tone - in marked contrast to the individual seated at absurdly outsized and ludicrously large tables.

And, while supportive, he has let (or enabled, or encouraged) Europe to lead on this.

Actually, I suspect that Mr Putin despises Mr Biden, and may well see him as an elderly, senile man, lamentably devoid of aggression, cruelty, or a desire to inflict humiliation, hurt and violence or anything remotely macho, - Mr Putin may confuse this with weakness - (yet Mr Biden's son served with the military), for Mr Biden models a form of masculinity while holding power that is sympathetic to, courteous to, and respectful of women, minorities and people of colour.

While Mr Trump is no longer in office, equally interesting is the fact that Dr Merkel no longer is, either; I think that Mr Putin thought to test her successor - Mr Scholz - who is new to his position and possibly (succeeding the almost twenty years of Dr Merkel's rule) not yet fully confident or not yet fully grown into his role as German Chancellor; well, he has grown up - he has had to - at an accelerated rate - this past week-end.

My brother also suggested tonight that Covid may have delayed the implementation of these plans, which may have been scheduled while Mr Trump still held office. Perhaps; but I cannot discount it entirely.


----------



## Arkitect

WTF!?


Huntn said:


> View attachment 12100
> How will he ever find respect now?​



@Huntn 
As a gay man, I am asking you what exactly are you implying with that image?
I find it extremely offensive of you to mock Putin by portraying him as a queer man.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> WTF!?
> 
> @Huntn
> As a gay man, I am asking you what exactly are you implying with that image?
> I find it extremely offensive of you to mock Putin by portraying him as a queer man.



I did not realize…apologies. I did not realize gay men would tattoo themselves up with Stalin and mother Russia images…


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> I did not realize…apologies.



Yah know? Perhaps sometimes just THINK before you reach for the nearest meme. 
FFS!


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> I did not realize…apologies. I did not realize gay men would tattoo themselves up with Stalin and mother Russia images…



Don't be a smart ass. The rainbow flag?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> Yah know? Perhaps sometimes just THINK before you reach for the nearest meme.
> FFS!



I loathe memes.

And I had "liked" @Huntn's post before he added that stupid meme.

The point about possibly falling off a cliff remains valid.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> I loathe memes.
> 
> And I had "liked" @Huntn's post before he added that stupid meme.
> 
> The point about possibly falling off a cliff remains valid.



They have their place sometimes... But often are just mindless.


----------



## Huntn

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes, I think that it is.
> 
> And - as a European - I will also add a word or two of praise re President Biden; thus far, he has been exemplary - sharing intelligence, calling it correctly, speaking with a measured, moderate, mature tone - in marked contrast to the individual seated at absurdly monstrous tables.
> 
> And, while supportive, he has let (or enabled, or encouraged) Europe to lead on this.
> 
> Actually, I suspect that Mr Putin despises Mr Biden, and may well see him as an elderly, senile man, lamentably devoid of aggression, cruelty, or a desire for violence or anything remotely macho, - Mr Putin may confuse this with weakness - (yet Mr Biden's son served with the military), and yet symathetic to, courteous to, and respectful of women and people of colour.
> 
> While Mr Trump is no longer in office, equally interesting is the fact that Dr Merkel no longer is, either; I think that Mr Putin thought to test her successor - Mr Scholz - who is new to his position and possibly (succeeding the almost twenty years of Dr Merkel's rule) not yet fully confident or not yet fully grown into his role as German Chancellor; well, he has grown up - he has had to - at an accelerated rate - this past week-end.
> 
> My brother also suggested tonight that Covid may have delayed the implementation of these plans, which may have been scheduled while Mr trump still held office. Perhaps; but I cannot discount it entirely.



After dealing with President Biden’s predecessor, while being giddy with Donny, Biden has to be disappointing to Vlad.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> They have there place sometimes... But often are just mindless.



Especially when they offend the alliance. As I said I was blinded by the tattoos, and I did not recognize the rainbow flag. Sorry again.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> They have their place sometimes... But often are just mindless.



Mostly mindless, to my way of thinking.

If it - the power to do so - lay in my hands, I'd ban them.  Outright, always and forever.

They are rarely original, or clever, or witty, let alone intelligent.

Instead, mostly, they pretend to be "funny" (and are nothing of the sort) and try to hide behind fake wit in order to give offence. 

Above all, they are intellectually lazy.

But, back to Ukraine....


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Mostly mindless, to my way of thinking.
> 
> If it - the power to do so - lay in my hands, I'd ban them.  Outright, always and forever.
> 
> They are rarely original, or clever, or witty, let alone intelligent.
> 
> Instead, mostly, they pretend to be "funny" (and are nothing of the sort) and try to hide behind fake wit in order to give offence.



Memes are mind-viruses. They lack sophistication or accuracy by design, but still way more complex than one would think (just like viral genomes). 



Scepticalscribe said:


> Above all, they are intellectually lazy.



The concept is fascinating, because as Dawkins pointed out (who is a pathetic little asshole) they follow principles similar to that of biological evolution.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Memes are mind-viruses. They lack sophistication or accuracy by design, but still way more complex than one would think (just like viral genomes).
> 
> 
> The concept is fascinating, because as Dawkins pointed out (who is a pathetic little asshole) they follow principles similar to that of biological evolution.




I loathe them, and - well, it may be intellectual arrogance on my part, I used to be an academic, after all - but I will say that I tend to regard the posts of people who employ them as less, shall we say, intellectually rigorous, less serious, less sophisticated, than of those who take the time and trouble to present their case in mere words.

Anyway, back to Ukraine...


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> Anyway, back to Ukraine...




Biden consults with allies and also actually does listen to his own advisors, who were picked for their competence.   Those behaviors do make for a vastly different US administration compared to what Putin experienced with Trump, who was only pretending to bother with a functional government.

Some Americans and probably others as well are still judging Biden harshly over how the USA's exit from occupation of Afghanistan has proceeded.  Anyone who assumed there could be a non-tragic conclusion to that whole situation wasn't paying attention:  the USA tried to "keep an eye" on Afghanistan while mostly trying to cope with one after another disaster in the fallout from our having invaded Iraq.​​There never has been and may never be a good way for occupiers to leave Afghanistan.  That might be especially true for the USA since it was not only distracted but also essentially trying to paper the place over in one generation,  with a half baked democracy and a set of related cultural changes,  to which there was some enduring resistance outside of a few urban enclaves.​​There's a reason they call that piece of this planet a graveyard of empires.   Tribal behaviors don't help Afghanistan climb up from poverty and lack of infrastructure, but they do tend to get reinforced every time another foreign occupier packs up and leaves,  by invitation of whoever most recently managed to acquire (by force or buyout) the right to show the outsiders the door.​
All that said, it's a big mistake for anyone to assume that the chaos of the  US military's departure from Afghanistan was a fair demo of the Biden administration's readiness to deal on the world stage.   And right about now, Putin is probably starting to realize that, if he too thought he saw vulnerability there.   Trump damaged allies' trust in the USA,  but it's becoming clear that the Biden administration is working hard to shift gears and earn back some respect from our allies in Europe.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Mostly mindless, to my way of thinking.
> They ared rarely original, or clever, or witty, let alone intelligent.
> Above all, they are intellectually lazy.



Agreed. But they serve to provide talking points to those who have never read more than two likes of text at a time, and that they do wonderfully well.

Case in point:





As for the rest, regarding Ukraine, while I was initially angry at the EU for being laggy in their response, which at first seemed to be weak, I am extremely pleased to admit that I was wrong and that Ukraine must have been the straw that broke the camel’s back, because the joint response against Putin is now resolute. Letting people in visa-free and even agreeing to shuffle fighter jets around so that those who operate Russian-made ones can send them to the Ukrainian air force (as they similar to the ones the pilots are used to).

Banning RT and Sputnik is the cherry on top (and if only they cracked down on Russian-backed parties, that would be the cherry on top of the cherry).


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> I loathe them, and - well, it may be intellectual arrogance on my part, I used to be an academic, after all - but I will say that I tend to regard the posts of people who employ them as less, shall we say, intellectually rigorous, less serious, less sophisticated, than of those who take the time and trouble to present their case in mere words.
> 
> Anyway, back to Ukraine...




__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/t39dln


----------



## MarkusL

Zoidberg said:


> As for the rest, regarding Ukraine, while I was initially angry at the EU for being laggy in their response, which at first seemed to be weak, I am extremely pleased to admit that I was wrong and that Ukraine must have been the straw that broke the camel’s back, because the joint response against Putin is now resolute. Letting people in visa-free and even agreeing to shuffle fighter jets around so that those who operate Russian-made ones can send them to the Ukrainian air force (as they similar to the ones the pilots are used to).
> 
> Banning RT and Sputnik is the cherry on top (and if only they cracked down on Russian-backed parties, that would be the cherry on top of the cherry).



Even though it is looking better now it is not wrong to say that the response was laggy. There has been a lot of anxious looking to the sides to see what everyone else is doing, and nobody wants to move first. If it was Finland being attacked I think the Swedish decision to donate anti-tank weapons would have come on Thursday, but for Ukraine it took until Sunday. And who knows how much difference that delay will make?

Considering the long duration of the Russian build-up the thinking and talking should have been complete and the actions should have been immediate.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

MarkusL said:


> Even though it is looking better now it is not wrong to say that the response was laggy. There has been a lot of anxious looking to the sides to see what everyone else is doing, and nobody wants to move first. If it was Finland being attacked I think the Swedish decision to donate anti-tank weapons would have come on Thursday, but for Ukraine it took until Sunday. And who knows how much difference that delay will make?
> 
> Considering the long duration of the Russian build-up the thinking and talking should have been complete and the actions should have been immediate.



I've worked for the EU, and I've worked with the EU.

By their usual standards, - most such decisons require unanimity, which takes time, as participants must be persuaded of the reason for action, rather than bribed, or bullied, or threatened; this is consensus decision making, which very often - or, almost always - involves complicated compromises, recognises the need for individual governments to be able sell decisions to their electorates and elites in a way that is domestically palatable, therefore, spends considerable time constructing mutually acceptable - and face-saving - solutions - (and, moreover, soft power, rather than hard power, is where their - the EU's traditional strength lies), - their response has occurred at well in excess of warp speed.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> I've worked for the EU, and I've worked with the EU.
> 
> By their usual standards, - most such decisons require unanimity, which takes time, as participants must be persuaded of the reason for action, rather than bullied or bribed or threatened, this is consensus decision making, which very often - or, almost always - involves complicated compromises, recognises the need for individual governments to be able sell decisions to their electorates and elites in a way that is domestically palatable, therefore, spends much time constructing mutually acceptable - and face-saving solutions - (and, moreover, soft power, rather than hard power, is where their strength lies), - their response has occurred at well in excess of warp speed.



I was not alone in expecting Hungary to be a stumbling block. But once Orban gave his support it could only be smooth sailing.

For me the surprise is Switzerland (granted, not in the EU) loosening their grip on their "neutrality".
Cynical me thinks that in the wake of the Credit Suisse revelations, it was a bit of PR. They're still a rotten bunch.


Meanwhile, here in Blighty, I wish this Tory government would just shut the F up. Truss and Johnson beating the war drums is not helpful.


> Russia blames Liz Truss for nuclear 'special alert'
> "There had been statements by various representatives at various levels about possible conflict situations and even collisions and clashes between Nato and the Russian Federation," said Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for Vladimir Putin.
> 
> "We consider such statements absolutely unacceptable.* I will not name the authors of these statements, although it was the British foreign secretary.*"


----------



## MarkusL

Scepticalscribe said:


> I've worked for the EU, and I've worked with the EU.
> 
> By their usual standards, - most such decisons require unanimity, which takes time, as participants must be persuaded of the reason for action, rather than bullied or bribed or threatened; this is consensus decision making, which very often - or, almost always - involves complicated compromises, recognises the need for individual governments to be able sell decisions to their electorates and elites in a way that is domestically palatable, therefore, spends considerable time constructing mutually acceptable - and face-saving - solutions - (and, moreover, soft power, rather than hard power, is where their strength lies), - their response has occurred at well in excess of warp speed.



For EU as an organization that is true, but I was thinking more of the EU as a collection of member countries. Sweden for example has used the EU as a shield against having to make decisions of our own, as in "we are not going to do anything until the EU as a whole does something".


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I was not alone in expecting Hungary to be a stumbling block. But once Orban gave his support it could only be smooth sailing.




Well, while I think that Hungary (specifically, Mr Orban's government), may originally have been something of a stumbling block - and I think Mr Putin may have hoped that he (Mr Orban) would play such a role - one word should have sufficed to put pay to that.  Namely: 1956.

It is what I would have said had I been present, and asked them (the Hungarians) whether they had completely taken leave of their senses and completely (and conveniently) forgotten their own history?

More to the point, I think that failure to act would not have been forgiven lightly by a Hungarian electorate.

History and geography both play a role here: During one of the elections which I observed in Ukraine, I was sent to the west of the country, where part of my brief was to keep an eye on the Hungarians - the Hungarian minority in Ukraine (i.e. report on whether they were excluded, were able to participate fully in the political and electoral process without hindrance or obstacles, legal, linguistic, economic, cultural, political etc).  One day, while "mapping" my region, I walked right up to the border (of Ukraine) with Hungary, stood at the Ukrainian border crossing, and looked across - around 100 metres away - to the Hungarian border post, complete with Hungarian and EU flags.

So, for Hungary, (or rather, for Hungarians), this matter is a little more immediate, and present, and pressing, the nightmares of histoyr returning with a vengeance.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> For me the surprise is Switzerland (granted, not in the EU) loosening their grip on their "neutrality".
> Cynical me thinks that in the wake of the Credit Suisse revelations, it was a bit of PR. They're still a rotten bunch.



Agreed (re rotten bunch, and their recognition of the need for PR).

There is some truth in that, but I also think - and this surprised me, but I have worked with Swiss lawyers, and Swiss businessmen, - they were colleagues, hard-working and idealistic and ethical colleagues - when observing elections (indeed, I was more than surprised, and quite taken aback, to learn that Switzerland is in the OSCE) - and they have made it clear to me that Switzerland (in order to be able to do business in, and with, EU countries,) is, (and has to be,) a lot more in conformity with EU law (especially EU commercial and trade law - soft power again) than I would have considered possible.


Arkitect said:


> Meanwhile, here in Blighty, I wish this Tory government would just shut the F up. Truss and Johnson beating the war drums is not helpful.




As for Blighty, well, words fail me on this appalling and perfectly dreadful administration; the fact that they are still dragging their heels on admitting Ukrainians (without compelling them to avail of - and apply for - the atrocious temporary workers' visa scheme) appals me.

My brother (who is in full agreement with me) laughingly asked me last night whether this means that I will now be focussed on Ukraine "rather than Boris and Brexit"?


----------



## Arkitect

Reason no. 2,368 why I despise this Tory Government:

Compare and contrast with what EU countries are doing…



> *Ukrainians denied entry to UK despite being eligible for visa*





> A Ukrainian woman and her 15-year-old diabetic daughter say they are feeling increasingly distraught after escaping the conflict in Ukraine only to be blocked from a visa the UK government announced on Sunday evening for which they are eligible.
> 
> Yakiv Voloshchuk, 60, a British citizen, rescued his wife, Oksana Voloshchuk, 41 and their daughter, Veronika Voloshchuk, from Poland on 26 February.
> 
> He drove from his home in London to the Polish border and waited for them to get across Ukraine’s border with Poland. He then did a return 24-hour journey by road across Europe before reaching Paris on Sunday where he hoped he would get the green light from British officials to bring his wife and daughter on the last leg of the journey to the UK.
> 
> The family hoped it would be straightforward to reach the UK, especially after the publication of new Home Office guidance giving permission for some immediate family members of British citizens to apply free of charge to join their loved ones in the UK.
> 
> But when Oksana and Veronika tried to apply for the new visa online they were blocked from proceeding unless they paid thousands of pounds, even though the application is supposed to be free.
> 
> “We just don’t know what to do,” Voloshchuk told the Guardian on Monday morning.



link…




Scepticalscribe said:


> My brother (who is in full agreement with me) laughingly asked me last night whether this means that I will now be focussed on Ukraine "rather than Boris and Brexit"?



Our work against Pfeffel et al is never done. They will shamelessly use this tragedy to further conceal their mendacious behaviour… Operation Save Big Dog.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And, from the Guardian today: "The EU is expecting Ukraine’s application to join the European Union “imminently” and officials in Brussels said “this will need to be assessed very rapidly by the council and the decision made as to whether to request an urgent opinion from the European Commission”.

Wow.  Unprecedented.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> I was not alone in expecting Hungary to be a stumbling block. But once Orban gave his support it could only be smooth sailing.
> 
> For me the surprise is Switzerland (granted, not in the EU) loosening their grip on their "neutrality".
> Cynical me thinks that in the wake of the Credit Suisse revelations, it was a bit of PR. They're still a rotten bunch.
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, here in Blighty, I wish this Tory government would just shut the F up. Truss and Johnson beating the war drums is not helpful.



*Most of the World*: _You are an international law breaker, this action is unacceptable, dispicable! And you provide bull shit treasons for your treachery as if we are stupid. _
*Putin* (With the sound of jet planes, tanks in the background): _I’m a little busy here. Can’t the head of a honest, hard working country protect an uppity former minion from itself without you over reacting? I’m uncomfortable now as things aren’t going quite my way, and all this unwarranted hate, so I’m on high nuclear alert incase someone tries to pick on poor persecuted me._
*Most of the World: * You _ASSHOLE!_


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> And, from the Guardian today: "The EU is expecting Ukraine’s application to join the European Union “imminently” and officials in Brussels said “this will need to be assessed very rapidly by the council and the decision made as to whether to request an urgent opinion from the European Commission”.
> 
> Wow.  Unprecedented.



I wonder though… I do hope that the EU do not get carried away by this and just allow the Ukraine into the EU without the relevant checks and balances.
Sure, get talks and membership route going, but there are referendums to be held in a few countries before a new nation can become a member. (I may be incorrect about that.)

And boy, Serbia and the rest of the countries waiting patiently/impatiently for many years are not going to be so happy.

I mean, I am all in supporting Ukraine against Russia's aggression… but… but… how much exactly do we know about many issues like Human Rights/Women's Rights/Gay Rights… never mind demonstrating that they will be an asset to the EU's economy.

Personally I think there should be a few steps between _"waving flags, growing sunflowers, a media love-in with a comedian turned president"_ and automatic rubber stamping the Ukraine into the EU.

That is exactly the sort of thing that made Brexit possible by scaring the living bejeezus out of Brits.

And speaking of Brexit:



> *Priti Patel says waiving visa requirements would pose security risk*
> 
> She summarises the rules in place.
> 
> Some requirements and salary threshold have already been lowered, she says.
> 
> She says an extra 100,000 Ukrainians will be able to come to the UK as a result of her changes.
> 
> Patel says some MPs are calling for visa waivers for Ukrainians.
> 
> But she says she will not agree to that. She says biometric checks are an essential part of the system. She says, on the basis of security advice, they need to stay. She says Russians are infiltrating Ukrainian forces, and she says extremist groups are active in the war zone.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> *Reason no. 2,368 why I despise this Tory Government:*
> 
> Compare and contrast with what EU countries are doing…
> 
> 
> 
> link…
> 
> 
> 
> *Our work against Pfeffel et al is never done*. They will shamelessly use this tragedy to further conceal their mendacious behaviour… Operation Save Big Dog.



Oh, a passionate, profound and heartfelt amen to this.  You are absolutely correct.

And - an occasion for further shame - and I, personally, deeply dislike taking potshots of women in public life - they tend to get more than enough grief as it is - but, I will make an exception for the perfectly dreadful Priti Patel, who, according to the Guardian, has stated that waiving visa requirements for Ukrainians would "pose a security risk".  Apparently, she said that some "some requirements and salary thresholds have been lowered", but that biometric checks "are an essential part of the system", and that, "on the basis of security advice, they need to stay." 

This is both disgusting and disgraceful.

Contrast that with FIFA who (belatedly, very belatedly, granted) - according to the BBC - are set to suspend Russia from international football.  If true, that will hurt.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> I wonder though… I do hope that the EU do not get carried away by this and just allow the Ukraine into the EU without the relevant checks and balances.
> Sure, get talks and membership route going, but there are referendums to be held in a few countries before a new nation can become a member. (I may be incorrect about that.)
> 
> And boy, Serbia and the rest of the countries waiting patiently/impatiently for many years are not going to be so happy.
> 
> I mean, I am all in supporting Ukraine against Russia's aggression… but… but… how much exactly do we know about many issues like Human Rights/Women's Rights/Gay Rights… never mind demonstrating that they will be an asset to the EU's economy.
> 
> Personally I think there should be a few steps between _"waving flags, growing sunflowers, a media love-in with a comedian turned president"_ and automatic rubber stamping the Ukraine into the EU.
> 
> That is exactly the sort of things that made Brexit possible by scaring the living bejeezus out of Brits.



Doesn’t a lot depend on what happens in Ukraine? Isn't it based on Ukraine holding off Russian forces and keeping their government intact? I mean, I really hope this happens.


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> Doesn’t a lot depend on what happens in Ukraine? Isn't it based on Ukraine holding off Russian forces and keeping their government intact? I mean, I really hope this happens.



Correct. I cannot imagine this happening during a war of occupation.
For one thing Ukraine would need to ask their own population if they want to be part of the EU… and imagine the Russian hissy-fit.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I wonder though… I do hope that the EU do not get carried away by this and just allow the Ukraine into the EU without the relevant checks and balances.
> Sure, get talks and membership route going, but there are referendums to be held in a few countries before a new nation can become a member. (I may be incorrect about that.)
> 
> And boy, Serbia and the rest of the countries waiting patiently/impatiently for many years are not going to be so happy.
> 
> I mean, I am all in supporting Ukraine against Russia's aggression… but… but… how much exactly do we know about many issues like Human Rights/Women's Rights/Gay Rights… never mind demonstrating that they will be an asset to the EU's economy.
> 
> Personally I think there should be a few steps between _"waving flags, growing sunflowers, a media love-in with a comedian turned president"_ and automatic rubber stamping the Ukraine into the EU.
> 
> That is exactly the sort of things that made Brexit possible by scaring the living bejeezus out of Brits.




Actually, I agree with you.

I'd like to see talks started - and once, started, and the respective requirements met - this is a process that can take years.

And, personally, I have long wished to see Serbian membership (of the EU) encouraged and promoted.  Turkish membership, too, for that matter.

Just as integating Germany (well, west Germany as it was then) into the heart of the postwar European economic and political settlement ensured peace and stability in Europe, I believe that Serbian membership (of the EU) would play a similar role in serving to help stabilise the Balkans.

And yes, Croatia - since it gained EU membership - has played a major spoiler role re potential Serbian membership, - placing as many diplomatic (and other) obstacles in its path as possible (despite having promised not to do so prior to having been accepted into the EU) which is very regrettable, and frankly, infuriating.  Now, likewise, Russia would - from a different perspective - also play a spoiler role in any attempt to secure Serbian membership, but, for now, as we can see, Russia is otherwise fully occupied.

And I read that - not surprisingly - the rouble has lost around 40% of its value today.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Huntn said:


> Doesn’t a lot depend on what happens in Ukraine? Isn't it based on Ukraine holding off Russian forces and keeping their government intact? I mean, I really hope this happens.






Arkitect said:


> Correct. I cannot imagine this happening during a war of occupation.
> For one thing Ukraine would need to ask their own population if they want to be part of the EU… and imagine the Russian hissy-fit.



Agreed.

Nevertheless, the fact that this is even under consideration, or possibly under discussion, (as opposed to - say, - being deferred, sine die) is quite extraordinary.


----------



## Pumbaa

Scepticalscribe said:


> And I read that - not surprisingly - the rouble has lost around 40% of its value today.



Time to refer to it as “the rubble” soon?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Pumbaa said:


> Time to refer to it as “the rubble” soon?



Actually, - given that there was a complete Russian currency collapse and the country defaulted on its international debt in the late 1990s - creating the catastrophic (economic and social) conditions that led (more or less directly) to the appointment of Mr Putin - initially - as Prime Minister, by then President Yeltsin, later succeeding Mr Yeltsin as President, - personally, I would prefer to see another route to - how shall one phrase this tactfully and diplomatically? - regime change, (perhaps discontented, shocked or appalled elites) than ensuring complete Russian economic collapse. 

Complete economic collapses - yes, Russia should be made aware that actions have consequences and that the state runs the risk (at astonishing speed) of being made an international pariah - are not good for the economic, or social, or political health of a country.  

Unfortunately, such catastrophic consequences are more likely to give rise to conditions that suit the emergence of populist autocrats who seek to aim, or channel, or direct, impotent public fury at convenient selected targets (Jews, or gays, or other ethnicities, or other social classes, for example), than create the conditions needed for the development of (a stable) democracy. 

Persuading Russians that this invasion is not just not a good idea and will be actively and fiercely resisted, and that their leader is displaying a dismaying lack of judgme fuelled and informed by deranged delusions is one thing, but revelling in their humiliation will not end well for us, either.


----------



## Zoidberg

Arkitect said:


> And boy, Serbia and the rest of the countries waiting patiently/impatiently for many years are not going to be so happy.



I believe if Serbia were to be allowed in the EU, it would end up being a Trojan horse. I've never met more nationalist people (in a bad way), except maybe the Russians.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> I believe if Serbia were to be allowed in the EU, it would end up being a Trojan horse. I've never met more nationalist people (in a bad way), except maybe the Russians.



The Croats more than match them, unfortunately.

And, while Serbia has produced some truly appalling and perfectly ghastly leaders, they have also lost some excellent ones, (and occasionally, even genuinely democratic ones), to assassination, such as Zoran Djindic, and Ivan Stambolic.


----------



## Pumbaa

The Executive Board of the International Olympic Committee recommends that International Sports Federations and sports event organisers not invite or allow the participation of Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials in international competitions.



			https://olympics.com/ioc/news/ioc-eb-recommends-no-participation-of-russian-and-belarusian-athletes-and-officials


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> An exceptionally important point, agreed.
> 
> I don't know whether our American readers actually understand just quite how extraordinary - and transformative - all of this is to European political culture and society.
> 
> And equally extraordinary is the case of Germany, exporting arms (for the first time since 1945) to a conflict zone (one, moreover, heavy with historical resonance for Germany), and doubling their defence budget overnight.
> 
> And most extraordinary is the case of the EU.
> 
> I have worked with the EU, worked for several EU CSDP missions; the EU doesn't do armed conflict.  And doesn't support, fund, or equip belligerents.
> 
> In  general, the EU sends civilian "capacity-building" missions to conflict areas or war zones, generally operating under an armed umbrella supplied by someone else (NATO, the US, etc for example); the EU supports (and funds) the building of a civilian infrastructure - courts, prosecution services, police, human, civil, and women's rights, whereas people like me advise on (and report on) political matters.
> 
> But, this is unprecedented - for the EU to agree to send arms - especially at such short notice.  (And, by the way, I'm in wholehearted agreement with this).




It's indeed been quite astonishing to see the European reaction develop......it's quite a turn around from just a few weeks earlier.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

From the Guardian: "Switzerland, a favourite destination for Russian oligarchs, has set aside its tradition of neutrality and announced that it will adopt all the sanctions already imposed by the European Union on Russia."


----------



## JayMysteri0

Scepticalscribe said:


> Contrast that with FIFA who (belatedly, very belatedly, granted) - according to the BBC - are set to suspend Russia from international football.  If true, that will hurt.



Yeah, about that...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498329599477964803/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498325273552596996/


----------



## MarkusL

Macky-Mac said:


> It's indeed been quite astonishing to see the European reaction develop......it's quite a turn around from just a few weeks earlier.



I think seeing what is happening in Ukraine has caused our politicians to start thinking about what the next step will be if we just let Putin have his way again.

In the press conference where the Swedish PM and Defence Minister presented the aid package to the Ukrainian army they were asked approximately “These weapons were bought to equip the Swedish army. Does that mean we weaken our own forces when we give them away?”

The answer was that the weapons were bought to enhance Sweden’s security, and in this situation the best place for the weapons to contribute to Sweden’s security is in Ukraine.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> From the Guardian: "Switzerland, a favourite destination for Russian oligarchs, has set aside its tradition of neutrality and announced that it will adopt all the sanctions already imposed by the European Union on Russia."




Switzerland was otherwise maybe soon enough going to run into some fine print in whatever its trade agreements are with the European Union.    The EU is Switzerland's main trading partner but Switzerland is only fourth on the list of the EU's trade partners (after US, China, UK).


----------



## Pumbaa

Scepticalscribe said:


> Contrast that with FIFA who (belatedly, very belatedly, granted) - according to the BBC - are set to suspend Russia from international football.  If true, that will hurt.



It’s done.









						FIFA/UEFA suspend Russian clubs and national teams from all competitions | Inside UEFA
					

All Russian clubs and national teams are suspended from participation in both FIFA and UEFA competitions until further notice.




					www.uefa.com


----------



## Macky-Mac

The first day of talks ended without anybody being kidnapped or murdered.....and nobody surrendered.

Both sides agreed to resume the talks after a break for "consultations" with their respective governments.









						Latest Ukraine news: Guterres says dialogue must remain open
					

Russia-Ukraine news from February 28: UN General Assembly held its first emergency session in decades over Ukraine.




					www.aljazeera.com


----------



## Eric

And he's right...

Sen. Leahy: Putin has miscalculated the United States because “he was able to lead Donald Trump around like a puppy dog”​








						Sen. Leahy: Putin has miscalculated the United States because “he was able to lead Donald Trump around like a puppy dog”
					

Moments after President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian nuclear deterrent forces on alert, Senator Patrick Leahy joins Ali Velshi to react and explain why Putin isn’t the genius President Trump claims he is and how he has “miscalculated the United States.”




					www.msnbc.com


----------



## Thomas Veil

Just one more thing that makes me like Pat Leahy even more. (Besides the fact that he’s a Batman fan, I mean.)


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Pumbaa said:


> It’s done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FIFA/UEFA suspend Russian clubs and national teams from all competitions | Inside UEFA
> 
> 
> All Russian clubs and national teams are suspended from participation in both FIFA and UEFA competitions until further notice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.uefa.com




Excellent.

Extraordinarily rapid, too, not least as FIFA had been dragging their heels on this as recently as yesterday.

And, also from the Guardian: 

"Russia’s stock market will remain closed on Tuesday, Russia’s central bank has confirmed.

Russia’s central bank initially delayed trading on Moscow’s stock exchange on Monday until at least 3pm local time, before saying it would stay closed all day. It has now said trading will not resume on 1 March."

Obviously, the economic blows - sanctions, and currency collapses - are hitting earlier, and far harder than anyone would have anticipated, or expected, Russia's cushion of a vast sovereign reserve fund notwithstanding.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Putin needs a My Pillow guy.  It would really elevate public opinion and add some respectability.


----------



## Cmaier

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Putin needs a My Pillow guy.  It would really elevate public opinion and add some respectability.



Isn’t Trump Putin‘s My Pillow guy?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Turkey has triggered the 1936 Montreux Convention, has warned both Black Sea and non-Black Sea countries not to pass warships through its Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, reported Reuters (I am quoting from the Guardian).

Turkey controls the straits under the 1936 Montreux Convention, which stipulates that in a time of war Turkey may block access to warships belonging to states bordering the Black Sea, providing they are not returning to their permanent bases there.

The 1936 Montreux Convention allows Turkey to restrict naval transit on its straits during wartime, though allowing warships to return to their registered bases.

Turkish officials including Mr Çavuşoğlu (the Foreign Minister) declared yesterday that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine constitutes a war, a significant shift in tone after officials previously described it as a “military operation,” even while condemning Russia’s actions. 

According to the convention, Black Sea nations must notify Turkey eight days in advance of their warships, including submarines, transiting the straits while warships belonging to other nations require 15 days notice. The decision to block ships could affect an estimated 16 Russian warships and submarines currently in the Mediterranean, some of which are part of their Black Sea fleet.

Following a meeting of his cabinet, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stated earlier today that “we have decided to exercise the authority granted to our country by the Montreux Convention regarding vessel traffic on the straits in order to prevent the escalation of the crisis.”

Erdogan has repeatedly offered to mediate between Russia and Ukraine, amid efforts to maintain its alliances with both parties. Turkey imports roughly a third of its natural gas from Russia and previously bought Russia’s S400 missile defense system, but has recently enhanced its economic and defense ties to Ukraine, including selling Kyiv Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones.

“Throughout this process, we have maintained our multifaceted diplomatic initiatives uninterruptedly to ensure peace and stability, and we continue to do so,” said Erdoğan.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Cmaier said:


> Isn’t Trump Putin‘s My Pillow guy?



Waiting for a truckload of pillows to be stopped from being delivered to Putin.


----------



## Herdfan

Pumbaa said:


> It’s done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FIFA/UEFA suspend Russian clubs and national teams from all competitions | Inside UEFA
> 
> 
> All Russian clubs and national teams are suspended from participation in both FIFA and UEFA competitions until further notice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.uefa.com




I have to wonder if Putin didn't see all of this coming.  FiFA, the IOC, F1, and the list of pushback goes on and on........


----------



## Pumbaa

Herdfan said:


> I have to wonder if Putin didn't see all of this coming.  FiFA, the IOC, F1, and the list of pushback goes on and on........



I have, at least for the moment, given up trying to guess what Putin did or did not expect. Happy to add the International Ice Hockey Federation suspension of both Russia and Belarus to the list, though.









						IIHF - IIHF Council takes definitive action over Russia, Belarus
					

Russian, Belarusian national teams suspended until further notice




					www.iihf.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Pumbaa said:


> I have, at least for the moment, given up trying to guess what Putin did or did not expect. Happy to add the International Ice Hockey Federation suspension of both Russia and Belarus to the list, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IIHF - IIHF Council takes definitive action over Russia, Belarus
> 
> 
> Russian, Belarusian national teams suspended until further notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.iihf.com



Agreed.

However, I have yet to see an authoritarian, or autocratic, regime that didn't genuinely thrill to and glory in, participation, the attendant recognition, and - above all - success - in any international sports arena (be it soccer, hockey, the Olympics, motor car racing, and so on) they were permitted to participate in.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> I have to wonder if Putin didn't see all of this coming.  FiFA, the IOC, F1, and the list of pushback goes on and on........



Can he recognize that he has made his country a pariah, and two, does he care? I mean yes, he will care when the time comes his grip on power is threatened, but I’m talking before then when Russia is locked out  from the world community?

My impression with bloated ego individuals, they are always right and it’s the rest of the world with the problem. He might actually be ok with that, just like our own state side pariah, until someone shows up with handcuffs. 









						Pariah Status Starts to Exact a Financial Toll on Russia
					

Pariah Status Starts to Exact a Financial Toll on Russia




					www.bloombergquint.com
				












						The West Can Make Russia a Trade Pariah with a Page from Moscow's Playbook
					

Western governments looking to add to the economic pressure on Russia could make it a trade pariah by ending its most-favored-nation status, writes Susan Ariel Aaronson.




					www.barrons.com


----------



## Thomas Veil

Herdfan said:


> I have to wonder if Putin didn't see all of this coming.  FiFA, the IOC, F1, and the list of pushback goes on and on........



I do not think he expected to have so much of the world lined up against him. I mean right now, it's Russia (and Belarus) vs. NATO and sympathetic countries, sports leagues and companies. 

Turkey kinda surprised me, as well as BP and Shell pulling out their investments in Gazprom. It's become quite a bandwagon effect--and I like it.

If I were to guess what's going on in the Kremlin now, I'd say Putin has been taken quite by surprise. He thought this was gonna be a cakewalk, and it's not going that way. 

So one of two things is happening. Either he's (a) looking for a way to exit gracefully and save face (withdrawing and saying he's proven his point); or (b) digging in for the long haul, because he's either losing his reason or is not about to admit that this wasn't such a hot idea. Given his tendency to act like he's the cleverest, toughest guy in the room, I'd guess the latter.


----------



## Huntn

*War Stories 28Feb22:*

No, You’re Not Imagining It: Russia’s Army Is Inept​But superior firepower still gives it an edge in the short run.









						No, You’re Not Imagining It: Russia’s Army Is Inept
					

But superior firepower still gives it an edge in the short run.




					slate.com
				



_After four days of fighting, the Russian military is bogged down in Ukraine. In part this is due to the valiant resistance of Ukraine’s army and civilian defense forces. But it’s also due to the fact that the Russian army just isn’t very good.

News reports, tweets, videos, and emails from the battlefields show Russia’s armored vehicles abandoned for lack of fuel, its soldiers foraging for food, its transport planes shot out of the sky, its various military elements—tanks, infantry, aircraft—unable to coordinate their aims.

Michael Kofman, a military analyst at CNA, an Arlington, Virginia–based think tank, who has been following the battle closely, tweeted late Sunday afternoon, “It’s taken me a while to figure out what [the Russian military is] trying to do, because it looks so ridiculous and incompetent.” B.A. Friedman, a military historian and tactician, went further: “This isn’t a good army executing a bad plan. It isn’t a good army executing outdated or out-of-context tactics. It’s a bad army!”_


Ukrainians are hurling Molotov cocktails at Russians. Hungarians and Finns have done the same.​


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/28/russia-ukraine-war-putin-news/
		

*paywall you might have to use reader mode.
_The young men waited in the shadows until the Russian tank had passed them on the narrow city street. Then one jumped from a doorway, climbed onto the vehicle and jammed a crowbar into its tread, bringing it to a halt.
When a member of the tank crew cracked open a hatch to take a look, another man threw a flaming molotov cocktail, while the first man jerked open the hatch and dropped in a hand grenade. Other men then clambered over the tank, yanked out the Russians and shot them.
“As long as there are old bottles and gasoline supplies and rags to serve for fuses, no Russian tank will be safe in the streets,” a member of the besieged country’s defiant government declared in the New York Times. (His name was withheld for security reasons.)
The Russian army has “met its match in the molotov cocktail,” he proclaimed. _


----------



## SuperMatt

Zekensky is asking for a no-fly zone to be created. With the momentum of support for Ukraine growing every day, is it possible such a thing could happen?

In other news, Russia keeps killing civilians as it holds talks. You’d think they could put in a 1-day ceasefire for the talks… if the talks were serious. This makes it seem as if Russia doesn’t take them seriously.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Zekensky is asking for a no-fly zone to be created. With the momentum of support for Ukraine growing every day, is it possible such a thing could happen?
> 
> In other news, Russia keeps killing civilians as it holds talks. You’d think they could put in a 1-day ceasefire for the talks… if the talks were serious. This makes it seem as if Russia doesn’t take them seriously.



Anyone enforcing it immediately goes to war with Russia, I'm of the opinion the all NATO nations should join a united front and defend them, I don't think Putin will stop until he's put down.


----------



## GermanSuplex

It is quite something to see the valor of Ukrainians. That story of the Ukrainian soldiers protecting that island who were feared dead has inspired a script or two, I’m sure. Was thrilled to hear they made it out alive, if that report was accurate.


----------



## Thomas Veil

I don’t know how much stock to put in this, but I’ve heard some of this Russian “incompetence” ascribed to soldiers who _really don’t want to be there fighting their neighbors_…so they’re doing things like taking long circuitous routes so they’ll purposely run out of gas. If true they are in effect _throwing the fight_.


----------



## SuperMatt

Everybody is against Russia now. Disney is not going to release new films there. Warner Brothers didn’t want to be left out, so they announced they will not release their new film “The Batman” in Russia. Instead, they will re-release this one:



I suspect Russia will surrender before the movie is over.


----------



## Eric

A powerful statement.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498381591306981379/


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

That convey heading to Kiev is 40 miles long which is enormous. I can’t see Ukraine managing to hold off that many troops. The funny thing is if NATO were involved, that convoy would be wiped out by cruise missiles and it’s amazing so many vehicles are bunched together in one place.


----------



## Zoidberg

Looking at the possible final outcomes of the current offensive, the resistance is going to be fierce, and as more and more Ukrainians have personal friends and family members fall victim to the Russians, they are likely to go to the wire.

For reference, in Afghanistan, the Soviets between 14000 and 30000 men (depending of the source) over the course of *nine years.*

The Ukrainian forces are claiming over 5000 russians have been killed already. Given the sheer amount of tanks and convoys completely destroyed that are well documented, it might be high, but it's not impossible (of course, there are no official numbers yet). For the Russians, that's between 1/3 (official numbers) and 1/6th (unofficial numbers) of the Soviet-Afghan war losses _*in less than a week*_.

And when they finally take "control" of most of the country –which seems inevitable, given the Russian military sheer numbers, notwithstanding all their issues– there's definitely no way that Putin manages to place a puppet. The Ukrainians ousted the previous one for much less than what's going on now. Maintaining him in power would require large numbers of Russian troops permanently stationed all over Ukraine, which doesn't seem sustainable in the long term.

Adding to this, the Ukrainians are going to get more deadly, as they are going to get more desperate, and they now have a virtually unlimited supply of weaponry to defend themselves thanks to NATO and the EU. The EU is also going to link up our grid system to Ukraine's, to ensure power supply wherever possible, even when the Russians cut it off.

The Russians claimed air supremacy within 24 hours, and now, five days in, the Ukrainians are attacking convoys with slow, budget military drones running on 100 hp civilian aircraft engines seemingly without a bother. That would never happen if the Russians indeed had any kind of actual air control. And without air control, the Russians can only rely on bombing from a distance, which will hit and enrage the civilian population even more.

So, the final outcome becomes clear, and it begs the following question: what would happen if Putin manages* to nuke Kyiv (or any other city for that matter)?

* by manage, I mean that the command is actually carried out, as I'm sure that that order would give pause even to the most ruthless people around him.


----------



## Thomas Veil

SuperMatt said:


> Everybody is against Russia now. Disney is not going to release new films there. Warner Brothers didn’t want to be left out, so they announced they will not release their new film “The Batman” in Russia. Instead, they will re-release this one:
> 
> View attachment 12122
> 
> I suspect Russia will surrender before the movie is over.



Well great.  Now the Russians can take us to The Hague and charge us with war crimes.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Thomas Veil said:


> Well great.  Now the Russians can take us to The Hague and charge us with war crimes.



Very much doubt it.

In fact, today, between 100 and 140 diplomats walked out of an address delivered (online, as he was unable to be present, in person, due to sanctions banning Russian flights over European airspace) by Sergei Lavrov, (the Russian Foreign Minister), at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.


----------



## DT

Scepticalscribe said:


> Very much doubt it.




Context.  It's a joke about a older, terrible movie being re-released in Russia (vs. the new movie based on the same material).


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> Very much doubt it.
> 
> In fact, today, between 100 and 140 diplomats walked out of an address delivered (online, as he was unable to be present, in person, due to sanctions banning Russian flights over European airspace) by Sergei Lavrov, (the Russian Foreign Minister), at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.



I think @Thomas Veil was referring slyly to the Batman and Robin film being released there.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Scenes of those diplomats leaving in the UN

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498695374441172997/

Giving a speech at the 'Human Rights Council'.

Really?!

Really?!!


----------



## yaxomoxay

JayMysteri0 said:


> Scenes of those diplomats leaving in the UN
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498695374441172997/
> 
> Giving a speech at the 'Human Rights Council'.
> 
> Really?!
> 
> Really?!!



Far from me defending Putin (and I am glad to see what happened), but after the war in Iraq (and quite possibly the mess in Afghanistan)  with hundreds of thousands of deaths, I wonder if the US actually belongs there.

Edit: let me clarify that I am not looking for moral equivalencies, however the question remains in particular after the war in Iraq. On an international level and in modern times, it’s the US that brought the concept of pre-emptive wars to the front and center of military options. 

I also do see the difference between the war in Iraq (unprovoked and based on lies) and the war in Afghanistan (no matter how badly handled, it’s rooted in 9/11).


----------



## JayMysteri0

yaxomoxay said:


> Far from me defending Putin (and I am glad to see what happened), but after the war in Iraq (and quite possibly the mess in Afghanistan)  with hundreds of thousands of deaths, I wonder if the US actually belongs there.



I think for a true parallel, it would be if everyone & Russia walked out during the US speech about Iraq during the endless search.

Yes, it's always easy to jump on the US numerous f'ups in the past, but THIS is a real time horror movie happening that Russia was warned against repeatedly.  Russia said "So?"  Went on, 'f'ed that up, and now has to go all in, with everyone knowing what's coming.

So...

No.


----------



## yaxomoxay

JayMysteri0 said:


> I think for a true parallel, it would be if everyone & Russia walked out during the US speech about Iraq during endless search.
> 
> Yes, it's always easy to jump on the US numerous f'ups in the past, but THIS is a real time horror movie happening that Russia was warned against repeatedly.  Russia said "So?"  Went on, 'f'ed that up, and now has to go all in, with everyone knowing what's coming.
> 
> So...
> 
> No.



Don’t get me wrong, I do agree with the above statements. However in order to criticize Russia - which as you say it is very important to do - we also need to do lots of introspection, esp. in reference to the war in Iraq.


----------



## JayMysteri0

yaxomoxay said:


> Don’t get me wrong, I do agree with the above statements. However in order to criticize Russia - which as you say it is very important to do - we also need to do lots of introspection, esp. in reference to the war in Iraq.



We have done that.  Many times over I believe.  Did we bring those responsible up on any kind of charges?  Do we ever?  We do recognize where we f'd up, and it plays a part in all of our conversations when we consider future actions.

What you are seeming to say is that that introspection would NEVER end, thus we would NEVER have to the right to criticize anyone doing anything awful again.

Just because one does bad shit in the past, doesn't mean one can't recognize bad shit now or even worse.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1498697956526071810/


----------



## yaxomoxay

JayMysteri0 said:


> Just because one does bad shit in the past, doesn't mean one can't recognize bad shit now or even worse.




Oh, absolutely. As I clarified in my original post, I am not looking for moral equivalencies. I guess j am just saying that we should remember we ain’t saints either and to keep in mind that international politics is… messy. Just for context.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Far from me defending Putin (and I am glad to see what happened), but after the war in Iraq (and quite possibly the mess in Afghanistan)  with hundreds of thousands of deaths, I wonder if the US actually belongs there.
> 
> Edit: let me clarify that I am not looking for moral equivalencies, however the question remains in particular after the war in Iraq. On an international level and in modern times, it’s the US that brought the concept of pre-emptive wars to the front and center of military options.
> 
> I also do see the difference between the war in Iraq (unprovoked and based on lies) and the war in Afghanistan (no matter how badly handled, it’s rooted in 9/11).



Yes. Beyond the human tragedy, some of the long-lasting consequences to the Iraq invasion are that it gave a free pass to others to do whatever they wanted by just “whatabouting-it”, and it cemented the “USA-is-an-evil empire” narrative for at least another half century, just as Vietnam was fading away.


----------



## GermanSuplex

This is what happens when you live in an autocratic dictatorship with an isolated ruler who resides in an echo chamber.

Its funny to have seen Pompeo and Trump harp on about what a genius Putin is as the larger conversation is heading in the opposite direction. While the crisis in Ukraine is much bigger than Trump, its a god sign of why someone like Trump is unfit to serve and what can happen when one man has too much power. It also must irk Trump to see Zelensky get so much praise, as he exhibits the qualities Trump claims to have in quantities but clearly is lacking entirely. Trump would have been tweeting from a bunker by now, urging his people to fight as he watched cable news and maybe cheated at a few holes of golf.


----------



## SuperMatt

GermanSuplex said:


> This is what happens when you live in an autocratic dictatorship with an isolated ruler who resides in an echo chamber.
> 
> Its funny to have seen Pompeo and Trump harp on about what a genius Putin is as the larger conversation is heading in the opposite direction. While the crisis in Ukraine is much bigger than Trump, its a god sign of why someone like Trump is unfit to serve and what can happen when one man has too much power. It also must irk Trump to see Zelensky get so much praise, as he exhibits the qualities Trump claims to have in quantities but clearly is lacking entirely. Trump would have been tweeting from a bunker by now, urging his people to fight as he watched cable news and maybe cheated at a few holes of golf.



Trump and Pompeo have both recently said that Putin is smart and that American and European leaders are dumb. (Trump has been saying it since 2016 at least). The fact is, it is Putin who looks really dumb right now. Of course, Trump and Pompeo have always looked dumb, so they are staying on brand.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> Trump and Pompeo have both recently said that Putin is smart and that American and European leaders are dumb. (Trump has been saying it since 2016 at least). The fact is, it is Putin who looks really dumb right now. Of course, Trump and Pompeo have always looked dumb, so they are staying on brand.



I do consider Putin smart. One doesn’t stay in power in Russia for 20+ years while making it again a quite powerful country by being stupid.

Said that, he might’ve been very wrong in his evaluations here. However I am very afraid that people are underestimating him right now in the evaluation of the long term goals. I have no idea what he wants in the long run, but let’s not claim victory over Russia not even a week after the war started while he’s getting Ukraine (probably at a higher price than expected, but he’s still getting it). 

In other words, let’s be cautious before calling him dumb.


----------



## Herdfan

yaxomoxay said:


> Oh, absolutely. As I clarified in my original post, I am not looking for moral equivalencies. I guess j am just saying that we should remember we ain’t saints either and to keep in mind that international politics is… messy. Just for context.




I will say I think we at least try not to bomb civilian areas.  Doesn't mean we always succeed, but we try.  Russia seems willing to bomb anything and kill anyone.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Herdfan said:


> I will say I think we at least try not to bomb civilian areas.  Doesn't mean we always succeed, but we try.  Russia seems willing to bomb anything and kill anyone.



I don’t disagree with the above, but that’s a different subject. Obviously what Putin is doing is on a whole different level of piece-of-shitness.


----------



## fooferdoggie

SuperMatt said:


> Trump and Pompeo have both recently said that Putin is smart and that American and European leaders are dumb. (Trump has been saying it since 2016 at least). The fact is, it is Putin who looks really dumb right now. Of course, Trump and Pompeo have always looked dumb, so they are staying on brand.



trump said our leaders are dumb. was he not a leader very recently???


----------



## GermanSuplex

fooferdoggie said:


> trump said our leaders are dumb. was he not a leader very recently???




Like everything else with Trump, its projection. He meant everyone but him, clearly. This is the same guy who voted by mail while criticizing it, said only guilty people settle lawsuits, only guilty people plead the fifth, etc.


----------



## Zoidberg

Herdfan said:


> I will say I think we at least try not to bomb civilian areas.  Doesn't mean we always succeed, but we try.  Russia seems willing to bomb anything and kill anyone.



They are not “willing” to bomb civilians. Bombing civilians *is* their strategy*.

Look at what was left of Grozny.

*while calling the civilians being bombed nazis, of course.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> I do consider Putin smart. One doesn’t stay in power in Russia for 20+ years while making it again a quite powerful country by being stupid.
> 
> Said that, he might’ve been very wrong in his evaluations here. However I am very afraid that people are underestimating him right now in the evaluation of the long term goals. I have no idea what he wants in the long run, but let’s not claim victory over Russia not even a week after the war started while he’s getting Ukraine (probably at a higher price than expected, but he’s still getting it).
> 
> In other words, let’s be cautious before calling him dumb.



Excellent post and some very well made points.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

In Russia, Ekho Moskvy, a radio station that for decades has been the emblem of the Russian capital’s liberal opposition and intelligentsia, - one of the few remaining genuinely independent media, one of the few remaining media to date from (and faithfully represent, the independent media that grew out of the "Glasnost" reforms) - has been taken off the air, its director said.

Also suppressed (and shut down) was the independent TV station, Dozhd TV (TVRain).

And - this is almost parody - the Russian media have been banned from using the words "war, invasion, or attack" to describe events in Ukraine. Unprecedented.

Elsewhere, in a further tightening of the economic screws on Russia, the EU has approved cutting off seven Russian banks from Swift banking system, including the VTB bank, according to Bloomberg news.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> And - this is almost parody - the Russian media have been banned from using the words "war, invasion, or attack" to describe events in Ukraine. Unprecedented.



Is “walkabout” allowed?


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Is “walkabout” allowed?



Well it's certainly not a "walk in the park" for Putin.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Apparently, according to the Guardian, Roskomnadzor, Russia's media monitoring agency, is threatening to ban the Wikipedia website throughout the country (Russia) for an article titled “Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022”.

The agency is accusing Wikipedia of “illegally disseminated information” about the Russian military, Ukrainian civilian casualties, and bank runs.

Dear me.


----------



## SuperMatt

It looks like Ukraine was able to slow down Russian forces temporarily, but the news today has been far less optimistic. I fear Russia will soon have large numbers of troops in Kyiv.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> It looks like Ukraine was able to slow down Russian forces temporarily, but the news today has been far less optimistic. I fear Russia will soon have large numbers of troops in Kyiv.



Without external support, Kiev will fall.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

This is being fought with more than bombs and bullets:

Two interesting tweets from @Mij_Europe tonight:

"Senior EU officials tell me the EU is considering offering qualified Russian  citizens EU  passports - to accelerate Russian economic brain drain

This is just one of many innovative measures being considered to complement economic sanctions now in place "

and: 

"Other ideas include offering asylum and refugee status for soldiers that want to desert the Russian army - to incentivise defections - as long as they have not committed war crimes. Plus many more. The policy ingenuity is remarkable "


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Is “walkabout” allowed?




I believe this is what the GOP officially calls "a field trip with a couple knuckleheads."


----------



## Deleted member 215

yaxomoxay said:


> Don’t get me wrong, I do agree with the above statements. However in order to criticize Russia - which as you say it is very important to do - we also need to do lots of introspection, esp. in reference to the war in Iraq.



I do think there is a pervasive historical attitude of “only America is allowed to do this” (Condoleeza Rice on Fox News saying that invasion of a sovereign country is a war crime, that’s rich). It does matter because we keep doing it and we don’t learn our lesson. It doesn’t mean we can’t criticize Putin. But let’s remember this when it comes time to support the next “regime change”…


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> I do think there is a pervasive historical attitude of “only America is allowed to do this” (Condoleeza Rice on Fox News saying that invasion of a sovereign country is a war crime, that’s rich). It does matter because we keep doing it and we don’t learn our lesson. It doesn’t mean we can’t criticize Putin. But let’s remember this when it comes time to support the next “regime change”…



Invading Iraq was terrible and inexcusable. That being said, we didn’t threaten to annex the country and make it part of the United States. This action by Putin is not really comparable.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> Invading Iraq was terrible and inexcusable. That being said, we didn’t threaten to annex the country and make it part of the United States. This action by Putin is not really comparable.



I vehemently disagree with this. Invading a sovereign country when unprovoked, causing the death of countless civilians, is invading a sovereign country regardless of the end-game. Let’s call a spade a spade.


----------



## Deleted member 215

It's comparable because they're both acts of imperialism. Yes, there is a scale of sympathetic regime > puppet state > annexation, but in terms of damage done, it can be just as great as annexation (if not more), even if the level of imperialism isn't quite the same.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> I vehemently disagree with this. Invading a sovereign country when unprovoked, causing the death of countless civilians, is invading a sovereign country regardless of the end-game. Let’s call a spade a spade.




We were just exporting democracy and Putin is just keeping the peace. 

I don't know why some people insist on looking past original mission statements.  It never goes anywhere good.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> I vehemently disagree with this. Invading a sovereign country when unprovoked, causing the death of countless civilians, is invading a sovereign country regardless of the end-game. Let’s call a spade a spade.



The 2 situations have many differences, and yes, some similarities. I am not ignoring the similarities, and you should not ignore the differences.


----------



## Macky-Mac

SuperMatt said:


> It looks like Ukraine was able to slow down Russian forces temporarily, but the news today has been far less optimistic. I fear Russia will soon have large numbers of troops in Kyiv.




One problem with having a "miles long convoy" is that if the opposition blocks the first few vehicles in the convoy, then you get a "miles long traffic jam"


----------



## Pumbaa

Macky-Mac said:


> One problem with having a "miles long convoy" is that if the opposition blocks the first few vehicles in the convoy, then you get a "miles long traffic jam"




True. I learned this from the Atari 2600 game  Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back. Winning strategy to cripple the front and munch away on sitting ducks. Another takeaway from the game is that convoys are extremely vulnerable if one does not have air superiority.

So few pixels, yet so many lessons.


----------



## Yoused

Thers is a _*direct causal link*_






between the staged crocodile tears of that terrible, horrible, awful, evil crisis actor Greta Thunberg and Putin's assault on Ukraine.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Pumbaa said:


> True. I learned this from the Atari 2600 game  Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back. Winning strategy to cripple the front and munch away on sitting ducks. Another takeaway from the game is that convoys are extremely vulnerable if one does not have air superiority.
> 
> So few pixels, yet so many lessons.




I became aware of the principal as a result of getting stuck in massive traffic jams on the freeways here in Los Angeles


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Pumbaa said:


> Another takeaway from the game is that convoys are extremely vulnerable if one does not have air superiority.




Highway of Death 2: Putin Boogaloo


----------



## Thomas Veil

DT said:


> Context.  It's a joke about a older, terrible movie being re-released in Russia (vs. the new movie based on the same material).



Yes, it was one of the most godawful superhero movies ever released and has been the butt of jokes ever since it was released.



Scepticalscribe said:


> ...Two interesting tweets from @Mij_Europe tonight:
> 
> "Senior EU officials tell me the EU is considering offering qualified Russian  citizens EU  passports - to accelerate Russian economic brain drain
> 
> This is just one of many innovative measures being considered to complement economic sanctions now in place "
> 
> and:
> 
> "Other ideas include offering asylum and refugee status for soldiers that want to desert the Russian army - to incentivise defections - as long as they have not committed war crimes. Plus many more. The policy ingenuity is remarkable "



It's a nice idea but I question the degree of effectiveness. People have families, and you know what happens to families of people who cross thugs. The extremes Putin is going to lately, I wouldn't put it past him.


----------



## Thomas Veil

fooferdoggie said:


> trump said our leaders are dumb. was he not a leader very recently???



Yes, and as usual he was talking about himself.

Meanwhile, more good news.









						Mastercard and Visa cut off Russian banks from their networks
					

Visa and Mastercard are the latest Western companies to cut off or curtail their business activities in Russia following sanctions that have sent the Russian economy into freefall.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Visa. It's everywhere you want to be...unless you're in Russia.


----------



## Zoidberg

Apple is getting out too (it’s not like many will be able to afford their stuff anyway… or be able to pay for it, for that matter).

I was reading articles about how Kyiv only has insulin for a couple more days, and how the pediatric cancer ward is running low on everything as well.

Fuck Putin.


----------



## GermanSuplex

It’s seriously insane that we are this far along, with this much history behind us to learn from, and we still let individuals with massive egos cause such destruction.


----------



## yaxomoxay

GermanSuplex said:


> It’s seriously insane that we are this far along, with this much history behind us to learn from, and we still let individuals with massive egos cause such destruction.



I think it’s just human nature, if not nature in general itself.


----------



## GermanSuplex

On a slightly related note, Biden knocked it out or the park tonight. A couple hecklers but a lot of bipartisan respect shown. Great speech.


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> Without external support, Kiev will fall.



They'll seize it but it's obvious their people will not roll over, once they get their boots on the ground it's going to be ugly for everyone.

I normally never wish death on anyone but someone needs to put a bullet in Putin's head, even if it's his own people.









						Russia leader Vladimir Putin 'holed up in lair' as assassination predicted
					

A security specialist who hails from West Cork has predicated that Russia President Vladimir Putin will be assassinated by his own people




					www.irishmirror.ie


----------



## Yoused

Apparentlly the Antonov AN-225 Mriya , the largest aircraft in the world, was destroyed in a Ukranian hangar by the Russian assault.


----------



## Deleted member 215

It's interesting. I'm seeing more right-wingers defending Putin across the internet. They're claiming that Zelensky is a progressive globalist and Putin is fighting the "deep state".


----------



## fooferdoggie

Anonymous Offers Russian Soldiers Over $50K Worth of Bitcoin for Each Surrendered Tank (Report)
					

The intercontinental hacker collective – Anonymous - will reportedly pay $52,000 in BTC for a surrendered tank.




					cryptopotato.com


----------



## User.45

TBL said:


> It's interesting. I'm seeing more right-wingers defending Putin across the internet. They're claiming that Zelensky is a progressive globalist and Putin is fighting the "deep state".



Took 'em a week to come up with a narrative. As i said, russian trolls seem to have a supply issue too.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Without external support, Kiev will fall.




Question is, will the government fall with it or retreat into the countryside?

Kiev in Russian hands and a puppet government installed. Putin declares "Mission accomplished"… and then a protracted guerrilla war.


----------



## User.45

Arkitect said:


> Question is, will the government fall with it or retreat into the countryside?
> 
> Kiev in Russian hands and a puppet government installed. Putin declares "Mission accomplished"… and then a protracted guerrilla war.



Route depends on how encircled Kyiv is. If it’s a full ring, good luck getting anybody in or out. That includes supplies from the west. To be realistic I think Kyiv will fall in two to three days.

Even if Zelensky survives, he will be cut off from the outside world. So without propaganda, if no daily report from Zelensky, Kyiv is lost. Ukraine has been beating Russia in information warfare, which is still the biggest shocker to me, though the hypothesis i found feasible is that Russians are way too busy controlling the narrative domestically. I really think they didn’t have a plan in these regards. 

Ukrainians can make Kyiv a living hell to Russian forces but i doubt they’ll have the firepower to retake the city one those forces are in and entrenched. 

So as you say, that’s gonna be a “what now?” Moment for everyone.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> So as you say, that’s gonna be a “what now?” Moment for everyone.



Agreed. I have no idea about what will happen in the long run. 

I am starting to see a possible gamble by Putin. 
Certainly the Ukrainian people want normalcy. So does the West in general. While it’s true that Russia has been severely hit by sanctions, it is also true that the west - in particular the EU - doesn’t want to keep tensions up. Certainly nobody wants an energy crisis. 

I wonder, if somehow Russia is able to bring the concept of normality to Ukraine back, will the west ease its sanctions? After all, our memory is very short. 

Of course the biggest unknown is how the Ukrainian people will do. It’s true that they might want to fight until each one of them is dead, but will they?


----------



## Thomas Veil

Holy…









						Zelensky assassination plot foiled, Ukrainian authorities say — Axios
					

Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council chief Oleksiy Danilov announced during a briefing Tuesday that Ukrainian forces had foiled an assassination plot against President Volodymyr Zelensky, according to a Telegram post from Ukrainian authorities.




					apple.news


----------



## yaxomoxay

Thomas Veil said:


> Holy…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zelensky assassination plot foiled, Ukrainian authorities say — Axios
> 
> 
> Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council chief Oleksiy Danilov announced during a briefing Tuesday that Ukrainian forces had foiled an assassination plot against President Volodymyr Zelensky, according to a Telegram post from Ukrainian authorities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



I am very surprised that they said the source of the tip.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Yeah, that’s not good. Somebody’s head may roll for that. The media should have kept that part a mystery.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Thomas Veil said:


> Yeah, that’s not good. Somebody’s head may roll for that. The media should have kept that part a mystery.



Granted, the information might be imprecise enough to play just into Putin’s paranoia.


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> Agreed. I have no idea about what will happen in the long run.
> 
> I am starting to see a possible gamble by Putin.
> Certainly the Ukrainian people want normalcy. So does the West in general. While it’s true that Russia has been severely hit by sanctions, it is also true that the west - in particular the EU - doesn’t want to keep tensions up. Certainly nobody wants an energy crisis.
> 
> *I wonder, if somehow Russia is able to bring the concept of normality to Ukraine back, will the west ease its sanctions? After all, our memory is very short.*
> 
> Of course the biggest unknown is how the Ukrainian people will do. It’s true that they might want to fight until each one of them is dead, but will they?



I don't see how that's possible when you're occupied, it's like WWII and Afghanistan taught us nothing. You may be able to take over and occupy a country but if they don't want you there it will always be an uphill battle for the aggressor.


----------



## Cmaier

Thomas Veil said:


> Yeah, that’s not good. Somebody’s head may roll for that. The media should have kept that part a mystery.




I disagree. If there are others in Russia who oppose the war and might want to help, knowing that they are not alone may be just the thing that gets them to help out too.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> I don't see how that's possible when you're occupied, it's like WWII and Afghanistan taught us nothing. You may be able to take over and occupy a country but if they don't want you there it will always be an uphill battle for the aggressor.



Not that I don’t agree with you, but Afghanistan and Ukraine are quite different in mentality. One way to do this is to create a Western Ukrainian state.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Cmaier said:


> I disagree. If there are others in Russia who oppose the war and might want to help, knowing that they are not alone may be just the thing that gets them to help out too.



I think that the issue is that they said specifically where it came from. I would’ve kept it with a generic “government officials”


----------



## Yoused

yaxomoxay said:


> I wonder, if somehow Russia is able to bring the concept of normality to Ukraine back, will the west ease its sanctions? After all, our memory is very short.



Our memory may be short, but most of the world has been a bit uncomfortable with V. V. Putin for, really, a couple decades, and absolutely no one wants to let him cleanly get away with a stunt like this.


----------



## Cmaier

yaxomoxay said:


> I think that the issue is that they said specifically where it came from. I would’ve kept it with a generic “government officials”




“Members of the security service” doesn’t seem very specific to me.  And if it makes Putin paranoid of the security service and they start trying to root out who these people are, it distracts and paralyzes the security service, which is even better.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Have you captured a tank and are worried about the tax implications? The Ukrainian revenue agency has issued formal guidance that you don't need to declare it








						No need to declare captured Russian tanks, other equipment of invaders as income – NAPC
					

Ukraine's National Agency for the Protection against Corruption (NAPC) has declared that captured Russian tanks and other equipment are not subject to declaration.




					en.interfax.com.ua


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> It's interesting. I'm seeing more right-wingers defending Putin across the internet. They're claiming that Zelensky is a progressive globalist and Putin is fighting the "deep state".




There are people on the right who would defend gang rape if the Democrats took a direct stance against it.  They'd probably even use the Jimmy Carr term for rape, a struggle snuggle.


----------



## Eric

Is it just me or is Putin's face all puffed out and tight? That can be related to taking steroids for health conditions and if you've ever seen the mood swings it causes it can flat out make people evil, and if you're already evil, then God help us all. Where's @P_X we need to get to the bottom of this.


----------



## Arkitect

Eric said:


> Is it just me or is Putin's face all puffed out and tight? That can be related to taking steroids for health conditions and if you've ever seen the mood swings it causes it can flat out make people evil., and if you're already evil, then God help us all. Where's @P_X we need to get to the bottom of this.



I agree. Over the past year or so he has become noticeably more puffy and as you point out, it could be due to steroid use. Sure it is speculation, but I would bet ons some serious health condition(s).


----------



## Cmaier

Eric said:


> Is it just me or is Putin's face all puffed out and tight? That can be related to taking steroids for health conditions and if you've ever seen the mood swings it causes it can flat out make people evil, and if you're already evil, then God help us all. Where's @P_X we need to get to the bottom of this.



No, it‘s not just you. Both of your faces are all puffed out.

Hah hah. I’ll be here all week, folks.


----------



## Arkitect

Just a bit of information that popped out today as I was reading this opinion piece in the Guardian today.


> Today, according to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, *Ukraine is the second most corrupt in Europe*, ahead of Russia.



Unfortunately it is true. Link
Now, I am not saying Ukraine deserve being invaded, but people need to not forget things like this. Especially when it comes to handing out EU memberships.

Ukraine’s bid for fast-track membership of EU likely to end in disappointment


----------



## Cmaier

Arkitect said:


> Just a bit of information that popped out today as I was reading this opinion piece in the Guardian today.
> 
> Unfortunately it is true. Link
> Now, I am not saying Ukraine deserve being invaded, but people need to not forget things like this. Especially when it comes to handing out EU memberships.
> 
> Ukraine’s bid for fast-track membership of EU likely to end in disappointment




You’ll be amazed at how current events will put an end to all that. Real countries are built out of common hardships. Once there’s a true sense of being part of one nation, things will clean up fast.


----------



## Eric

Go get 'em.

$1 million bounty on Putin offered by Russian businessman​The Russian entrepreneur said the Russian president came to power by "blowing up apartment buildings in Russia.​


			https://www.jpost.com/international/article-699098
		


The photo they used here is great.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Opinion | My Letter From Kyiv to the 'Anti-Imperialist Idiots' in the West
					

Before taking up my post to defend this city from looming invasion, I would like to communicate to the Western Left what I think about its reaction to Russia's aggression against Ukraine.




					www.commondreams.org


----------



## Arkitect

_"Refugees from Ukraine you are all welcome… as long as you're the right colour!"_

You'd think a common humanity would prevail in times like these.
Humans — for all their little sunflower emojis and hearts and prayers and thoughts — are shit.


People of colour fleeing Ukraine attacked by Polish nationalists​
"Attackers dressed in black sought out groups of non-white refugees, mainly students who had just arrived in Poland at Przemyśl train station from cities in Ukraine after the Russian invasion.

Many of the foreign nationals fleeing the Russian attacks are students. About 16,000 African students were studying in the country before the invasion, Ukraine’s ambassador to South Africa said this week.

Reports and footage on social media in the past week have shown acts of discrimination and violence against African, south Asian and Caribbean citizens while fleeing Ukrainian cities and at some of the country’s border posts."

Link


----------



## Deleted member 215

P_X said:


> Took 'em a week to come up with a narrative. As i said, russian trolls seem to have a supply issue too.




Yeah, it took them about a week to come up with the same narrative they always come up with. The fact that Zelensky is Jewish probably adds to it…


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Is it just me or is Putin's face all puffed out and tight? That can be related to taking steroids for health conditions and if you've ever seen the mood swings it causes it can flat out make people evil, and if you're already evil, then God help us all. Where's @P_X we need to get to the bottom of this.



he has a masked (parkinsonian) face at baseline but I think it’s actually just lots of botox. I couldn’t find good stills from recent times, what i see shows his lower face is certainly puffed out a little, but that again could be just weight gain.

Cushingoid face (steroid related facial changes) comes with a little bit of temporalis muscle atrophy (muscle at the temples) and lots of lower face rounding, +/- blushing of the face, though the blushing I haven’t seen that much with exogenous steroids. Based on the photos I’ve seen, wouldn’t draw any conclusions. Also, there are a few drugs that can be used instead of corticosteroids that don’t come with changes in appearance so wouldn’t make much sense in his situation. (I do use a ton of steroids, but am not an endocrinologist).

So no, there’s nothing tangible here, just hypotheses.



Arkitect said:


> _"Refugees from Ukraine you are all welcome… as long as you're the right colour!"_
> 
> You'd think a common humanity would prevail in times like these.
> Humans — for all their little sunflower emojis and hearts and prayers and thoughts — are shit.
> 
> 
> People of colour fleeing Ukraine attacked by Polish nationalists​
> "Attackers dressed in black sought out groups of non-white refugees, mainly students who had just arrived in Poland at Przemyśl train station from cities in Ukraine after the Russian invasion.
> 
> Many of the foreign nationals fleeing the Russian attacks are students. About 16,000 African students were studying in the country before the invasion, Ukraine’s ambassador to South Africa said this week.
> 
> Reports and footage on social media in the past week have shown acts of discrimination and violence against African, south Asian and Caribbean citizens while fleeing Ukrainian cities and at some of the country’s border posts."
> 
> Link



No surprises there unfortunately (i grew up around there and am part of the African diaspora). You can diffuse these assholes if you speak the language better than them. The main motivation is xenophobia.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

At the UN General Assembly (meeting in Emergency session for only the 11th time since 1950, and the first time in the past 40 years that the Security Council referred a crisis to the General Assembly), Russia has suffered - not just a crushing defeat, but a shocking expression of just how isolated they are.

The United Nations has voted overwhelmingly to deplore the Russian invasion of Ukraine “in the strongest possible terms”.

The UN general assembly has approved a resolution demanding that Russia stop the war in Ukraine and withdraw all troops.

The resolution won support from 141 votes and five voted against. There were 35 abstentions.

The five votes against included Russia, which was joined by Belarus, Eritrea, North Korea, and Syria.

Among the 35 abstentions were India, Pakistan, China, Iran, Iraq, and, a few (though not all) of the former central Asian states and other former states, (such as Armenia) of the USSR also abstained, whereas Azerbaijan didn't register any preference at all.

Meanwhile, the oligarch Roman Abramovich has confimed (I'm seeing this in the Guardian) that he is putting the football cub, Chelsea, up for sale, and has also agreed to write off the loan of almost £2 billion the club owes him; clearly, his attempts to distance himself from ownership of the club (by placing it under the ostensible control of a charitable foundation while still retaining ownership, haven't worked).


----------



## Macky-Mac

That's an amazing vote by the UN General Assembly.

Here's the full vote tabulation


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Among the 35 abstentions were India, Pakistan, China, Iran, Iraq, and, a few (though not all) of the former central Asian states and other former states, (such as Armenia) of the USSR also abstained, whereas Azerbaijan didn't register any preference at all.




I am definitely not happy about India’s position.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Does the UN vote actually accomplish anything tangible?

I will accept "no" as a valid answer.


----------



## Renzatic

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Does the UN vote actually accomplish anything tangible?
> 
> I will accept "no" as a valid answer.




It's a moral standpoint.


----------



## lizkat

In my mailbox today:  Frontier Communications makes calls to Ukraine free through March 11, possibly longer.


----------



## Huntn

I am amazed that BP jettisoned a reported coinvestment in Russia totaling $20B+. Therecare reports


yaxomoxay said:


> I am definitely not happy about India’s position.



Abstentions, India and Pakistan, we’re they on vacation?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Renzatic said:


> It's a moral standpoint.





So no then.  Moral standpoints don't stop the killing of innocent people.  I can make moral standpoints all day long and get the same end result they got here.  World and public opinion was well known before this "let's make it official" vote by the UN.  

I don't want to come off as harsh but this is a harsh situation and reality.


----------



## Renzatic

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I don't want to come off as harsh but this is a harsh situation and reality.




You have to think of the UN as a meeting spot for all the various nations of the world to palaver over the latest issues of the day. It has no real power in and of itself, but it's good for showing where everyone stands.


----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> Abstentions, India and Pakistan, were they on vacation?



India and Pakistan have an eternal dispute over a Kashmir and would rather not face UN reproach over a territorial conflict.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Does the UN vote actually accomplish anything tangible?
> 
> I will accept "no" as a valid answer.




There are other valid answers.

And, in this instance, to my mind, "no" is not a valid answer.


Renzatic said:


> It's a moral standpoint.



Exactly, and it is a moral standpoint that you are choosing to make explicit to the world, in public view.




Huntn said:


> Abstentions, India and Pakistan, we’re they on vacation?



They abstained.

In such assemblies, sometimes, there are four options: Yes (in favour), no, (against), abstention (a deliberate choice to register a vote neither "in favour", nor, "against"), and "present but not voting".

And there is the fifth: Not present, (deliberately, or not, who can say), and therefore, not voting.



Chew Toy McCoy said:


> So no then.  Moral standpoints don't stop the killing of innocent people.



But, you are announcing that you think it wrong.

And, you are also able to find out just how many others hold similar views - for, with this vote, Russia can be in no doubt of how the world views their invasion of Ukraine - they will not be able to make the argument that they enjoy widespread international support, and nor will they be able to argue that this is "a western plot", for, far too many countries, not all of them western, oppose the invasion of Ukraine, and are prepared to say so openly.

Moreover, such a vote also allows you to see how many countries have reservations (the abstentions, some of whom would usually be more - sometimes, a lot more - closely aligned with Russia) and how many will actually admit - not just to world public opinion, but, to their own domestic audiences (and electorates) that they support this.

It is a damning indictment - and a clear signal - of how just friendless and alone and isolated Russia is on this issue.

Besides, "moral choices" - and expressing "moral choices" made it clear that many people - who, although not present, or unable to influence what happened - found the fact, and manner, of how George Floyd died utterly repugnant, which, in turn, meant that the authorities were obliged to act by suspending, arresting and charging the police officers responsible.


----------



## Huntn

The whopper foreign policy delimma what happens when a tactical Nuke goes off in Ukraine?

No one wants WWIII, I predict nothing in response as far as counter nukes directed at Russia. What will happen will be huge political turmoil, an economic tsunami of retaliation against Russia.

Now if Vlad gets desperate enough, the scenario we would all cross our fingers for would be him being deposed by internal forces not ready to die in WWIII. However for a guy who usually gets anything he wants in his own country, the fall can be hard, and  I can imagine him ready to up in a FUCK YOU mushroom cloud.

However you want to describe it, no matter how you come to terms with the reality you won’t live forever, this is so scary, it’s almost something we don’t want to think about. But there are  people in positions of authority around the world, who have been thinking about the what ifs. I’ll assume they will be ready to respond, and let the chips fall where they may and the future of the human race could be determined by a single megalomaniac who does not like the word no.


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> The whopper foreign policy delimma what happens when a tactical Nuke goes off in Ukraine?
> 
> No one wants WWIII, I predict nothing in response as far as counter nukes directed at Russia. What will happen will be huge political turmoil, an economic tsunami of retaliation against Russia.
> 
> Now if Vlad gets desperate enough, the scenario we would all cross our fingers for would be him being deposed by internal forces not ready to die in WWIII. However for a guy who usually gets anything he wants in his own country, the fall can be hard, and  I can imagine him ready to up in a FUCK YOU mushroom cloud.
> 
> However you want to describe it, no matter how you come to terms with the reality you won’t live forever, this is so scary, it’s almost something we don’t want to think about. But there are  people in positions of authority around the world, who have been thinking about the what ifs. I’ll assume they will be ready to respond, and let the chips fall where they may and the future of the human race could be determined by a single megalomaniac who does not like the word no.



It would make zero sense to set off a nuclear bomb so close to his own country. And nobody wants to annex a nuclear wasteland, so it would be pointless to use a nuclear weapon on land you want to take over.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> The whopper foreign policy delimma what happens when a tactical Nuke goes off in Ukraine?
> 
> No one wants WWIII, I predict nothing in response as far as counter nukes directed at Russia. What will happen will be huge political turmoil, an economic tsunami of retaliation against Russia.
> 
> Now if Vlad gets desperate enough, the scenario we would all cross our fingers for would be him being deposed by internal forces not ready to die in WWIII. However for a guy who usually gets anything he wants in his own country, the fall can be hard, and  I can imagine him ready to up in a FUCK YOU mushroom cloud.
> 
> However you want to describe it, no matter how you come to terms with the reality you won’t live forever, this is so scary, it’s almost something we don’t want to think about. But there are  people in positions of authority around the world, who have been thinking about the what ifs. I’ll assume they will be ready to respond, and let the chips fall where they may and the future of the human race could be determined by a single megalomaniac who does not like the word no.



That’s why it’s important that leaders of a nuclear power have sons/daughters and family in general.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> So no then.  Moral standpoints don't stop the killing of innocent people.  I can make moral standpoints all day long and get the same end result they got here.  World and public opinion was well known before this "let's make it official" vote by the UN.
> 
> I don't want to come off as harsh but this is a harsh situation and reality.



Well it won’t bring back any of those murdered, but this is part of the blowback, the political opinion is condemning Russia which will effect not only it’s economics, but may actually cause the citizens of Russia  to force a change.


----------



## Huntn

Scepticalscribe said:


> There are other valid answers.
> 
> And, in this instance, to my mind, "no" is not a valid answer.
> 
> Exactly, and it is a moral standpoint that you are choosing to make explicit to the world, in public view.
> 
> 
> 
> They abstained.
> 
> In such assemblies, sometimes, there are four options: Yes (in favour), no, (against), abstention (a deliberate choice to register a vote for neither option), and "present but not voting".
> 
> And there is the fifth: Not present, (deliberately, or not, who can say), and therefore, not voting.
> 
> 
> But, you are announcing that you think it wrong.
> 
> And, you are also able to find out just how many others hold similar views - for, with this vote, Russia can be in no doubt of how the world views their invasion of Ukraine - they will not be able to make the argument that they enjoy widespread international support, and nor will they be able to argue that this is "a western plot", for, far too many countries, not all of them western, oppose the invasion of Ukraine, and are prepared to say so openly.
> 
> Moreover, such a vote also allows you to see how many countries have reservations (the abstentions, some of whom would usually be more - sometimes, a lot more - closely aligned with Russia) and how many will actually admit - not just to world public opinion, but, to their own domestic audiences (and electorates) that they support this.
> 
> It is a damning indictment - and a clear signal - of how just friendless and alone and isolated Russia is on this issue.
> 
> Besides, "moral choices" - and expressing "moral choices" made it clear that many people - who, although not present, or unable to influence what happened - found the fact, and manner, of how George Floyd died utterly repugnant, which, in turn, meant that the authorities were obliged to act by suspending, arresting and charging the police officers responsible.



Mine was a sarcastic comment, and it’s bothersome these 2 countries abstained. What do they get from Russia?


----------



## Huntn

Thomas Veil said:


> Yes, it was one of the most godawful superhero movies ever released and has been the butt of jokes ever since it was released.
> 
> 
> It's a nice idea but I question the degree of effectiveness. People have families, and you know what happens to families of people who cross thugs. The extremes Putin is going to lately, I wouldn't put it past him.



I heard it (Batman) was getting 1.5 star ratings.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> It would make zero sense to set off a nuclear bomb so close to his own country. And nobody wants to annex a nuclear wasteland, so it would be pointless to use a nuclear weapon on land you want to take over.



Tactical nukes are different than the big boys, yes devastating and poisonous but a much smaller scale. I could see this calculation on behalf of Putin.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> There are other valid answers.
> 
> And, in this instance, to my mind, "no" is not a valid answer.
> 
> Exactly, and it is a moral standpoint that you are choosing to make explicit to the world, in public view.
> 
> 
> 
> They abstained.
> 
> In such assemblies, sometimes, there are four options: Yes (in favour), no, (against), abstention (a deliberate choice to register a vote neither "in favour", nor, "against"), and "present but not voting".
> 
> And there is the fifth: Not present, (deliberately, or not, who can say), and therefore, not voting.
> 
> 
> But, you are announcing that you think it wrong.
> 
> And, you are also able to find out just how many others hold similar views - for, with this vote, Russia can be in no doubt of how the world views their invasion of Ukraine - they will not be able to make the argument that they enjoy widespread international support, and nor will they be able to argue that this is "a western plot", for, far too many countries, not all of them western, oppose the invasion of Ukraine, and are prepared to say so openly.
> 
> Moreover, such a vote also allows you to see how many countries have reservations (the abstentions, some of whom would usually be more - sometimes, a lot more - closely aligned with Russia) and how many will actually admit - not just to world public opinion, but, to their own domestic audiences (and electorates) that they support this.
> 
> It is a damning indictment - and a clear signal - of how just friendless and alone and isolated Russia is on this issue.
> 
> Besides, "moral choices" - and expressing "moral choices" made it clear that many people - who, although not present, or unable to influence what happened - found the fact, and manner, of how George Floyd died utterly repugnant, which, in turn, meant that the authorities were obliged to act by suspending, arresting and charging the police officers responsible.





Maybe in another situation, but we’re talking Vladimir “Zero Fucks Given” Putin who seems to be the only opinion that matters in Russia and this is clearly a suicide vanity project, all or nothing. Best case scenario we let him have his way with Ukraine and then economically and literally starve out of the people of Russia over several years, which for some could make him more popular. “See, I told you the west was out to get you!”.

I’m sorry, but to me in this situation I don’t find any “I’m just fascinated by how all this politics stuff works!” fulfillment. None of it matters when you have a leader with nukes who says he’s not afraid to use them. How many thousands of people are going to die while we sit around taking disapproval votes over the next several weeks….months….years?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Huntn said:


> Mine was a sarcastic comment, and it’s bothersome these 2 countries abstained. What do they get from Russia?



Humour online is exceedingly subjective; to be honest, I didn't realise that you were being sarcastic.

Now, re the Indian sub-continent:

Historically, India was passionately anti-Imperialist, and politically, was a part of the non-aligned group - especially when ruled by the Congress Party (Mr Nehru and his descendants, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi).  This has meant - again, historically - that India was a lot less anti-Russian (anti-Soviet) than some of its Asian neighbours, and was, at times, almost sympathetic to Russia.

Pakistan is the real surprise: Traditionally, (not least because it takes positions that are anti-India, or, opposed to whatever India votes for, and India was usually understanding of the position adopted by the Soviet Union), it has usually been strongly pro-western on such matters.

However, Imran Khan - the current PM (and former cricket star) - recently, - recently, in this context, measn as recently as last week - visited Moscow, and has - just as recently, concluded a number of trade deals (the guaranteed purchase of Russian energy, apparently, comprising part of these deals).

Candidly, the last time I recall seeing India and Pakistan (and my time in Afghanistan has left me - I must confess - with a deep dislike of, and a profound distrust of - the politics, and political culture of Pakistan), even vaguely on the same side (even if today's abstention on the UN General assembly vote could be described thus) on anything was when they both, - hilariously and simultaneously, - banned Salman Rushdie's absolutely brilliant, magic-realism (and Booker Prize winning) novel - about the history of - the creation of India and Pakistan.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> I am definitely not happy about India’s position.



My Postdoc is Indian. He told me a story when he attended a social event with the Russian ambassador. Someone from the crowd asked whether he’d wish If Ukraine “joined” Russia again, and his response was, would India like Pakistan to “join” them again?

I think we all know the answers.



_*edits because I'm the only millennial who can't type on a touchscreen. _


----------



## User.45

I have to say, Ukraine's meme game is top notch:


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Have just read (Reuters, The Business Times and elsewhere) that the World Bank is to halt, or suspend, all programs, and projects in Russia and Belarus.


----------



## shadow puppet

Is this what thermobaric bombs look like?  Whatever these flashes are, they look scary AF.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499180156325445640/


----------



## Thomas Veil

Looked like it was far away because of the time between the flash and the sound...but jesus, did that light up the sky.

No idea whether that was a thermobaric bomb or not, but it's possible. At this point Putin doesn't care how barbaric he gets.

We can only hope that rumors of a potential assassination of Putin are true.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy




----------



## User.45

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/t4vxha
 official footage on the Techno House siege


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> India and Pakistan have an eternal dispute over a Kashmir and would rather not face UN reproach over a territorial conflict.




Also, Pakistan and China are trying to make more of their commercial relationships lately (since the US-Pakistan relationship has noticeably cooled),  and Pakistan doesn't want to offend China by siding against Russia in the current alignments...

 India looks east and west, and even under Modi it still usually still considers itself nonaligned,  but India has Himalayan border problems with China in the Galwan Valley  (east of the Indian-controlled part of the contested Kashmir region).  India has also long counted Russia as a major trading partner,  particularly for import of weapons and oil.

 So all in all both Pakistan and India have reason to try to minimize whatever their reservations are about Russia's aggression within Ukraine,  especially considering that China is also still trying to salvage its own relationship with Russia by not flat out renouncing the invasion.


----------



## Arkitect

The official excuse, apparently, is that Putin has to be kept in a health bubble.






But I wonder…


----------



## DT

P_X said:


> official footage on the Techno House siege




Comment from Reddit:

_"To be fair that works on regular doors. But this is no ordinary door. This is the famed "Door of Kyiv". Legend says the Door of Kyiv have slammed 7 Russian feet and stopped the advance of 16 Russian invaders. Fun fact, the Door of Kyiv isn't even located in Kyiv."_


----------



## Eric

Arkitect said:


> The official excuse, apparently, is that Putin has to be kept in a health bubble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I wonder…




he's turning


----------



## Pumbaa

Eric said:


> he's turning



Let’s just hope he doesn’t turn Earth into a radioactive Mount Doom…


----------



## Eric

Pumbaa said:


> Let’s just hope he doesn’t turn Earth into a radioactive Mount Doom…



He won't if we take him out first. The priority of every nation on the planet should be to target that piece of shit in whatever bunker he's hiding in, the alternative could be far worse.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> Also, Pakistan and China are trying to make more of their commercial relationships lately (since the US-Pakistan relationship has noticeably cooled),  and Pakistan doesn't want to offend China by siding against Russia in the current alignments...
> 
> India looks east and west, and even under Modi it still usually still considers itself nonaligned,  but India has Himalayan border problems with China in the Galwan Valley  (east of the Indian-controlled part of the contested Kashmir region).  India has also long counted Russia as a major trading partner,  particularly for import of weapons and oil.
> 
> So all in all both Pakistan and India have reason to try to minimize whatever their reservations are about Russia's aggression within Ukraine,  especially considering that China is also still trying to salvage its own relationship with Russia by not flat out renouncing the invasion.



Kind of like when  economics trump what is right, or ignore what is wrong,


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> Kind of like when  economics trump what is right, or ignore what is wrong,



Hah! Well looking around the world, that's been a problem for a long, long time.

Money talks. Lots a money talks really loudly.

And when our politicians get into bed with dodgy Billionaires… well… yeah. We end up where we are today.

Lots of hand wringing and mea culpae. 

To quote a great movie villain, Hannibal Lecter: _"We begin by coveting what we see every day."_
And for politicians who rub shoulders every day with the super rich. Man, oh man! Don't they all just want a little bit more? A flat renovated? Special seats at the football game? A little bit of grease to smooth things over.

And before you know it, constituents be damned! Morals be damned! All decency be damned!
It is just so lovely sucking on that champagne teat. 
Little holidays on a super yacht. 
Special deliveries of extra special caviar.

Ya know? The things that make it all so worthwhile slaving away in Parliament or Government.

The proles… they. Well. They. Just. Don't. Understand.

_"Oh, another invitation to be a Board member? Why you shouldn't have. But how about I nominate my wife? Thanks!"_


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> He won't if we take him out first. The priority of every nation on the planet should be to target that piece of shit in whatever bunker he's hiding in, the alternative could be far worse.




I’m sure a good part of it is being in the leadership bubble, but those people are often seen or even known to say that they are the most patriotic and would die for their country. Yet they can’t step up to the plate of potentially dying for the betterment of that country when putting a bullet in the leader’s head would be the right thing to do. They think dying in a pile of rubble is more patriotic than stopping the senseless killing of thousands to millions of their own people. They are the least patriotic cowards.


----------



## Runs For Fun

Eric said:


> He won't if we take him out first. The priority of every nation on the planet should be to target that piece of shit in whatever bunker he's hiding in, the alternative could be far worse.



Exactly. There's a lot of very bad outcomes that could result from this invasion and getting rid of him would avoid all of those. It's basically in the entire world's best interest.


----------



## Eric

Runs For Fun said:


> Exactly. There's a lot of very bad outcomes that could result from this invasion and getting rid of him would avoid all of those. It's basically in the entire world's best interest.



It's like before WWII, the world figured they would let Hitler have Poland.. what's the worst that can happen?


----------



## JayMysteri0

A brief revisit on what PoC are dealing with, and some of the media's help with that.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499370254790766597/



> https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2022/02/27/media-ukraine-offensive-comparisons/





> Russia’s invasion of Ukraine shocked the world as the largest cross-border European conflict in decades. But some observers see a troubling tone creeping into how some media outlets have attempted to contextualize it, describing Ukraine as more “civilized” than other countries, such as Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria.
> 
> In one notable CBS News segment, senior foreign correspondent Charlie D’Agata, reporting from Kyiv, said Friday that Ukraine “isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan, that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilized, relatively European — I have to choose those words carefully, too — city, where you wouldn’t expect that or hope that it’s going to happen.”
> 
> The statement went viral, and D’Agata, a veteran war correspondent, issued an apology Saturday, saying he had “used a poor choice of words” that he regretted. “What I had hoped to convey is that what’s unique about the fighting underway here is that this country has not really seen this scale of war in recent years, unlike some conflicts in countries I’ve covered that have tragically suffered through many years of fighting.”





> But D’Agata was just one of many correspondents and commentators using offensive comparisons in their effort to explain Ukraine’s plight.
> 
> ITV News correspondent Lucy Watson reported from a train station in Kyiv that the “unthinkable” had happened to the people of Ukraine. “This is not a developing third-world nation,” she said. “This is Europe.”
> 
> Likewise, in a segment on the BBC, David Sakvarelidze, former deputy prosecutor general of Ukraine, described his emotional response in seeing “European people with blue eyes and blond hair being killed, children being killed every day” in his country.
> 
> Daniel Hannan, a former Conservative member of European Parliament, wrote in London’s Telegraph newspaper of the Ukrainian people being attacked: “They seem so like us. That is what makes it so shocking. War is no longer something visited upon impoverished and remote populations. It can happen to anyone.”
> 
> Such coverage resorts to “Orientalist concepts of ‘civilization’ that have long been present in European colonial discourse,” said Denijal Jegic, a postdoctoral researcher in communication and multimedia journalism at Lebanese American University in Beirut, in an interview. “This implicitly suggests that war is a natural phenomenon in places outside of the Euro-American sphere, and the Middle East in particular, and that war would take place because of a lack of civilization, rather than due to unjust geopolitical power distribution or foreign intervention.”


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Rumours - well, not quite rumours, - but rather, tweets from Russian speakers (in the west) writing about, and citing, tweets and texts from Russian friends in Russia, (some of whom are driving through the night to reach the border), who have requested that they not be messaged (further) until they have reached the border, and have safely crossed it ("as all phones are being searched"), and that they fear that martial law will be declared in Russia.

And, an extraordinary clip just posted on Twitter (from one of the TV stations): An interviewed trader paused in the middle of the interview, raised a bottle of sparkling water to the camera, and toasted the memory of the Moscow stock market.

"Cheers", he said, opening the bottle with an audible twist, and proceeding to raise the bottle whereupon he looked straight at the camera:
“My only job from now on will be working as a Santa. Cheers to our stock market death.”

The expression on the interviewer's face was priceless, even though the moment was both grotesquely hilarious, and tragic: Shock and disbelief.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Mikhail Gorbachev changed history — and then the West paved the way for Putin
					

I was in Moscow when Gorbachev changed everything. But neoliberal "shock therapy" destroyed a historic opportunity




					www.salon.com
				




Interesting take. Basically after the collapse of the Soviet Union the west (Read: US?) handed Russia the blue print for one of the biggest periods of inequality in capitalism’s history and said “Do this”. This is when Putin began his career. Then couple that starting point with all the up and coming modern methods of wealth theft and corruption and here we are. Of course we could have helped them with a less destructive path, which we had elsewhere in the past, but that isn’t profitable for the west (Read: US?)


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> Hah! Well looking around the world, that's been a problem for a long, long time.
> 
> Money talks. Lots a money talks really loudly.
> 
> And when our politicians get into bed with dodgy Billionaires… well… yeah. We end up where we are today.
> 
> Lots of hand wringing and mea culpae.
> 
> To quote a great movie villain, Hannibal Lecter: _"We begin by coveting what we see every day."_
> And for politicians who rub shoulders every day with the super rich. Man, oh man! Don't they all just want a little bit more? A flat renovated? Special seats at the football game? A little bit of grease to smooth things over.
> 
> And before you know it, constituents be damned! Morals be damned! All decency be damned!
> It is just so lovely sucking on that champagne teat.
> Little holidays on a super yacht.
> Special deliveries of extra special caviar.
> 
> Ya know? The things that make it all so worthwhile slaving away in Parliament or Government.
> 
> The proles… they. Well. They. Just. Don't. Understand.
> 
> _"Oh, another invitation to be a Board member? Why you shouldn't have. But how about I nominate my wife? Thanks!"_



I won’t speak for other countries, but you have just described the USA perfectly.  As far as humanity in general I would describe a significant number of us as selfish and greedy. For the longest time conservatives pushed the idea of _work hard and become wealthy._ Not to demean hard work, but only if it was that easy. The thing is they sell a fantasy, the sysytem is not set up so everyone, or even a majority can become “wealthy”. Then from a philosophical standpoint, we (humans) can debate what the definition of wealth is or should be. 

I’d argue a future without continuous conflict and upheaval involves socialism but then I know how humans function. If you look at the major Communist countries, a cousin to socialism, we have a serious problem with corruption that tends to stymie human advancement.


----------



## yaxomoxay

@Scepticalscribe you might find this quite interesting:









						Moscow Patriarch Kirill: Ukraine Orthodox bishops in 'schism'
					

News: Ukraine




					www.pillarcatholic.com
				




Basically all Orthodox leaders in Ukraine, including Russian Orthodox leaders, separated from Moscow.


----------



## yaxomoxay

I read on the Italian news that Putin declared that “Ukrainians and Russians are the same people.”

If true, this Sounds like full annexation is the goal.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> I read on the Italian news that Putin declared that “Ukrainians and Russians are the same people.”
> 
> If true, this Sounds like full annexation is the goal.



That would be even worse than a installing a puppet government.  So how do the kids feel when  Dad stomps in, kills their siblings, then declares _we’re one big happy family_?


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> That would be even worse than a installing a puppet government.  So how do the kids feel when  Dad stomps in, kills their siblings, then declares _we’re one big happy family_?



Sadly it wouldn’t be the first time in history that this happens. If you think about, he already leaned towards that during his invasion speech. If he’s actually saying that Russia and Ukraine is the same, it can mean only that Ukraine will cease to exist as a country. We shall see.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> Hah! Well looking around the world, that's been a problem for a long, long time.
> 
> Money talks. Lots a money talks really loudly.
> 
> And when our politicians get into bed with dodgy Billionaires… well… yeah. We end up where we are today.
> 
> Lots of hand wringing and mea culpae.
> 
> To quote a great movie villain, Hannibal Lecter: _"We begin by coveting what we see every day."_
> And for politicians who rub shoulders every day with the super rich. Man, oh man! Don't they all just want a little bit more? A flat renovated? Special seats at the football game? A little bit of grease to smooth things over.
> 
> And before you know it, constituents be damned! Morals be damned! All decency be damned!
> It is just so lovely sucking on that champagne teat.
> Little holidays on a super yacht.
> Special deliveries of extra special caviar.
> 
> Ya know? The things that make it all so worthwhile slaving away in Parliament or Government.
> 
> The proles… they. Well. They. Just. Don't. Understand.
> 
> _"Oh, another invitation to be a Board member? Why you shouldn't have. But how about I nominate my wife? Thanks!"_



And this is why I am in favour of - and have long been in favour of - paying decent (very decent) salaries to politicians.

Politics shouldn't be confined to thsoe who have access to:

1): Private incomes of their own, and can afford to enter politics.  

2): Those who live off the private incomes of others, and thus, can afford a political career.

Leaving aside the fact that confining political life to the already wealthy, or the already bought, this serves to exclude from poitical life  those who are not born wealthy, or who may stand to inherit wealth from political power.

Worse, this also means that you grow up, with a lack of imagination - or lack of awareness, and often, a complete lack of empathy - of the facts and the sordid compromises, and the needs of the lives of those who are less fortunate, or less financially well endowed than you, and yor polices in offcie will reflect this.

And, worst of all, if your wealth in politics - or your income - derives from others, then, you are bought, and you are primarily answerable to them, and not to your electorate.  And, yes, your policies, inevitably, and regrettably, will also tend to reflect this, something that, at the very least, will not only corrosively corrupt democracy, but contribute to a profound disillusion with its workings.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Arkitect said:


> Hah! Well looking around the world, that's been a problem for a long, long time.
> 
> Money talks. Lots a money talks really loudly.
> 
> And when our politicians get into bed with dodgy Billionaires… well… yeah. We end up where we are today.
> 
> Lots of hand wringing and mea culpae.
> 
> To quote a great movie villain, Hannibal Lecter: _"We begin by coveting what we see every day."_
> And for politicians who rub shoulders every day with the super rich. Man, oh man! Don't they all just want a little bit more? A flat renovated? Special seats at the football game? A little bit of grease to smooth things over.
> 
> And before you know it, constituents be damned! Morals be damned! All decency be damned!
> It is just so lovely sucking on that champagne teat.
> Little holidays on a super yacht.
> Special deliveries of extra special caviar.
> 
> Ya know? The things that make it all so worthwhile slaving away in Parliament or Government.
> 
> The proles… they. Well. They. Just. Don't. Understand.
> 
> _"Oh, another invitation to be a Board member? Why you shouldn't have. But how about I nominate my wife? Thanks!"_




Are you suggesting when a politician is contemplating a decision they sooner think of the people they hung out with on a yacht than the people they bought cupcakes from at the church bake sale? The only way you could come to that conclusion is if you look at what they actually do as opposed to what they say.

Yachts seem to be coming up a lot these days and I think for good reason. Here’s an idea. Instead of having book burnings we should have yacht burnings. I think both sides could get on board with that and it would be sending a message to the right people.  That's unless somebody can prove to me that the world's authors are actively hoarding all the wealth.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Mikhail Gorbachev changed history — and then the West paved the way for Putin
> 
> 
> I was in Moscow when Gorbachev changed everything. But neoliberal "shock therapy" destroyed a historic opportunity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.salon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting take. Basically after the collapse of the Soviet Union the west (Read: US?) handed Russia the blue print for one of the biggest periods of inequality in capitalism’s history and said “Do this”. This is when Putin began his career. Then couple that starting point with all the up and coming modern methods of wealth theft and corruption and here we are. Of course we could have helped them with a less destructive path, which we had elsewhere in the past, but that isn’t profitable for the west (Read: US?)



Salon has a long history of shit takes, blaming the West for Putin's actions.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> I read on the Italian news that Putin declared that “Ukrainians and Russians are the same people.”
> 
> If true, this Sounds like full annexation is the goal.




Sorta like how a certain historical Austrian German said Germans and Austrians are the same people.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> I read on the Italian news that Putin declared that “Ukrainians and Russians are the same people.”
> 
> If true, this Sounds like full annexation is the goal.



Full annexation _*was*_ the goal. Now they have realised that the window of opportunity has closed and it's never going to happen, so they are going for full annihilation.


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Sorta like how a certain historical Austrian German said Germans and Austrians are the same people.



Anschluß


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> And this is why I am in favour of - and have long been in favour of - paying decent (very decent) salaries to politicians.



I am not sure just paying our politicians more, much, much more is the answer at all. Hell! You're competing with billionaires here.

Because as it stands right now in the UK they _are_ being paid a very decent salary.

MPs will earn £84,000 from April 2022 plus expenses for running their office — never mind the subsidised Pol Roger at the several Bars in Parliament. 

This is just under three times more than the 2021 national medium salary of £31,461 in the United Kingdom.

So how much exactly should we be paying them? I would hope for a certain amount of moral character — christ! How about a sense of duty?

I don't believe paying them more is going to suddenly make them think about the population they represent.

I am extraordinarily cynical — and unforgiving — when it comes to our current batch of politicians.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> @Scepticalscribe you might find this quite interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moscow Patriarch Kirill: Ukraine Orthodox bishops in 'schism'
> 
> 
> News: Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pillarcatholic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Basically all Orthodox leaders in Ukraine, including Russian Orthodox leaders, separated from Moscow.



This is fasciating, and I have been looking out for some stories which covered this, as it is important, (not least, as it supplies the theological, and thus, historical, justification - in so far as such a thing can be said to exist - for te Russian invasion, and attepted annexation, of Ukraine).

Now, I was aware that the Orthodox Church of Ukraine had split from the Moscow Patriarchy and that its autocephalous status (vehemently disputed by Moscow, and leading to the Moscow Patriarchy breaking away from Constantinople's ecclesiastical authority - a classical schism) - was recognised by the Patriarch (the First among Equals - primus Inter Pares - insofar as Orthodoxy recognises such a concept) in Constantinople in 2018.

However, while the Orthodox Church of Ukraine is recognised as autocephaous (administratively self-governing, in ecclesiastical terms, including the right to appoint bishops and clergy), by much (not all, that schism of 2018 received a lot less attention than it should have from scholars and analysts) of the Orthodox communion, the position of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate - which still recognises Moscow as its ultimate ecclesiastical authority) is interesting.

And your piece - thanks very much for posting it - is fascinating, and seems to suggest that for some within the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the dilemma between citizenship and pastoral loyalty is being stretched to breaking point, not least because the Moscow Patriarchy is fulfillling its usual (and entirely predictable) role of offering theological justifications for indefensible and inexcusable actions on the part of the Russian state and government.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Zoidberg said:


> Salon has a long history of shit takes, blaming the West for Putin's actions.




There are countless examples of chicken or the egg scenarios where “This wouldn’t have happened if the US didn’t first do this”.  That doesn’t make it a shit take.  It just depends how far back in history you want to go and how much you you think that contributes responsibility from the current actors.  

It’s like saying blacks in the US should stop blaming slavery for their current problems or determining who has more of a right to exist in Israel.  There  could be valid points or shit takes on both those issues.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I am not sure just paying our politicians more, much, much more is the answer at all. Hell! You're competing with billionaires here.
> 
> Because as it stands right now in the UK they _are_ being paid a very decent salary.
> 
> MPs will earn £84,000 from April 2022 plus expenses for running their office — never mind the subsidised Pol Roger at the several Bars in Parliament.
> 
> This is just under three times more than the 2021 national medium salary of £31,461 in the United Kingdom.
> 
> So how much exactly should we be paying them? I would hope for a certain amount of moral character — christ! How about a sense of duty?
> 
> I don't believe paying them more is going to suddenly make them think about the population they represent.
> 
> I am extraordinarily cynical — and unforgiving — when it comes to our current batch of politicians.



As am I (re the current Tory administration & government).

But - and we get this especially from the left (where I used to dwell, to be found in my younger days in the fringes and fronds of the undergrowth of thta landscape) - that politicians should only be paid "an average working salary".

However, if you want honesty in public life (judges, politicians) they must be paid enough to be independent of vested interests (and to be able to afford - financially, as well as ethicaly and politically - to face down vested interests, and represent the public good.

Therefore, if you are not to confine this - a political career, a life as a professional politician - to the already wealthy (who would simply govern in the interests of their own class, even if otherwise not especially evil, and could not envisage a world where people are not wealthy - they never meet any except servants and staff - then you must be prepared to pay for it.

Otherwise, entry to political life is confined to saints, and that is also a world I would not wish on anyone.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Arkitect said:


> I am not sure just paying our politicians more, much, much more is the answer at all. Hell! You're competing with billionaires here.
> 
> Because as it stands right now in the UK they _are_ being paid a very decent salary.
> 
> MPs will earn £84,000 from April 2022 plus expenses for running their office — never mind the subsidised Pol Roger at the several Bars in Parliament.
> 
> This is just under three times more than the 2021 national medium salary of £31,461 in the United Kingdom.
> 
> So how much exactly should we be paying them? I would hope for a certain amount of moral character — christ! How about a sense of duty?
> 
> I don't believe paying them more is going to suddenly make them think about the population they represent.
> 
> I am extraordinarily cynical — and unforgiving — when it comes to our current batch of politicians.




In the US it’s starting to get to the point where you already have to be rich just to run and win…or be bat shit high on conspiracies.   In either case that doesn’t really qualify you to be in touch with the concerns of the common citizen.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> There are countless examples of chicken or the egg scenarios where “This wouldn’t have happened if the US didn’t first do this”.  That doesn’t make it a shit take.  It just depends how far back in history you want to go and how much you you think that contributes responsibility from the current actors.
> 
> It’s like saying blacks in the US should stop blaming slavery for their current problems or determining who has more of a right to exist in Israel.  There  could be valid points or shit takes on both those issues.



People like Medea Benjamin (since we're talking about Salon in particular) write articles that are basically a carbon copy of the Kremlin's talking points.
I'm definitely not saying that Western countries are blameless, but Salon is often an outlet for well-meaning idiots who will always blame NATO/the West/the US/the EU for everything wrong in the world and look the other way when their guys commit war crimes.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> As am I (re the current Tory administration & government).
> 
> But - and we get this especially from the left (where I used to dwell, to be found in my younger days in the fringes and fronds of the undergrowth of thta landscape) - that politicians should only be paid "an average working salary".
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> If you want honesty in public life (judges, politicians) they must be paid enough to be independent of vested interests (and to be able to afford - financially, as well as ethicaly and politically - to face down vested interests, and represent the public good.
> 
> Therefore, if you are not to confine this - a political career, a life as a professional politician - to the already wealthy (who would simply govern in the interests of their own class, even if otherwise not especially evil, and could not envisage a world where people are not wealthy - they never meet any except servants and staff - then you must be prepared to pay for it.
> 
> Otherwise, entry to political life is confined to saints, and that is also a world I would not wish on anyone.



Well, I certainly am still Left. Not batshit crazy Corbynista Left… but my values still very much reflect my education and upbringing.

A world where politicians could conceive of the idea of an NHS. Imagine that? 

Basically what you are talking about is to put it bluntly, a bribe. A bribe to keep them on the straight and narrow and out of reach of the billionaires and oligarchs.

So how much would be enough?
A £1,000,000 per year? £10,000,000? Because you will always find someone to outbid you.

Akin to the BBC paying themselves vast amounts, reasoning that's the only way of keeping the "good" people from joining Rupert Murdoch. 
Well, surprise surprise, they still leave and follow the money.

The world has become high on the craze for money.

The last thing anyone needs are politicians vastly wealthy and still out of touch.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> Well, I certainly am still Left. Not batshit crazy Corbynista Left… but my values still very much reflect my education and upbringing.
> 
> A world where politicians could conceive of the idea of an NHS. Imagine that?
> 
> Basically what you are talking about is to put it bluntly, a bribe. A bribe to keep them on the straight and narrow and out of reach of the billionaires and oligarchs.
> 
> So how much would be enough?
> A £1,000,000 per year? £10,000,000? Because you will always find someone to outbid you.
> 
> Akin to the BBC paying themselves vast amounts, reasoning that's the only way of keeping the "good" people from joining Rupert Murdoch.
> Well, surprise surprise, they still leave and follow the money.
> 
> The world has become high on the craze for money.
> 
> The last thing anyone needs are politicians vastly wealthy and still out of touch.



No, I suppose that I am talking enough for a "good middle class" (which, in the UK, means upper middle class) life.

And, yes, I'm still left (though Jeremy Corbyn, dear God, left me deeply depressed - these were the people I hung out with, all too worshipfully, in my youth) and broadly agree with you.

In fact, one of the things that Britons should bear in mind when self-flagellating is to hold to the generosity of the vision that could conceive of the NHS, and not just conceive of the NHS, but conceive of it - and implement it - in a country almost destroyed and bankrupted by war.

I will add that I suspect that this sort of comprehensive social reform would have been inconceivable without the female franchise, and the need to acknowledge their concerns through relevant public policy initiatives.

And, on links between money and power - and returning to Ukraine - the links between the Tory Party and Russian oligarchic monies really is very unsavoury.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> In the US it’s starting to get to the point where you already have to be rich just to run and win…or be bat shit high on conspiracies.   In either case that doesn’t really qualify you to be in touch with the concerns of the common citizen.



True. On the other hand, electors want people with a perfect pedigree which started in elementary school. This is true even at local level.

“MIT graduate, with law and med doctorate at Harvard. Retired US Marine general, wounded veteran. Business owner, Amazon co-founder. Perfect family, and of course philanthropist. Running for City Council.” or stuff like that. All that stuff requires money, let alone running the campaign.

This is also why:
a) Despite my disagreements with AOC, I truly hate when she’s referred to as a bartender by people on the right, in an attempt to diminish her. As long as she worked honestly, it’s nothing shameful.
b) I truly can’t stand that people go into gossipy stuff during the presidential elections, or high stake elections. My disdain for the concept of the First Lady/Gentleman (by US standards) is well known.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> No, I suppose that I am talking enough for a "good middle class" (which, in the UK, means upper middle class) life.




I would think at 3 times the average national wage they are there… 



Scepticalscribe said:


> And, on links between money and power - and returing to Ukraine - the links between the Tory Party and Russian oligarchic monies really is very unsavoury.



I truly hope this is the death knell of the Tories and the Oligarchs…



*******************************************************************************************************
​Yikes!
I find this a very frightening picture.
The banality of evil?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Zoidberg said:


> People like Medea Benjamin (since we're talking about Salon in particular) write articles that are basically a carbon copy of the Kremlin's talking points.
> I'm definitely not saying that Western countries are blameless, but Salon is often an outlet for well-meaning idiots who will always blame NATO/the West/the US/the EU for everything wrong in the world and look the other way when their guys commit war crimes.




By "their guys" I can only assume you mean Obama?  I wasn't really a Salon reader back then, but I agree in general the left tends to fall asleep when their guy is at the helm and so does their media, at least prior to Trump.  All kinds of shit gets a pass because their guy did it with a hug and a smile instead of with a middle finger.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I would think at 3 times the average national wage they are there…
> 
> 
> I truly hope this is the death knell of the Tories and the Oligarchs…
> 
> 
> 
> *******************************************************************************************************
> ​Yikes!
> I find this a very frightening picture.
> The banality of evil?




No, that one comes from the pages of "grandiose delusions fuelled by evil".

And "evil" is not a word I use lightly.

The "banality of evil", and what a brilliant and evocative phrase - and I was introduced to the writings of Hannah Arendt by my professor of political philosophy, a wonderfully wise, sardonic, Scots Presbyterian with a strong social conscience, who revered her - is more chilling still, precisely because it is so ordinary, so boring, so banal, so relatable.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> No, that one comes from the pages of "grandiose delusions fuelled by evil".
> 
> And "evil" is not a word I use lightly.
> 
> The "banality of evil", and what a brilliant and evocative phrase - and I was introduced to the writings of Hannah Arendt by my professor of political philosophy, a wonderfully wise, sardonic, Scots Presbyterian with a strong social conscience, who revered her - is more chilling still, precisely because it is so ordinary, so boring, so banal, so relatable.





Scepticalscribe said:


> No, that one comes from the pages of "grandiose delusions fuelled by evil".
> 
> And "evil" is not a word I use lightly.
> 
> The "banality of evil", and what a brilliant and evocative phrase - and I was introduced to the writings of Hannah Arendt by my professor of political philosophy, a wonderfully wise, sardonic, Scots Presbyterian with a strong social conscience, who revered her - is more chilling still, precisely because it is so ordinary, so boring, so banal, so relatable.



For a second I read that you studied under Hannah Arendt and my brain went in full intellectual excitement mode!


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> For a second I read that you studied under Hannah Arendt and my brain went in full intellectual excitement mode!




If only.

However, I believe that my professor (who died in 2012, a lovely, gentle, witty and wise man, - I both respected him, admired him and liked him enormously, he was an incredibly encouraging and supportive teacher, and his classes were brilliant - I attended his funeral in a characteristically austere and severe chapel, but the service was lovely) had studied at one time under Karl Popper.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Terrifying Putin Phone Call Warns ‘Worst Is Yet to Come’
					

French President Emmanuel Macron says the Russian president told him he will fight “until the end” as those close to him start to panic.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## MarkusL

Arkitect said:


> Yikes!
> I find this a very frightening picture.
> The banality of evil?



Since we are trying to give each other nightmares, did anyone already mention that the International Space Station needs a boost of its orbit so it doesn't come crashing down in some random location... and that there are only two people who can do it?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

From David Aaronovitch (@DAaronovitch) on Twitter - @Arkitect will like this, because so apt and so true: "I’m beginning to confuse the honours list and the sanctions list. But I suppose it doesn’t matter."


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> From David Aaronovitch (@DAaronovitch) on Twitter - @Arkitect will like this, because so apt and so true: "I’m beginning to confuse the honours list and the sanctions list. But I suppose it doesn’t matter."



Perfect! Just perfect!
Sums up my feelings 100%


----------



## Deleted member 215

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> By "their guys" I can only assume you mean Obama?  I wasn't really a Salon reader back then, but I agree in general the left tends to fall asleep when their guy is at the helm and so does their media, at least prior to Trump.  All kinds of shit gets a pass because their guy did it with a hug and a smile instead of with a middle finger.




Yeahhhh...not really seeing how Putin is a leftist.

It's true that the left (I mean the actual left, not centrist neoliberals) often blames the West for everything, but the right and center (including neolibs/cons) make excuses for the West for everything.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> True. On the other hand, electors want people with a perfect pedigree which started in elementary school. This is true even at local level.



Maybe this is a question for another thread, but Trump was the exact opposite of this. The exception that proves the rule? Or is the “rule” not really true?


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> Maybe this is a question for another thread, but Trump was the exact opposite of this. The exception that proves the rule? Or is the “rule” not really true?



I disagree. As in, you’re right that he wasn’t the classical candidate, as in someone groomed for politics, but he still had to be the “successful” rich dude, with a good looking family etc, with a degree etc.

His main difference is that he didn’t hide his ego, revealing quite easily that he was a bad person in his personal life. But in general the concept didn’t change.

On the other side we also had another… not liked person, named Hillary Clinton.

Addendum: and honestly I have enough of all those mailers with photos of the candidate’s perfect family. No, I do not give a crap about your hot/photoshopped wife/husband and your almost identical kids.


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> I disagree. As in, you’re right that he wasn’t the classical candidate, as in someone groomed for politics, but he still had to be the “successful” rich dude, with a good looking family etc, with a degree etc.
> 
> His main difference is that he didn’t hide his ego, revealing quite easily that he was a bad person in his personal life. But in general the concept didn’t change.
> 
> On the other side we also had another… not liked person, named Hillary Clinton.



I guess cheating on your wife with porn stars, multiple divorces, etc. is SOMEBODY’s definition of a “perfect pedigree“? Any ONE of those things, or bragging about grabbing women by the pussy or calling Mexicans rapists, would have disqualified most candidates in the past. Sorry… not buying the idea that Trump had a perfect pedigree by anybody’s definition. It seems like you’re trying to jam a round peg into a square hole to keep your concept going.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> I guess cheating on your wife with porn stars, multiple divorces, etc. is SOMEBODY’s definition of a “perfect pedigree“? Any ONE of those things, or bragging about grabbing women by the pussy or calling Mexicans rapists, would have disqualified most candidates in the past. Sorry… not buying the idea that Trump had a perfect pedigree by anybody’s definition. It seems like you’re trying to jam a round peg into a square hole to keep your concept going.



No. On the perfect pedigree, you are right. He was an exception. 

But what he did, he had to do with lots of money (which is the point of the initial reply). So yes, he was successful as an entrepreneur, and he did use his family (esp. his kids) to show “success”. 

But even Trump doesn’t change the initial point:  most voters want the “perfect pedigree”, which usually involves lots of money, which is what I was replying to.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> Yeahhhh...not really seeing how Putin is a leftist.
> 
> It's true that the left (I mean the actual left, not centrist neoliberals) often blames the West for everything, but the right and center (including neolibs/cons) make excuses for the West for everything.
> 
> The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.



I'm glad you mention this. Because the far left is often pro-Putin, just like how poor Americans often thought that Trump was "just like them". Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense, but they are totally invested in the anti-West sentiment. This is true at least in Southern Europe and in Latin America. Far left, in this context means not progressive, but anticapitalist or even openly communist. Hell, I know people who idolise Stalin (!).

They always start "Yes, he's a homophobe, but.... " and then they spit out every single Russian talking point against NATO, the US and the EU. Never a word about his 22 years in power, his incestuous relationship with the billionaire oligarchs mafia, human rights abuse... For them it boils down to he's against the West = he's good. Just look at the recent EU resolutions against Russia and you'll find both far Right and far Left MEPs abstaining from voting (which is basically a "yes, go ahead, I'll look away" in diplomacy)

You might not realise it, but modern Russian propaganda has been hard at work for about fifteen years, they have had plenty of time to build their discourse, find allies, extend their network into academia...

(And I say that as someone who by most standards could be considered a leftie, for the record)

However, I'm glad to say I just read 20 minutes ago that RT US is rumoured to be about to shut down. I guess with the last round of sanctions now in place it's too expensive to maintain and they don't see the point in keeping it.


----------



## SuperMatt

Zoidberg said:


> I'm glad you mention this. Because the far left is often pro-Putin, just like how many poor Americans thought that Trump was "just like them". Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense, but they are totally invested in the anti-West sentiment. This is true at least in Southern Europe and in Latin America. Far left, in this context means not progressive, but anticapitalist or even openly communist. Hell, I know people who idolise Stalin (!).
> 
> They always start "Yes, he's a homophobe, but.... " and then they spit out every single Russian talking point against NATO, the US and the EU. Never a word about his 22 years in power, his incestuous relationship with billionaire oligarchs, human rights abuse... For them it boils down to he's against the West = he's good. Just look at the recent EU resolutions against Russia and you'll find both far Right and far Left MEPs abstaining from voting (which is basically a "yes, go ahead, I'll look away" in diplomacy)
> 
> You might not realise it, but modern Russian propaganda has been hard at work for about fifteen years, they have had plenty of time to build their discourse, find allies, extend their network into academia...
> 
> (And I say that as someone who by most standards could be considered a leftie, for the record)
> 
> However, I'm glad to say I just read 20 minutes ago that RT US is rumoured to be about to shut down. I guess with the last round of sanctions now in place it's too expensive to maintain and they don't see the point in keeping it.



I think the invasion of Ukraine has undone all the work done by Russian propaganda.


----------



## Thomas Veil

This is just sad all around…









						Video Appears to Show Russian Soldier in Tears as He's Fed by Ukrainians and Allowed to Call Home — People
					

“Everything is fine, son” a woman says in the unverified viral video, which has been viewed millions of times — underlining Ukraine's larger efforts to build support even with Russian fighters




					apple.news
				






> "Our soldiers, our border guards, our territorial defense, even simple farmers are capturing Russian soldiers every day, and all of them are saying the same thing: They don't know why they are here,'' he said, according to The New York Times. "These are not warriors of a superpower. These are confused children who have been used."




In one case…


> The tearful soldier, dressed in camouflage fatigues, is seen in the footage eating and sipping tea as a young woman with purple hair holds up a phone so he can apparently speak with his mother back home in Russia.





> "The post says he burst into tears when he was allowed to video-call his mother. So many of these troops are just teenagers, with absolutely no clue what this war is really for."


----------



## Deleted member 215

Zoidberg said:


> I'm glad you mention this. Because the far left is often pro-Putin, just like how many poor Americans thought that Trump was "just like them". Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense, but they are totally invested in the anti-West sentiment. This is true at least in Southern Europe and in Latin America. Far left, in this context means not progressive, but anticapitalist or even openly communist. Hell, I know people who idolise Stalin (!).
> 
> They always start "Yes, he's a homophobe, but.... " and then they spit out every single Russian talking point against NATO, the US and the EU. Never a word about his 22 years in power, his incestuous relationship with billionaire oligarchs, human rights abuse... For them it boils down to he's against the West = he's good. Just look at the recent EU resolutions against Russia and you'll find both far Right and far Left MEPs abstaining from voting (which is basically a "yes, go ahead, I'll look away" in diplomacy)
> 
> You might not realise it, but modern Russian propaganda has been hard at work for about fifteen years, they have had plenty of time to build their discourse, find allies, extend their network into academia...
> 
> (And I say that as someone who by most standards could be considered a leftie, for the record)
> 
> However, I'm glad to say I just read 20 minutes ago that RT US is rumoured to be about to shut down. I guess with the last round of sanctions now in place it's too expensive to maintain and they don't see the point in keeping it.




That is news to me. I’ve never met a leftist who is pro-Putin and I live in Commiefornia.  The only people I’ve encountered defending Putin in the US are the authoritarian far right, who see Putin as a noble warrior fighting the Jewish globalist new world order. But I imagine the far left in America differs somewhat from the far left in Europe or Latin America.


----------



## Zoidberg

SuperMatt said:


> I think the invasion of Ukraine has undone all the work done by Russian propaganda.



For some, maybe, but for most who are that far gone, "iT's aLL beCAuse oF NATO becuAse thEY're EXPANDING!!!!!!"


----------



## Deleted member 215

Russia should've just applied to join NATO.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> That is news to me. I’ve never met a leftist who is pro-Putin and I live in Commiefornia.  The only people I’ve encountered defending Putin in the US are the authoritarian far right, who see Putin as a noble warrior fighting the Jewish globalist new world order. But I imagine the far left in America differs somewhat from the far left in Europe or Latin America.



I would admit that in my experience most pro-Putin (*) individuals are on the right. As for Xi, he short circuits his brain. 

(*) however I also noticed that if anyone says anything even remotely in favor of something Putin did, they get labeled immediately as “pro-putin”


----------



## Deleted member 215

yaxomoxay said:


> remotely in favor of something Putin did, they get labeled immediately as “pro-putin”




That is true, or even something that is critical of the West and happens to be a criticism Putin has made.

It's like how the Soviets used to "whatabout" the lynching and discrimination against blacks in the U.S. Did they actually care about the plight of black Americans? Of course not. But they weren't wrong about what they were calling to attention. And anyone who agreed was labeled a "communist".


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> That is news to me. I’ve never met a leftist who is pro-Putin and I live in Commiefornia.  The only people I’ve encountered defending Putin in the US are the authoritarian far right, who see Putin as a noble warrior fighting the Jewish globalist new world order. But I imagine the far left in America differs somewhat from the far left in Europe or Latin America.



Yeah, it's sensibly different. Now put yourself in the place of someone who lives I don't know, say in Bolivia. They are poor, struggling, and the US/CIA indeed did everything they could to fuck up with not just your country but most of your continent, dating back to the 1950s, so there's already a strong sentiment anti US. They never went to school after age 12, and all of a sudden, they get the internet in 2010 on their brand new smartphone, and the first thing that pops up is videos about how the US is bombing Libya. Who are you going to believe: RT who's showing you a well presented "documentary", or the US who says that Gaddafi was a dictator and needed to go, given their history?

I mean, look at the grasp Infowars has in the US, it's not hard to understand that populism can be very appealing, and RT is very good at tailoring their message based on their audience. In the UK, RT UK went after the racist far Right audience, whereas in Spain they appealed to the anti-imperialist Leftie audience.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

TBL said:


> That is news to me. I’ve never met a leftist who is pro-Putin and I live in Commiefornia.  The only people I’ve encountered defending Putin in the US are the authoritarian far right, who see Putin as a noble warrior fighting the Jewish globalist new world order. But I imagine the far left in America differs somewhat from the far left in Europe or Latin America.






yaxomoxay said:


> I would admit that in my experience most pro-Putin (*) individuals are on the right. As for Xi, he short circuits his brain.
> 
> (*) however I also noticed that if anyone says anything even remotely in favor of something Putin did, they get labeled immediately as “pro-putin”



Unfortunately, you will find some on the 'far left' in Europe.

They are not explicitly pro-Putin per se at the moment (who can be?), but they are anti-Imperialist, anti-colonial, anti-war, and - re Ukraine - all too keen to point to the anti-Semitism deeply rooted in much of the history and culture of western Ukraine (which has historical validity; Babi Yar - which was bombed (by the Russians) this week - commemorates one such atrocity) - but, bearing in mind that Mr Zelensky is Jewish, has no relevance, politically, whatsoever, in the current conflict.

And, historically, they have tended to view Russian transgressions in a more benign and forgiving light - and explain them away readily - than those of the "west".


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Unfortunately, you will find some on the 'far left' in Europe.
> 
> They are not explicitly pro-Putin per se at the moment (who can be?), but they are anti-Imperialist, anti-colonial, anti-war, and - re Ukraine - all too keen to point to the anti-Semitism deeply rooted in much of the history and culture of western Ukraine (which has historical validity; Babi Yar - which was bombed (by the Russians) this week - commemorates one such atrocity) - but, bearing in mind that Mr Zelensky is Jewish, has no relevance, politically, whatsoever, in the current conflict.
> 
> And, historically, they have tended to view Russian transgressions in a more benign and forgiving light - and explain them away readily - than those of the "west".



Exactly. Not really pro-Putin, but they still swallowed his propaganda and will readily regurgitate it. This was just yesterday in one of the Whatsapp groups I’m in.
Russian propaganda spreads like wildfire in those (slightly less so now than a couple of years ago, I think). To spread that video right now, with all that's going on, you really have to believe in it.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Scepticalscribe said:


> Unfortunately, you will find some on the 'far left' in Europe.
> 
> They are not explicitly pro-Putin per se at the moment (who can be?), but they are anti-Imperialist, anti-colonial, anti-war, and - re Ukraine - all too keen to point to the anti-Semitism deeply rooted in much of the history and culture of western Ukraine (which has historical validity; Babi Yar - which was bombed (by the Russians) this week - commemorates one such atrocity) - but, bearing in mind that Mr Zelensky is Jewish, has no relevance, politically, whatsoever, in the current conflict.
> 
> And, historically, they have tended to view Russian transgressions in a more benign and forgiving light - and explain them away readily - than those of the "west".



I mean I’m anti- all those things too. But the Nazi argument is silly and disingenuous. If any Eastern European nation has more Nazis than Ukraine, it’s Russia.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> But the Nazi argument is silly and disingenuous.



And it works. Because you're not exposed to it, but Russia has been at war against Ukraine for 8 years already, and they have been laying the propaganda groundwork that Ukrainians are nazis for a long time, and a lot of people have willingly subscribed to RT on Youtube, on Facebook, "to get a balanced view". RT also operates in specific ways that make it effective: extremely short articles, a circular ecosystem of news reporting, which is basically entirely controlled by the Kremlin, but extends to many, many different outlets, so that you could start clicking around into a propaganda rabbit hole for two hours without getting out of their network.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Zoidberg said:


> I'm glad you mention this. Because the far left is often pro-Putin, just like how poor Americans often thought that Trump was "just like them". Yes, I know it doesn't make any sense, but they are totally invested in the anti-West sentiment. This is true at least in Southern Europe and in Latin America. Far left, in this context means not progressive, but anticapitalist or even openly communist. Hell, I know people who idolise Stalin (!).
> 
> They always start "Yes, he's a homophobe, but.... " and then they spit out every single Russian talking point against NATO, the US and the EU. Never a word about his 22 years in power, his incestuous relationship with the billionaire oligarchs mafia, human rights abuse... For them it boils down to he's against the West = he's good. Just look at the recent EU resolutions against Russia and you'll find both far Right and far Left MEPs abstaining from voting (which is basically a "yes, go ahead, I'll look away" in diplomacy)
> 
> You might not realise it, but modern Russian propaganda has been hard at work for about fifteen years, they have had plenty of time to build their discourse, find allies, extend their network into academia...
> 
> (And I say that as someone who by most standards could be considered a leftie, for the record)
> 
> However, I'm glad to say I just read 20 minutes ago that RT US is rumoured to be about to shut down. I guess with the last round of sanctions now in place it's too expensive to maintain and they don't see the point in keeping it.





I don’t know anybody on the left who is pro Putin. The closest I can think of is being anti-US imperialism, but good luck finding any country that isn’t slave to that in one form or another, aside from places like North Korea and Iran. At the very least they have to sign off on the US being #1 and don’t attempt a sizeable sphere of influence that threatens the US sphere of influence. Does Putin fit into that? Absolutely, but so do a lot of other countries. They just don’t let it get to them or attempt to change it. 

If this is socialism is a slippery slope to communism and praising that thing, Russia isn’t communist. I’m fairly ignorant of Russia’s economics, but I’ve never heard anybody say look to Russia as a positive example of modern socialism. I honestly don’t know what they have going on there, but it doesn’t seem like taking care of their population or having any kind of balanced equality is a priority or even an interest.

I also frequently hear from the left that the US is an oligarchy just like Russia, and that isn’t a compliment by any stretch. The irony is the US “elites” in politics often demonize Russian oligarchy despite being part of the same system. Our politicians just have a lot more rich they need to serve. Is that the distinction? We can’t be an oligarchy because there are more than a dozen super-rich they need to answer to?


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> I guess cheating on your wife with porn stars, multiple divorces, etc. is SOMEBODY’s definition of a “perfect pedigree“? Any ONE of those things, or bragging about grabbing women by the pussy or calling Mexicans rapists, would have disqualified most candidates in the past. Sorry… not buying the idea that Trump had a perfect pedigree by anybody’s definition. It seems like you’re trying to jam a round peg into a square hole to keep your concept going.



It perfectly astounding how not only could such an illustrated POS like DJT, identified as such before the election, get elected, and still have an energetic  following 4 years later, which illustrates if nothing more how badly our standards have fallen, and just how broken we are that a minority could imagine finding their salvation in this poisonous disaster of a wannabe dictator, who belongs behind bars.

To clarify he could not have done this alone. He is just the wheezing, bloody cough, coming from our rotten lungs.


----------



## Macky-Mac

I think it's not really a matter of being pro-Putin, but rather that there are some "lefties" who feel so compelled to argue that anything that happens that might be viewed as bad is actually the fault of the West, and particularly the US......and that argument  gets misunderstood as coming from somebody who is "pro-Putin"


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I don’t know anybody on the left who is pro Putin. The closest I can think of is being anti-US imperialism, but good luck finding any country that isn’t slave to that in one form or another, aside from places like North Korea and Iran. At the very least they have to sign off on the US being #1 and don’t attempt a sizeable sphere of influence that threatens the US sphere of influence. Does Putin fit into that? Absolutely, but so do a lot of other countries. They just don’t let it get to them or attempt to change it.
> 
> If this is socialism is a slippery slope to communism and praising that thing, Russia isn’t communist. I’m fairly ignorant of Russia’s economics, but I’ve never heard anybody say look to Russia as a positive example of modern socialism. I honestly don’t know what they have going on there, but it doesn’t seem like taking care of their population or having any kind of balanced equality is a priority or even an interest.
> 
> I also frequently hear from the left that the US is an oligarchy just like Russia, and that isn’t a compliment by any stretch. The irony is the US “elites” in politics often demonize Russian oligarchy despite being part of the same system. Our politicians just have a lot more rich they need to serve. Is that the distinction? We can’t be an oligarchy because there are more than a dozen super-rich they need to answer to?



I’m not saying it makes sense. I’m saying that’s what they believe. Even if they don’t idolise Putin per se, they will still embrace the message that Russia is selling. Just like with Brexit. Sure, people voting for it, didn’t think “lets’s make Russia great again!”, but they still acted in Russia’s best interest (via Farage).

It’s normal that you don’t know anyone on the left who’s pro-Putin. You and the people you mingle with are not the target audience, so of course you haven’t been exposed to it (you’re not even in the right country).

Spain is a good example: Russian propaganda went after Podemos voters (far left), but when it became apparent that they couldn’t really make any significant change (they seldom got more than 15% of the vote), they pivoted and started going after Vox voters (far right) about the same time as Vox hired none other than Steve Bannon as a consultant. Small world, uh?

It’s not about policies or ideals, it’s about populism and stirring shit. Russia doesn't care whether Spain exits the EU under the far Left or under the far Right, their goal is to weaken the EU. So they won't say they are pro-Putin, but they will be anti-West, and that's good enough.


----------



## Huntn

Zoidberg said:


> And it works. Because you're not exposed to it, but Russia has been at war against Ukraine for 8 years already, and they have laid the propaganda groundwork that Ukrainians are nazis for a long time, and a lot of people have willingly subscribed to RT on Youtube, on Facebook, "to get a balanced view". RT also operates in specific ways that make it effective: extremely short articles, a circular ecosystem of news reporting, which is basically entirely controlled by the Kremlin, but extends to many, many different outlets, so that you could start clicking around into a propaganda rabbit hole for two hours without getting out of their network.



We were slow. Did’nt Putin make his feelings known as far back as Georgia? As I’ve made clear I’m a bit ignorant about this bit of history, and I know this is hind sight, but you‘d think someone would have suggested Ukraine being fast tracked into NATO unless after their change in leadership, they made no overtures? A bunch of former satellites joined in 2004.

Edited date…


----------



## Zoidberg

Huntn said:


> We were slow. Did’nt Putin make his feelings known as far back as Georgia? As I’ve made clear I’m a bit ignorant about this bit of history, and I know this is hind sight, but you‘d think someone would have suggested Ukraine being fast tracked into NATO unless after their change in leadership, they made no overtures? A bunch of former satellites joined in 2009.



Putin had his guy there until 2014. When Ukrainians (at least in the West) wanted their country to become more European, with the ambition of one day joining the EU, Yanukovych wanted the opposite. He got ousted, and seeing that the writing was on the wall, Putin moved into Crimea and started war in the East, which ensured Ukraine couldn't join NATO. The rest of the country kept moving further West (ideologically) and Putin saw weakness in the reaction in the West (weak sanctions, loopholes galore, no consequences), so he got bolder.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Exactly. When you strip this thing down, what it amounts to is a control freak's massive hissy fit.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> For a second I read that you studied under Hannah Arendt and my brain went in full intellectual excitement mode!



Go get a room guys


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Huntn said:


> A bunch of former satellites joined in 2009.



2004, @Huntn, 2004.

Not 2009.

And, Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007.

I'm a bit of a pedant (very anal, put it down to my background as an historian; facts matter, and so do dates) about such things.

Elsewhere, I suspect that @Zoidberg, @Pumbaa, @yaxomoxay, and @Arkitect - among others - may agree with me: Please, please, please, spare me US exceptionalism. 

And please stop, cease, desist from - thinking that how the US experiences some philosophies (rooted in European history, politics, culture and experience) is the same as what  Europe knows, lived, and has experienced.  It isn't.

The European historical experience, and political experience - and what passes for what is defined as "right" (far right) and "left" (far-left) is not the same as the US.

Just because what passes for the left in the US is not (slavishly) - or, axiomatically - pro-Russian (a historic hangover from having been pro-Soviet) does not mean that other far-left (and there was a time, in my youth, when I belonged to, danced with, identified with, willingly, perhaps myopically, but most certainly, insanely idealistically, - that world) groups, individuals, fellow-travellers in Europe (anyone take a look at Jeremy Corbyn's fatuous press conferences this week? Or, the voting preferences registered by a few idiots on the far left in the European Parliament, who were elected under Ireland's geninely generous proportional representation electoral system?) do not still (yes, perhaps, illogically, inexplicably) hold these views.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> I'm glad you mention this. Because the far left is often pro-Putin, just like how poor Americans often thought that Trump was "just like them".



Can you specify which far leftists are proPutin? I've never met a leftist who is proPutin, in the eastern block, the right wing is way more cosy with Putin than the left.


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> Can you specify which far leftists are proPutin? I've never met a leftist who is proPutin, in the eastern block, the right wing is way more cosy with Putin than the left.




Like I said earlier their propaganda doesn't follow ideology, it will get what it can get by any means necessary. Like @Scepticalscribe said, they are not overtly -usually at least- pro-Putin, it's more insidious, but if it quacks like a duck...

In Spain, for instance, their logic is:
We are against the war, and Spain shouldn't arm the Ukrainians because weapons would enrich the military-industrial complex. So, anyone who sends weapons to Ukraine is pro-war, and imperialists. Putin is fighting them, so he's fighting imperialists, so that's good. It's sad that civilians will die, but what can you do, that's on NATO!"

To find the full explanation in the particular case of Spain you have to go back a few decades. Franco was a pure old school fascist, even if he remained neutral during WW2.

After the war, the US went ballistic with the Red Scare, and was more than happy to help Franco, because his regime was anti-communist, so he received considerable help from the US. To sum up, the right wing dictator was anti-communist, so the left wing thing to do was to like communists. This idea has pervaded through time, and it is still quite widespread. Then you add a few years of propaganda to whitewash the soviet atrocities, and you have a far left that's receptive to Russia being actually the good guy against the imperialists.

If you can read Spanish I can link many examples.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Like I said earlier their propaganda doesn't follow ideology, it will get what it can get by any means necessary. Like @Scepticalscribe said, they are not overtly -usually at least- pro-Putin, it's more insidious, but if it quacks like a duck...
> 
> In Spain, for instance, their logic is:
> We are against the war, and Spain shouldn't arm the Ukrainians because weapons would enrich the military-industrial complex. So, anyone who sends weapons to Ukraine is pro-war, and imperialists. Putin is fighting them, so he's fighting imperialists, so that's good. It's sad that civilians will die, but what can you do, that's on NATO!"
> You'll find a whole lot of blog articles and alt-left youtubers spreading that message.
> 
> If you can read Spanish I can link many examples.



Thanks! I definitely don't know too many Spanish people so this makes sense. Would be interested in the links, yeah. Youtube on the other hand. Nobody should do youtube to get informed about politics.


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> Thanks! I definitely don't know too many Spanish people so this makes sense. Would be interested in the links, yeah. Youtube on the other hand. Nobody should do youtube to get informed about politics.



I added a paragraph to explain where it stems from, it will make more sense I think.

As for youtube, people will watch what they have access to (same goes for Facebook, if it's right on your FB wall and recommended by groups you follow, you'll watch it).









						Pedro Sánchez mete de cabeza a España en la guerra | Análisis
					






					analisis.pcoe.net
				












						El “no a la guerra” como única solución a la invasión rusa
					

LÚH ha querido averiguar el por qué la posición pacífica es la única opción vapuleada, contactando con la activista pacifista Koldobi Velasco Vázquez, de Alternativa Antimilitarista.Moc, para poder elaborar un análisis pausado de la situación




					luhnoticias.es
				








__





						Paremos la guerra. Una agenda de lucha - Tortuga
					





					www.grupotortuga.com
				




People without Ukrainian passports had trouble crossing into the EU, so of course the EU is again the bad guy (not a peep about the guy who actually bombed them and made them refugees in the first place):





Oh, and of course, the EU now will buy more gas from the US, so it means it benefits them, so they made Russia do it:








						El gran negocio de EEUU: vende el gas a Europa un 40% más caro que Rusia
					

Estados Unidos se prepara para hacer un gran negocio con la exportación de gas natural. El país está acelerando la puesta en operación de algunas de sus principales infraestructuras de regasificación para incrementar su volumen de ventas.



					www.eleconomista.es
				




It's quite simple, really, just one-sided bad faith arguments, but they get pushed out through tens of outlets, so it becomes ingrained.


----------



## Huntn

Zoidberg said:


> Putin had his guy there until 2014. When Ukrainians (at least in the West) wanted their country to become more European, with the ambition of one day joining the EU, Yanukovych wanted the opposite. He got ousted, and seeing that the writing was on the wall, Putin moved into Crimea and started war in the East, which ensured Ukraine couldn't join NATO. The rest of the country kept moving further West (ideologically) and Putin saw weakness in the reaction in the West (weak sanctions, loopholes galore, no consequences), so he got bolder.



Thank you.  Part if this just a poor memory on my part.


----------



## Huntn

Scepticalscribe said:


> 2004, @Huntn, 2004.
> 
> Not 2009.
> 
> And, Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007.
> 
> I'm a bit of a pedant (very anal, put it down to my background as an historian; facts matter, and so do dates) about such things.
> 
> Elsewhere, I suspect that @Zoidberg, @Pumbaa, @yaxomoxay, and @Arkitect - among others - may agree with me: Please, please, please, spare me US exceptionalism.
> 
> And please stop, cease, desist from - thinking that how the US experiences some philosophies (rooted in European history, politics, culture and experience) is the same as what  Europe knows, lived, and has experienced.  It isn't.
> 
> The European historical experience, and political experience - and what passes for what is defined as "right" (far right) and "left" (far-left) is not the same as the US.
> 
> Just because what passes for the left in the US is not (slavishly) - or, axiomatically - pro-Russian (a historic hangover from having been pro-Soviet) does not mean that other far-left (and there was a time, in my youth, when I belonged to, danced with, identified with, willingly, perhaps myopically, but most certainly, insanely idealistically, - that world) groups, individuals, fellow-travellers in Europe (anyone take a look at Jeremy Corbyn's fatuous press conferences this week? Or, the voting preferences registered by a few idiots on the far left in the European Parliament, who were elected under Ireland's geninely generous proportional representation electoral system?) do not still (yes, perhaps, illogically, inexplicably) hold these views.



Is this directed at me or a general statement? I fixed the date.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> I added a paragraph to explain where it stems from, it will make more sense I think.
> 
> As for youtube, people will watch what they have access to (same goes for Facebook, if it's right on your FB wall and recommended by groups you follow, you'll watch it).





Zoidberg said:


> I added a paragraph to explain where it stems from, it will make more sense I think.
> 
> As for youtube, people will watch what they have access to (same goes for Facebook, if it's right on your FB wall and recommended by groups you follow, you'll watch it).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro Sánchez mete de cabeza a España en la guerra | Análisis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> analisis.pcoe.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> El “no a la guerra” como única solución a la invasión rusa
> 
> 
> LÚH ha querido averiguar el por qué la posición pacífica es la única opción vapuleada, contactando con la activista pacifista Koldobi Velasco Vázquez, de Alternativa Antimilitarista.Moc, para poder elaborar un análisis pausado de la situación
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luhnoticias.es
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paremos la guerra. Una agenda de lucha - Tortuga
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.grupotortuga.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People without Ukrainian passports had trouble crossing into the EU, so of course the EU is again the bad guy (not a peep about the guy who actually bombed them and made them refugees in the first place):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and of course, the EU now will buy more gas from the US, so it means it benefits them, so they made Russia do it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> El gran negocio de EEUU: vende el gas a Europa un 40% más caro que Rusia
> 
> 
> Estados Unidos se prepara para hacer un gran negocio con la exportación de gas natural. El país está acelerando la puesta en operación de algunas de sus principales infraestructuras de regasificación para incrementar su volumen de ventas.
> 
> 
> 
> www.eleconomista.es
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's quite simple, really, just one-sided bad faith arguments, but they get pushed out through tens of outlets, so it becomes ingrained.



When I read the words  la burguesía, proletariado, imperialista, la clase obrera, I haveto laugh. The language used is so blatantly communist, I can't help just laugh about it. Where and when I grew up not even the Soviets pushed language like this without getting a "go home, you're drunk" reaction.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Macky-Mac said:


> I think it's not really a matter of being pro-Putin, but rather that there are some "lefties" who feel so compelled to argue that anything that happens that might be viewed as bad is actually the fault of the West, and particularly the US......and that argument  gets misunderstood as coming from somebody who is "pro-Putin"




It's very disingenuous to conflate any criticism of the West with being "pro-Putin". It's a holdover from the Cold War when criticism of the West meant being a pro-Russian communist-sympathizer who hates freedom. It's also plainly a tactic used to shut down discussion and silence those with alternative views.


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> When I read the words  la burguesía, proletariado, imperialista, la clase obrera, I haveto laugh. The language used was is so blatantly communist, I can't help just laugh about it. Where and when I grew up not even the Soviets pushed language like this without getting a "go home, you're drunk" reaction.



It still works, though. And while in Spain this is negligible (the hardcore communist parties hover at maybe 5%, and they are slowly dying as these blogs lose funding in favour of the far Right), it works much, much better in South America.


----------



## Huntn

Macky-Mac said:


> I think it's not really a matter of being pro-Putin, but rather that there are some "lefties" who feel so compelled to argue that anything that happens that might be viewed as bad is actually the fault of the West, and particularly the US......and that argument  gets misunderstood as coming from somebody who is "pro-Putin"



Who exactly are you critiquing? Some things that have happened are the fault of the West, so who does that make appear pro-Putin, the left when they say it? And to whom, the Right (in the US)?
Dealing with Russia Ukraine most of what I’ve heard from “liberal” sources in the US is a constant blame on Russia, not any of _“it’s our fault“_ as a primary critique_,_ with a few historical hindsight comments how things could have been done better. And  I’ve heard some right wingers until a weak ago mimicking Trump and actually praising Putin, but that seems to have dried up In the current backlash.


----------



## Yoused

Here is a leftist opinion from one Roger Waters, for whom I have a great deal of respect,

*We on the left often make the mistake of still looking upon Russia as a somewhat socialist enterprise. Of course, it isn’t. The Soviet Union ended in 1991. Russia is an unadulterated neoliberal capitalist gangster’s paradise, modeled during the time of its horrific restructuring under Boris Yeltsin … In these difficult days, we should resist the temptation to pour good guy/bad guy gasoline on the fire; demand a ceasefire in the name of humanity … and stop pouring weapons of war into Eastern Europe, further destabilizing the region just to satisfy the insatiable appetite of the international armaments industry.*​
So, yes, I can see how the anti-war left might be perceived as facilitating Putin by way of being dogmatically anti-war. But what do you do when war itself is an awful thing to be opposed at all costs?


----------



## Eric

What Russia is doing in Ukraine right now from
      interestingasfuck


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> What Russia is doing in Ukraine right now from
> interestingasfuck



In the 21st century, when a Leader of a country, decides for no other reason that _I want this country back under my contro_l, then  subsequently proceeds to rape, destroy,  and murder citizens of said country, this sounds like a war crime to me.


----------



## Huntn

Huntn said:


> Is this directed at me or a general statement? I fixed the date.



@Scepticalscribe, who did you direct this to? Asking because it was replied to me. 

_Please, please, please, spare me US exceptionalism.

And please stop, cease, desist from - thinking that how the US experiences some philosophies (rooted in European history, politics, culture and experience) is the same as what Europe knows, lived, and has experienced. It isn't._


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> What Russia is doing in Ukraine right now from
> interestingasfuck



Unfortunately this is exactly what we were expecting the moment it became evident that Ukraine is not gonna surrender.

With a grain of salt:





It does imply that the war is becoming much bloodier. These numbers were around 5800 yesterday


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Reading reports of how the Russians have been shelling the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant (the largest in Europe).

Ugh.


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Reading reports of how the Russians have been shelling the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant (the largest in Europe).
> 
> Ugh.



do you have the source?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

@Huntn: Re your post (subsequently amended/corrected) I drew attention to the inaccurate date (re EU accession).

Maybe it is because I am female (I do not speak unless I am sure of - or comfortable with - my facts), or my background as an historian - (boring me, I like facts, and prefer them to opinions unless those opinions are well argued and/or sourced), but, I never - and I mean this - I never - post something I believe to be a fact without having already confirmed this, and that is despite my exceptional (almost anal) memory for dates.

Now, re US exceptionalism (which increasingly exhausts me): No, @Huntn, on that, you were not my target.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> do you have the source?



The source?

There are several.

Try, the Guardian, HuffPost, National Review, Reuters.....


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> The source?
> 
> There are several.
> 
> Try, the Guardian, HuffPost, National Review, Reuters.....



Well, thanks...

Here it is.


			https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-03-22/h_90d6015ddd64556835791ff5d9cbc857
		




> The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Mariano Grossi, has spoken with Ukraine's Prime Minister and the country's nuclear regulator about the reported fire at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, the IAEA said on Twitter early Friday.
> 
> Grossi "appeals for halt of use of force and warns of severe danger if reactors hit," the tweet added.
> *IAEA's warning: *Earlier on Friday — before the fire broke out — the IAEA released a statement warning that Russian troops were approaching the area and any fighting near the plant could be disastrous.
> 
> Ukraine told the IAEA "a large number of Russian tanks and infantry 'broke through the block-post' to the town of Enerhodar, a few kilometres from the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (NPP)," the IAEA said in a statement.
> 
> It added that Ukraine's regulatory authority had sent them an "urgent letter," warning that Russian troops were moving directly toward the nuclear plant and the situation was "critical."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the statement, Grossi had "appealed for an immediate halt to the use of force at Enerhodar and called on the military forces operating there to refrain from violence near the nuclear power plant."
Click to expand...


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> Well, thanks...
> 
> Here it is.
> 
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-03-22/h_90d6015ddd64556835791ff5d9cbc857



If the plant does not shut down properly with another Melt down scenario… Russia is in for a world of international hurt.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> Russia should've just applied to join NATO.



Actually it was almost done in the early 2000. I think it was a big mistake not allowing some sort of or


Scepticalscribe said:


> 2004, @Huntn, 2004.
> 
> Not 2009.
> 
> And, Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007.
> 
> I'm a bit of a pedant (very anal, put it down to my background as an historian; facts matter, and so do dates) about such things.
> 
> Elsewhere, I suspect that @Zoidberg, @Pumbaa, @yaxomoxay, and @Arkitect - among others - may agree with me: Please, please, please, spare me US exceptionalism.
> 
> And please stop, cease, desist from - thinking that how the US experiences some philosophies (rooted in European history, politics, culture and experience) is the same as what  Europe knows, lived, and has experienced.  It isn't.
> 
> The European historical experience, and political experience - and what passes for what is defined as "right" (far right) and "left" (far-left) is not the same as the US.
> 
> Just because what passes for the left in the US is not (slavishly) - or, axiomatically - pro-Russian (a historic hangover from having been pro-Soviet) does not mean that other far-left (and there was a time, in my youth, when I belonged to, danced with, identified with, willingly, perhaps myopically, but most certainly, insanely idealistically, - that world) groups, individuals, fellow-travellers in Europe (anyone take a look at Jeremy Corbyn's fatuous press conferences this week? Or, the voting preferences registered by a few idiots on the far left in the European Parliament, who were elected under Ireland's geninely generous proportional representation electoral system?) do not still (yes, perhaps, illogically, inexplicably) hold these views.



Hear hear! I second each and every single word of this post.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> If the plant does not shut down properly with another Melt down scenario… Russia is in for a world of international hurt.



That’s why it was a huge mistake for the west to say “no troops” or other stuff of that kind. Putin will not stop for anything now. 

This must be the most destabilizing situation I’ve ever witnessed in my 40 years of life. I truly don’t know what to say. I just want to cry.


----------



## Yoused

Curiously, while the nuclear plant is something like the biggest in Europe, with 6 reactors, it is in SE Ukraine, which is where more people like Russia. It shows how far off the rails Vladdy has gone, putting the people who would otherwise support him at grave risk. So far it seems that the fire is in a peripheral building, but it must stlll be concerning, as though the crazy man is signaling the rest of us that he is ready to use nuclear weapons.


----------



## Macky-Mac

TBL said:


> It's very disingenuous to conflate any criticism of the West with being "pro-Putin". It's a holdover from the Cold War when criticism of the West meant being a pro-Russian communist-sympathizer who hates freedom. It's also plainly a tactic used to shut down discussion and silence those with alternative views.




true enough......but not what I was referring to.




Huntn said:


> Who exactly are you critiquing? Some things that have happened are the fault of the West, so who does that make appear pro-Putin, the left when they say it? And to whom, the Right (in the US)?
> Dealing with Russia Ukraine most of what I’ve heard from “liberal” sources in the US is a constant blame on Russia, not any of _“it’s our fault“_ as a primary critique_,_ with a few historical hindsight comments how things could have been done better. And  I’ve heard some right wingers until a weak ago mimicking Trump and actually praising Putin, but that seems to have dried up In the current backlash.




First, I'd suggest that in what I posted. you not take "some lefties" to mean "all lefties".

There are "some" people across all of the whole of the political spectrum who make knee jerk reactions to situations based solely on their preconceived political viewpoint.....for them every situation MUST be viewed in terms that fits their particular political faith.


----------



## Pumbaa

A former colleague of mine, active in the Left Party (a party who used to call themselves “Left Party – the Communists” until 1990) used to aggressively chime in whenever anyone criticized Russia’s actions or threats. It was always NATO and the west who were at fault, Russia’s actions were just justified reactions to those. He never really addressed Putin, it was always about Russia, and he sure loved to use the word ”Russophobia”…

Coincidentally, when the Swedish Parliament recently voted on the proposal to send 5000 AT4s to Ukraine, the Left Party were the only ones voting against it.

280 Yes
14 No (13 from the Left Party, 1 from an independent who got elected for the Left Party and then … left)
5 Abstain (All 5 from the Left Party)
50 Not present (9 from the Left Party, among them the leader of said party)

Officially they were against sending weapons to an active war zone but would have been fine with sending the money instead, earmarked for Ukraine to get the same weapons from someone else…


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> That’s why it was a huge mistake for the west to say “no troops” or other stuff of that kind. Putin will not stop for anything now.
> 
> This must be the most destabilizing situation I’ve ever witnessed in my 40 years of life. I truly don’t know what to say. I just want to cry.



I am going to agree with you, and tack on another 18 years to your 40, nothing comes close to this…

But, I've given up on wanting to cry. I kind of feel sorry for people with children — they always seem to believe they are owed a bright future — but frankly, right now husband and me have made our peace with nuclear war as a probable outcome.

This morning I was awake earlier than usual, and it was a lovely, crispy cold blue sky with white contrails streaming across, and I looked out of the window at the waking city in the valley, little chimneys lazily smoking, cows slowly ambling across the greenest meadows and I thought to myself:

_"Enjoy these moments. We're in a handcart to hell driven by a madman."_

As an aside, usually people use the mad/crazy word to denigrate. Frankly, I do believe Putin fits that description.


----------



## User.45

Arkitect said:


> As an aside, usually people use the mad/crazy word to denigrate. Frankly, I do believe Putin fits that description.



Nuclear Nero.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> Nuclear Nero.



Breaking News: Putin begins fiddle lessons.


----------



## Zoidberg

Arkitect said:


> But, I've given up on wanting to cry. I kind of feel sorry for people with children — they always seem to believe they are owed a bright future — but frankly, right now husband and me have made our peace with nuclear war as a probable outcome.
> 
> As an aside, usually people use the mad/crazy word to denigrate. Frankly, I do believe Putin fits that description.



I have a 15-month-old, and I too believe that nuclear war is a very real possible outcome, which is why I just created the other thread to create a poll. I'm curious to see what people think.


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> Breaking News: Putin begins fiddle lessons.



He's a martial artist. His performance will be a kata.


----------



## Deleted member 215

White House resisting calls to ban Russian oil imports, fearing a further increase in gas prices:









						Bipartisan calls for Russian oil ban meet resistance from White House
					

Bipartisan calls grew on Capitol Hill for the United States to ban imports of oil from Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

Uh...  
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499580210865393671/


----------



## shadow puppet

This sounds graphic.  I'm relieved he didn't post any video.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499762289402069007/


----------



## Arkitect

JayMysteri0 said:


> Uh...
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499580210865393671/



Good grief!
Talking about getting your wires crossed!


----------



## quagmire

JayMysteri0 said:


> Uh...
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499580210865393671/




So if I got that right, the host went on an anti-US tirade believing the person going off was the American guest?


----------



## Andropov

Scepticalscribe said:


> Reading reports of how the Russians have been shelling the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant (the largest in Europe).
> 
> Ugh.



I wonder if this is just to instigate fear of nuclear energy into the western nations so they can't stop using russian gas. Trying to seize a nuclear facility by shelling it is a stupid move no matter how many safety mechanisms are in place. We'll see how the media treats this news. The containment units of modern nuclear power plants are incredibly resistant. The possibility of the power plant being shelled from the outside is even taken into consideration. But I fear the media will start talking about Chernobyl again as if something comparable could happen there.

The VVER reactor buildings of the Zaporizhzhya power plant have two walls made of reinforced concrete, ~1m and ~2m thick, plus all the plumbing of the emergency and cooling systems that surround the core, plus the core vessel itself that is made of (a lot of) steel. It's not the kind of thing that can be taken down by accident.

I believe the biggest concern right now is damage to critical subsystems (water supply, electrical generators...), but even if that were to happen, VVER reactors are intrinsically much safer (due to the negative void coefficient) and there are several systems in place to immediately stop the reaction in the event of the most critical failures (ECCSs + automatic insertion of control rods).

Another concern is damage to the stored spent nuclear fuel, but that also stored in strong enough containers that damaging them by accident is next to impossible.


----------



## Deleted member 215

And yes, many of us on the left thought the invasion wouldn't happen because the war-hawk commentary before the invasion was just like every other instance of it (the most recent being the possible war with Iran during Trump's term) and Russia has a pattern of annexing parts of a country or propping up phony "breakaway" republics without a full-scale invasion. So yes, I had reasons to think it was being blown out of proportion by the usual suspects. It wasn't. I was wrong. Putin really is as stupid as many were saying. I still don't think we (US/Europe/NATO, whatever) should send troops to Ukraine and risk starting WWIII and if that makes me a Putin-loving appeaser, then so be it. Ukraine isn't worth destroying the world. (Though I'd say it's worth raising gas prices and weaning the U.S. and Europe off the Russian energy teat, which so far Biden and Germany at least are refusing to do).


----------



## JayMysteri0

Andropov said:


> I wonder if this is just to instigate fear of nuclear energy into the western nations so they can't stop using russian gas. Trying to seize a nuclear facility by shelling it is a stupid move no matter how many safety mechanisms are in place. We'll see how the media treats this news. The containment units of modern nuclear power plants are incredibly resistant. The possibility of the power plant being shelled from the outside is even taken into consideration. But I fear the media will start talking about Chernobyl again as if something comparable could happen there.



A reason for Russia going after those plants as discussed by a commentator is two fold.

To obviously take control of power in larger cities to instill fear.

The other is because those plants have their own railways that the forces want for their own logistics.


----------



## yaxomoxay

P_X said:


> The points are:
> 1) You completely lack the perspective and experience



Nice projection. 


P_X said:


> 2) You're evidently unaware of your unawareness.



You must win awards for your speed at being judgmental


----------



## User.45

yaxomoxay said:


> Nice projection.



I'm a little too old for this


----------



## Pumbaa

How about a separate thread for the refugees & racism tangent?


----------



## SuperMatt

yaxomoxay said:


> This is a totally unfair take. Europe welcomed millions of refugees from Africa and the ME. Millions. And it did so for decades.
> 
> Right now there’s a war that started just a week ago, right at the gates of the welcoming countries (countries that share a lot with the refugees), a war in which the EU has direct involvement, hence the hurry to welcome about 150K refugees.
> 
> In 2021 alone, there were over 114,000 sea arrivals in Italy, Greece, Spain, Cyprus and Malta. By the end of 2016, nearly 5.2 million refugees and migrants reached European shores, undertaking treacherous journeys from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries torn apart by war and persecution.



Are you claiming Syrian refugees were treated the same way that Ukrainian refugees are being treated now? That is so obviously false that I’d laugh if it wasn’t so sad. The stories of backlash against Syrian refugees are plentiful. In fact, Europe literally paid Turkey 6 billion Euros to keep the Syrian refugees there and away from the rest of Europe: 









						EU strikes deal with Turkey to send back refugees
					

Refugees arriving in Greece from Sunday to be sent back across Aegean in deal that ‘re-energises’ talks on Turkish EU membership




					www.theguardian.com
				




Do you think the EU will make a deal with Turkey to ship *Ukrainian* refugees over there?

Now, that being said, many in Europe DID welcome refugees regardless of their national origin. But overall, the response was negative.

As for America, the Trump administration cut the number of refugees allowed drastically over his 4 years. And even for *Afghan* refugees, I’ve seen GOP members of Congress say they need “extreme vetting” for these people such as translators that literally risked their lives for Americans in Afghanistan, because “they might be terrorists!" I have not seen a SINGLE Republican ask for Ukrainians to go through “extreme vetting” if they want to come to America.

TL;DR - Europe did not WELCOME African or Middle Eastern refugees in the same way. Not by a long shot.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Typical US-centrism according to which all countries reason in line with US-Perceived notions.
> 
> Also, this is exactly why the left will take a pounding in November: it’s never enough. We are at the brink of a major crisis, with the threat of nuclear war, and immediately an American (ok he was born in SA) leftist millionaire has to tell people on the other side of the world that after welcoming million of immigrants, they are racist because in a moment of emergency they welcome other immigrants.




Tying this to cancel culture, it’s 10% somebody or people on the left making a stink about something and 90% right-wing media droning on about that ad nauseam. Add to that people on the right are fairly aligned on most issues while people on the left are a lot more diverse and fractured in their values and priorities. But since most of the right is on the same page they assume the left must also be on their same page. Sooooo…somebody like Trevor Noah points something out, the right has to counter that times 1,000 which gives the impression that the entire left is an army of Trevor Noahs.

To compound that, you even have left or center left public figures, including Obama, buying into the right-wing propaganda and coming out and saying “We really need to dial back the cancel culture, folks.” I’m sure they are out there, but I don’t know any militant cancel culture lefties and I’m pretty much engulfed in lefties. But the way the media portrays it, you’d think you wouldn’t be able to step off your porch without getting accosted by one.

But having said all that, it’s been a successful propaganda campaign by the right for which Democrats will lose voters. Somehow they’ll ignore the attempted rampant white washing of history because they believe there’s mass firings of people with impure thoughts.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> people on the right are fairly aligned on most issues while people on the left are a lot more diverse and fractured in their values and priorities.




Ain't that the truth. Lately I've been finding myself more frustrated with Democrats/left-of-center people than right-wingers. Trumpists are too far gone anyway. The left-of-center at least is worth debating. But as usual, Republicans can move further and further to the right and it works for them, but Democrats do anything even remotely left-wing and they have to dial it back, make concessions, and apologize.

(And yes, I'm fine with a new thread for this discussion).


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> Are you claiming Syrian refugees were treated the same way that Ukrainian refugees are being treated now?



No. I am not saying the “same way”. I myself said that there are some differences (including but not limited to timeline).  But that doesn’t automatically mean racism as the root of the differences. 

“People enter a house” can mean different things. 

1) your friends 
2) your neighborhors 
3) total strangers 
4) robbers

In different context 
a) invited 
b) surprise visit
c) trespassing
e) in a verified emergency 
d) in the performance of a criminal act. 

Depending on the combination of the above - plus multiple factors of course - behavior and rules will be different. 
So 1A will have a much different reaction than 1B, which will be different than 3E or 2B and so on. 

Can racism play a role? Undeniable. Is it a role here? Possibly. However I don’t like the automatic argument that since X was done in a certain way than Y has to be equal or it’s racism. No, as in my example below, there are differences that *might *cause different reactions. The context of Ukraine and the war is much different than the context of Syria. Much much different. (Plus I believe the EU has information to identify Ukrainians; I might be wrong on this but my understanding is that most of the info, at least on criminals, was shared).


----------



## JayMysteri0

Wow!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499585225546170370/

Mitch?

And a little more Wow!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499786773131628551/

Really?  Calling for assassinations?


----------



## Arkitect

*Putin's Way (Frontline Documentary)*

This first aired in 2015, but I see it popped up on the PBS YouTube channel.

It is well worth watching…

And yes, watch til the end. We've got a trapped rat on our hands, and Putin knows all about that.


----------



## chengengaun

Arkitect said:


> *Putin's Way (Frontline Documentary)*
> 
> This first aired in 2015, but I see it popped up on the PBS YouTube channel.
> 
> It is well worth watching…
> 
> And yes, watch til the end. We've got a trapped rat on our hands, and Putin knows all about that.



Hah, I just watched this a few hours ago. Putin is now getting cornered even within his circle, and it's hard to see how he can exit the stage gracefully.


----------



## Arkitect

chengengaun said:


> Hah, I just watched this a few hours ago. Putin is now getting cornered even within his circle, and it's hard to see how he can exit the stage gracefully.



Yup. I think he's preparing to take it all down with him.


----------



## mac_in_tosh

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> To compound that, you even have left or center left public figures, including Obama, buying into the right-wing propaganda and coming out and saying “We really need to dial back the cancel culture, folks.” I’m sure they are out there, but I don’t know any militant cancel culture lefties and I’m pretty much engulfed in lefties. But the way the media portrays it, you’d think you wouldn’t be able to step off your porch without getting accosted by one.



Of course the right's attack on cancel culture is hypocritical. Just ask Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, censured by the RNC. And of course Trump immediately turns on anyone who says something unflattering about him. It's just more nonsense fed to their gullible, uncritical audience.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> I still don't think we (US/Europe/NATO, whatever) should send troops to Ukraine and risk starting WWIII



Unfortunately, I'm afraid that it is possible that WW3 has already started. Denying it because ICBMs are not flying (yet) is not helpful. So the question is what are we going to do about it?

And before I get called a war hawk, I am very much on the left even by European standards (my American FIL thinks I'm a commie). I protested when my country participated in the Iraq War (not unlike the protests for which people are getting arrested in Moscow right now). Unfortunately, you cannot stop Putin by waving signs against the war, just like you couldn't appease Hitler with diplomacy giving him what he wanted. It only takes one who wants a war, to have a war.

This appeasement attitude regarding Putin –which I used to have as well, because war seemed like something from a distant past that happened to others, not to me– is exactly why he got bolder: he massacred Chechnya and the world looked away. He went to war against Georgia, and the same thing happened. He took parts of Ukraine in broad daylight, and he got a slap on the wrist. That's what he does: he probes, and if he feels like there's no resistance, he will take it.

So now he's going to "take" Ukraine, no matter how brave the Ukrainian resistance is (I include the quotes because the insurgency war will last for as long as the Russians are there). If the West decided to say "stop", our forces would make mince meat of his army and the war would be done in hours. Yes, there is a risk that he will launch a nuke (based on where I live, my family would probably be amongst the first to die, by the way). But if we don't push back for real, the Ukrainians will lose, and he will take the country. Then he will move on to take the next country (Moldova?). Will NATO react if he chomps on just a little bit of Estonia, or will there be some kind of grey area he'll use as a loophole, so that we can say "ah, fair enough, he can have that tiny region" and save face? At what point will you realise that it is not about wanting war (I definitely do not want that), it is about not wanting to have our cities bombed into rubble.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> Unfortunately, I'm afraid that it is possible that WW3 has already started. Denying it because ICBMs are not flying (yet) is not helpful. So the question is what are we going to do about it?
> 
> And before I get called a war hawk, I am very much on the left even by European standards (my American FIL thinks I'm a commie). I protested when my country participated in the Iraq War. Unfortunately, you cannot stop Putin by waving signs against the war, just like you couldn't appease Hitler with diplomacy giving him what he wanted. It only takes one who wants a war to have a war, unless you're willing to give them everything they want.
> 
> This appeasement attitude regarding Putin –which I used to have as well, because war seemed like something from a distant past that happened to others, not to me– is exactly why he got bolder: he massacred Chechnya and the world looked away. He went to war against Georgia, and the same thing happened. He took parts of Ukraine in broad daylight, and he got a slap on the wrist. That's what he does: he probes, and if he feels like there's no resistance, he will take it.
> 
> So now he's going to "take" Ukraine, no matter how brave the Ukrainian resistance is (I include the quotes because the insurgency war will last for as long as the Russians are there). If the West decided to say "stop", our forces would make mince meat of his army and the war would be done in hours. Yes, there is a risk that he will launch a nuke (based on where I live, my family would probably be amongst the first to die, by the way). But if we don't push back for real, the Ukrainians will lose, and he will take the country. At which point, he will move on to take the next country (Moldova?). Will NATO react if he chomps on just a little bit of Estonia, or will there be some kind of grey area he'll use as a loophole, so that we can say "ah, fair enough, he can have that tiny region" and save face? At what point will you realise that it is not about wanting war (I definitely do not want that), it is about not wanting to have our cities bombed into rubble.



Excellent post.
I'm with you on that.


----------



## SuperMatt

Zoidberg said:


> Unfortunately, I'm afraid that it is possible that WW3 has already started. Denying it because ICBMs are not flying (yet) is not helpful. So the question is what are we going to do about it?
> 
> And before I get called a war hawk, I am very much on the left even by European standards (my American FIL thinks I'm a commie). I protested when my country participated in the Iraq War. Unfortunately, you cannot stop Putin by waving signs against the war, just like you couldn't appease Hitler with diplomacy giving him what he wanted. It only takes one who wants a war to have a war, unless you're willing to give them everything they want.
> 
> This appeasement attitude regarding Putin –which I used to have as well, because war seemed like something from a distant past that happened to others, not to me– is exactly why he got bolder: he massacred Chechnya and the world looked away. He went to war against Georgia, and the same thing happened. He took parts of Ukraine in broad daylight, and he got a slap on the wrist. That's what he does: he probes, and if he feels like there's no resistance, he will take it.
> 
> So now he's going to "take" Ukraine, no matter how brave the Ukrainian resistance is (I include the quotes because the insurgency war will last for as long as the Russians are there). If the West decided to say "stop", our forces would make mince meat of his army and the war would be done in hours. Yes, there is a risk that he will launch a nuke (based on where I live, my family would probably be amongst the first to die, by the way). But if we don't push back for real, the Ukrainians will lose, and he will take the country. At which point, he will move on to take the next country (Moldova?). Will NATO react if he chomps on just a little bit of Estonia, or will there be some kind of grey area he'll use as a loophole, so that we can say "ah, fair enough, he can have that tiny region" and save face? At what point will you realise that it is not about wanting war (I definitely do not want that), it is about not wanting to have our cities bombed into rubble.



The Russian convoy would have been totally impractical if they hadn’t wiped out Ukraine’s Air Force first. Even a few NATO planes could end this, like you said.


----------



## Deleted member 215

It's not even about not wanting war, it's about not wanting the world destroyed. The last time this happened was before nuclear weapons. I'm not going to support something that means my home could be nuked.

Yes, if Putin uses nukes, then the conversation changes. We've gone past the threshhold at that point. But before that happens, I am going to support what I can to prevent nuclear war.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> Unfortunately, I'm afraid that it is possible that WW3 has already started. Denying it because ICBMs are not flying (yet) is not helpful. So the question is what are we going to do about it?
> 
> And before I get called a war hawk, I am very much on the left even by European standards (my American FIL thinks I'm a commie). I protested when my country participated in the Iraq War (not unlike the protests for which people are getting arrested in Moscow right now). Unfortunately, you cannot stop Putin by waving signs against the war, just like you couldn't appease Hitler with diplomacy giving him what he wanted. It only takes one who wants a war, to have a war.
> 
> This appeasement attitude regarding Putin –which I used to have as well, because war seemed like something from a distant past that happened to others, not to me– is exactly why he got bolder: he massacred Chechnya and the world looked away. He went to war against Georgia, and the same thing happened. He took parts of Ukraine in broad daylight, and he got a slap on the wrist. That's what he does: he probes, and if he feels like there's no resistance, he will take it.
> 
> So now he's going to "take" Ukraine, no matter how brave the Ukrainian resistance is (I include the quotes because the insurgency war will last for as long as the Russians are there). If the West decided to say "stop", our forces would make mince meat of his army and the war would be done in hours. Yes, there is a risk that he will launch a nuke (based on where I live, my family would probably be amongst the first to die, by the way). But if we don't push back for real, the Ukrainians will lose, and he will take the country. Then he will move on to take the next country (Moldova?). Will NATO react if he chomps on just a little bit of Estonia, or will there be some kind of grey area he'll use as a loophole, so that we can say "ah, fair enough, he can have that tiny region" and save face? At what point will you realise that it is not about wanting war (I definitely do not want that), it is about not wanting to have our cities bombed into rubble.



Agreed, with all my heart. 

I think that not putting troops right outside the two regions that he wanted will be remembered as a huge mistake.


----------



## yaxomoxay

SuperMatt said:


> The Russian convoy would have been totally impractical if they hadn’t wiped out Ukraine’s Air Force first. Even a few NATO planes could end this, like you said.



Yep. I am going out on a limb here but I think that the destruction of the huge convoy would’ve probably caused Putin’s assassination too.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> It's not even about not wanting war, it's about not wanting the world destroyed. The last time this happened was before nuclear weapons. I'm not going to support something that means my home could be nuked.
> 
> Yes, if Putin uses nukes, then the conversation changes. We've gone past the threshhold at that point. But before that happens, I am going to support what I can to prevent nuclear war.



So as long as he doesn't use nukes, he can do whatever he wants? Cluster bombs, FOABs in cities, flamethrowers on occupied buildings?


----------



## Deleted member 215

Zoidberg said:


> So as long as he doesn't use nukes, he can do whatever he wants? Cluster bombs, FOABs in cities, flamethrowers on occupied buildings?




How willing are you to risk nuclear war? How great do you think the risk is if the West sends in troops right now to combat the Russians?


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> How willing are you to risk nuclear war?




If you want peace, the willingness must be total.




> How great do you think the risk is if the West sends in troops right now to combat the Russians?




In Ukraine it’s too late now.


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> How willing are you to risk nuclear war? How great do you think the risk is if the West sends in troops right now to combat the Russians?



How willing I am to risk nuclear war is irrelevant, if the other side is going to level my city/country anyway. Look at videos of Kyiv, you have whole avenues that look like a bunch of rubble, and if you look closer, you see what's left of electric car chargers, modern things. Barely over a week ago, they had life much like yours. If you think that can't happen to you, think again. Sometimes we just get caught in the gears of History.

By the way, in the other thread, I answered "go all in in Ukraine, short of using nukes". Yes there's a chance he'll nuke something, but if he does, it's because he planned on doing it all the same.


----------



## Deleted member 215

I would be for going all in on Ukraine if it meant no risk of nuclear war. So depends on how willing one is to take that chance. I do not like the odds. 

(And I do think yaxo is right that it's too late to go all in).


----------



## Zoidberg

TBL said:


> (And I do think yaxo is right that it's too late to go all in).



If the West had placed troops in Ukraine ahead (assuming we'd have Ukraine's permission) we'd have given Putin the upper hand in future negotiations, Biden, Macron, et al would have been portrayed as warmongers and likely lost elections to Russia-friendly parties.

It's the preparation paradox, again. If you prepare for something well enough, it doesn't happen, so in retrospect it appears you have overreacted.

When one side is willing to fight, and the other will do anything to avoid fighting, there's only one possible outcome.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> If the West had placed troops in Ukraine ahead (assuming we'd have Ukraine's permission) we'd have given Putin the upper hand in future negotiations, Biden, Macron, et al would have been portrayed as warmongers and likely lost elections to Russia-friendly parties.



Obviously I disagree with this. And please note that I was very specific in saying that the troops had to be outside of the two regions Putin pretended to want.




Zoidberg said:


> It's the preparation paradox, again. If you prepare for something well enough, it doesn't happen, so in retrospect it appears you have overreacted.



It’s a risk, but a minor contingent would’ve sent a strong signal and would’ve been a huge deterrent. Granted, now I am talking of a fictional universe so we’ll never know.


Zoidberg said:


> When one side is willing to fight, and the other will do anything to avoid fighting, there's only one possible outcome.



True.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Obviously I disagree with this. And please note that I was very specific in saying that the troops had to be outside of the two regions Putin pretended to want.



How often have you read and heard that Clinton was a warmonger? That Russia is threatened by NATO's expansion? Portraying the West –and pro-Western actors– as expansionist and Russia as the victim is what they do.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> How often have you read and heard that Clinton was a warmonger? That Russia is threatened by NATO's expansion? Portraying the West –and pro-Western actors– as expansionist and Russia as the victim is what they do.



I think we’re talking about two slightly different things here. We have a tendency to declare that whoever sends troops somewhere is a warmonger (Clinton, Bush, Blair, Berlusconi, Mitterrand etc). Sometimes it might even be true. I give you that. 

However, in my opinion it would’ve not given Mr Putin the upper hand in negotiations. He would’ve faced a much more harsher domestic environment (war with the US and Europe at the same time? Not sure how many generals want it), and a trade issue (not sure how much China would’ve supported Bombing of US troops). Most importantly, there would still be negotiations and most likely Ukraine would’ve still been intact. Tension would’ve been sky high of course.


----------



## yaxomoxay




----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> Please stop viewing everything through an American prism, and allowing this American exceptionalism to shape your understanding of what is happening in Europe.



This is a really disappointing post that fails at the very above thing.


----------



## GermanSuplex

This is how stupid these Fox hosts and their viewers are. This wasn't a single, off the cuff our out of context statement. Carlson has been pushing this garbage for some time now. Now, he suddenly feels the need to backtrack. Give me a break. Someone at the network made him do this. You don't need to be a foreign policy or military expert to know Russia is in the wrong here. Yet just now, Carlson has had an epiphany, and he wants credit for having the "integrity" to admit he was wrong? Major facepalm.









						Tucker Carlson admits that his support of Russia was wrong, blames Biden and Harris
					

After declining to admit his support of Putin was wrong despite Russian attacks on civilians, Carlson finally made the admission after Russians attacked a nuclear power plant.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## Deleted member 215

I've started a new thread. If a mod wants to move these posts to it, that would be great:









						Racism in Europe, refugees, and topics tangentially related to the war in Ukraine
					

:cautious:




					talkedabout.com


----------



## DT

TBL said:


> I've started a new thread. If a mod wants to move these posts to it, that would be great:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Europe, refugees, and topics tangentially related to the war in Ukraine
> 
> 
> :cautious:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> talkedabout.com




I'll hop on this, I think it's pretty obvious which posts need to be moved, if one gets left behind, anyone feel free to edit and add a "Please move to Racism in Europe thread ..." to your post and be happy to oblige.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

TBL said:


> I've started a new thread. If a mod wants to move these posts to it, that would be great:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Europe, refugees, and topics tangentially related to the war in Ukraine
> 
> 
> :cautious:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> talkedabout.com




Great idea.

I've moved as many of the posts as I could find to the new thread; however, I may well have missed a few.


----------



## Huntn

TBL said:


> White House resisting calls to ban Russian oil imports, fearing a further increase in gas prices:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bipartisan calls for Russian oil ban meet resistance from White House
> 
> 
> Bipartisan calls grew on Capitol Hill for the United States to ban imports of oil from Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com



If they want to bring Russia to it’s knees economically…


----------



## Deleted member 215

That's the thing. It _would_ bring it to its knees. What would be the impact for Putin, though? Would he finally start to lose support? Or would Russians just see their economic devastation to be the result of Western aggression and support Putin even further?


----------



## SuperMatt

I saw this on The Washington Post:



> Russia and Ukraine said they agreed to* limited local cease-fires* to facilitate “humanitarian corridors,” as several cities warned that they were running out of supplies. But local officials in the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson said Russia is not cooperating with them and is pushing a plan to distribute its own aid unilaterally.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

TBL said:


> That's the thing. It _would_ bring it to its knees. What would be the impact for Putin, though? Would he finally start to lose support? Or would Russians just see their economic devastation to be the result of Western aggression and support Putin even further?




I think that if Mr Putin is removed from office, or power, it will come from elite fractures, and actions, (who may be motivated by public unrest), and not by the public.

Drastic and draconian media laws have been passed in the Russian parliament today (FB has been shut down, and the BBC is choosing not to broadcast from Russia - which is unprecedented - out of a concern of their own staff falling foul of these new incredibly stiff regulations).


----------



## Yoused

Three Russian commanders killed in Ukraine
					

Russians switch to long-distance bombardment as tank columns get bogged down north of Kyiv




					www.independent.co.uk
				




They moved to the front lines in order to restore momentum to the advance, only to learn, the hard way, the front lines are where people die.


----------



## Pumbaa

SuperMatt said:


> I saw this on The Washington Post:



Well, “Russia not cooperating on proposed humanitarian corridor” sounds exactly like something I would expect from Russia here. I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt, that it is just Ukrainian propaganda to make Russia look bad, but that would take a better warthog than I…


----------



## Pumbaa

Speaking of things about Russian conduct in Ukraine I’m inclined to believe… 



> [T]he NATO secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, confirmed that Russia had attacked Ukraine with anti-personnel cluster bombs, which kill so indiscriminately they are banned under international law.












						NATO Accuses Russia of Using Cluster Bombs in Ukraine
					

Officials made the accusation Friday as part of a display of a unified front in support of Ukraine, but rejected a plea from Kyiv to impose a no-fly zone over its airspace.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Facebook, Twitter and the BBC all now blocked - well, the BBC are no longer covering news stories in Russia - in Russia.

Extraordinary, this attempt to hermetically seal the Russian state off from (any information emanating from) the rest of the world.  

Very Soviet, and very Tsarist.


----------



## MarkusL

JayMysteri0 said:


> Wow!
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1499585225546170370/
> 
> Mitch?



Does this mean we are going to hear Moscow Mitch and Rand Paul complaining about cancel culture wrecking the Russian banks?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

What’s awaiting Russia may be much worse than the chaos of 1990s
					

If Putin does not change course – and fast – Russia may find itself in an economic catastrophe akin to that of 1918.




					www.aljazeera.com
				




Yikes.


----------



## yaxomoxay

> US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the establishment of a no-fly zone in Ukraine by the United States and its NATO allies could lead to a “full-fledged war in Europe.” He said Washington would continue to work with its allies to provide Ukrainians with the means to defend themselves from Russian aggression.
> 
> “The only way to actually implement something like a no-fly zone is to send NATO planes into Ukrainian airspace and to shoot down Russian planes, and that could lead to a full-fledged war in Europe. President Biden has been clear that we are not going to get into a war with Russia,” Blinken said during a news conference Friday in Brussels, where he is meeting with European allies following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “But we are going to tremendous lengths with allies and partners to provide Ukrainians with the means to, to effectively defend themselves, and of course, we're seeing every single day their extraordinary heroism, as well as very, very real results in what they're doing to achieve that,” he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “We are looking every day at what technologies, what capacities we can effectively deliver to, to Ukraine to defend itself, and that's an ongoing conversation, literally happening on a daily basis both with Ukraine and government officials, as well as among allies and partners. And so, the main focus is on making sure that anything we provide can be used, used effectively and in a timely way,” Blinken said.
Click to expand...



Idiots at the helm. I wonder if they understand how dangerous these statements are or if they just do it for the sound bite.


----------



## quagmire

yaxomoxay said:


> Idiots at the helm. I wonder if they understand how dangerous these statements are or if they just do it for the sound bite.




Dangerous in the sense that it empowers Russia to continue to do what they are doing? 

If so, it's not like Russia didn't know that already that the US/EU will not setup a no fly zone over Ukraine since that would be a trigger for WWIII......


----------



## Yoused

It looks like Germany will be sending 2700 Soviet-made anti-aircraft missiles to Ukraine – best to keep those thinos properly behind the Iron Curtain.


----------



## yaxomoxay

quagmire said:


> Dangerous in the sense that it empowers Russia to continue to do what they are doing?




Dangerous as it’s a green light (not empowerment, it’s worse) for more. 



quagmire said:


> If so, it's not like Russia didn't know that already that the US/EU will not setup a no fly zone over Ukraine since that would be a trigger for WWIII......



The issue is not the no fly zone (at this point I’d oppose it myself, maybe a temporary one in west Ukraine would be ok), but the addition and contextualization that basically says “anything in order to avoid war with Russia.”


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Dangerous as it’s a green light (not empowerment, it’s worse) for more.
> 
> 
> The issue is not the no fly zone (at this point I’d oppose it myself, maybe a temporary one in west Ukraine would be ok), but the addition and contextualization that basically says “anything in order to avoid war with Russia.”




I do feel there is a bit too much saying the quite part out loud reporting including sharing which country is giving the Ukrainians what military hardware. It’s like Putin could replace his intelligence operations with subscriptions to western news.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I do feel there is a bit too much saying the quite part out loud reporting including sharing which country is giving the Ukrainians what military hardware. It’s like Putin could replace his intelligence operations with subscriptions to western news.



Well, I am concerned indeed about how people are somewhat celebrating a sort of victory (as in “we’re showing it to him!”) already, due to the so-much advertised sanctions. I am afraid a good part of what’s happening is smoke and little meat.


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I do feel there is a bit too much saying the quite part out loud reporting including sharing which country is giving the Ukrainians what military hardware. It’s like Putin could replace his intelligence operations with subscriptions to western news.



Or perhaps the goal is exactly to insinuate how much damage Ukrainians can inflict. This also implies that the NATO/EU countries have very little concerns about their weapon shipments getting hijacked.


----------



## User.45

Kremlin staff didn't expect Putin to invade Ukraine and were shocked by the severity of Western sanctions, report says
					

Kremlin staff told Russian outlet Agency they only prepared for sanctions over recognizing Luhansk and Donetsk, not a full invasion into Ukraine.




					www.businessinsider.com
				




Per this article, Kremlin staff expected that Putin would just stick with Luhansk and Donetsk. Old Putin would have just done that.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

The nuclear deterrent seems to have the exact opposite effect here. The collective West could probably easily go in and crush Russia, but because of the threat of Putin potentially using nukes we have to idly sit by and watch innocent people get slaughtered.

The only silver lining (if you can even use that here) is Putin has completely fucked himself and Russia for the foreseeable future. Sure, he might take control of Ukraine but he’s going to be dealing with a well supported insurgency the entire occupation while getting sanctioned to death. I also believe China is going to watch the situation carefully, be of little help, and possibly back off a little on their own aspirations seeing this as a preview of what the west is capable of.


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> The nuclear deterrent seems to have the exact opposite effect here. The collective West could probably easily go in and crush Russia, but because of the threat of Putin potentially using nukes we have to idly sit by and watch innocent people get slaughtered.
> 
> The only silver lining (if you can even use that here) is Putin has completely fucked himself and Russia for the foreseeable future. Sure, he might take control of Ukraine but he’s going to be dealing with a well supported insurgency the entire occupation while getting sanctioned to death. I also believe China is going to watch the situation carefully, be of little help, and possibly back off a little on their own aspirations seeing this as a preview of what the west is capable of.



Keep in mind, Ukraine has at least 460K trained soldiers who are motivated and now also quite effectively equipped. Russian forces have about 150-200K lined up


----------



## Yoused

P_X said:


> Keep in mind, Ukraine has at least 460K trained soldiers who are motivated and now also quite effectively equipped. Russian forces have about 150-200K lined up



Nevermind the fact that most of the soldiers of U are highly motivated while a non-ignorable fraction of R boys really do not want to be there at all.


----------



## GermanSuplex

If you ever needed an example of how bad the GOP is, Trump and Pompeo are fawning over Putin and calling him a genius, and Graham is calling for his assassination. Two opposite opinions and both of them on the ass-ends of wrong.


----------



## Runs For Fun

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> idly sit by and watch innocent people get slaughtered.



But pretty much nobody is sitting idly by. Direct involvement isn’t the only way to support them. They’re getting fed tons of intelligence and weapons and other supplies.


----------



## Yoused

Scepticalscribe said:


> Facebook, Twitter and the BBC all now blocked - well, the BBC are no longer covering news stories in Russia - in Russia.
> 
> Extraordinary, this attempt to hermetically seal the Russian state off from (any information emanating from) the rest of the world.
> 
> Very Soviet, and very Tsarist.



Yes and no. About 105 years ago, the US Congress passed a law prohibiting certain types of criticizm of US actions related to the War to End All Wars, specifically stepping on the citizens' free speech/free press Constitutional rights. Because the UK was an American ally and we were supposed to be supporting them, this led to a legal action against a film, resulting in the most unfortunate case name of _US v Spirit of '76_ (as the content of the film was nominally critical of the British).


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Runs For Fun said:


> But pretty much nobody is sitting idly by. Direct involvement isn’t the only way to support them. They’re getting fed tons of intelligence and weapons and other supplies.




I'm saying in comparison to dropping the hammer if nukes weren't on the table, how many innocent lives could be saved.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

GermanSuplex said:


> If you ever needed an example of how bad the GOP is, Trump and Pompeo are fawning over Putin and calling him a genius, and Graham is calling for his assassination. Two opposite opinions and both of them on the ass-ends of wrong.




Trump has now also called it a holocaust by the Russians.  Maybe Trump should debate himself of 5 minutes ago.


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Trump has now also called it a holocaust by the Russians.  Maybe Trump should debate himself of 5 minutes ago.



Fine, but absolutely not in public, because the crossflow of gibberish would be carcinogenic.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> What’s awaiting Russia may be much worse than the chaos of 1990s
> 
> 
> If Putin does not change course – and fast – Russia may find itself in an economic catastrophe akin to that of 1918.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aljazeera.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yikes.




The Washington Post also has a piece that just boggles the mind in terms of the economic shutdown and cascading effects on the Russian economy (and on those outside Russia who are now implementing the sanctions). 

For example shipping giant Maersk (king of container shipping and other bulk shipping) said it's not going to be handling any more cargo in or out of Russia now, due to the sanctions and uncertainty over payments. 

The piece outlines the growth the economy underwent in Russia after the chaos of the 90s,  and noted that while it took nearly 30 years for global trade improvements to establish a Russian middle class (give or take the disruptions of the global 2008 financial crisis and the effects of the initial rounds of sanctions after the 2014 invasion of Ukraine), it has taken less than a week for it all to crash inwards like a house of cards.  

What a terrible miscalculation on the part of Putin.  He appears to have taken the relatively muted reaction to the annexation of Crimea as a green light for further aggression.  He must not have appreciated institutional and human memory of the USSR's behavior while building out its repressive satellite states.  Those memories will have been amplified a thousandfold now with the aggression against Ukraine.

Seems almost biblical of Putin, bringing the walls crashing down on him,  all because he projected his own aggressive outlook onto NATO... and feared offensive attack on Russia,  from closer and closer,  as the border defenses moved eastward -- in response to unease among Eastern European countries as to Russia's intentions.

*Russia’s business ties to the West took 30 years to build and one week to shatter*



> Economic stability — and higher oil prices — began to return ... as Putin rose to power, sparking a “honeymoon period” for foreign investment in the economy, according to Sergey Aleksashenko, a top official in Russia’s Finance Ministry and central bank in the 1990s.
> 
> “Many sectors were open, investment was flowing, the economy was growing at 7 percent a year, and many Western companies benefited from that time,” he said in an interview.




But now the banks and all those new investors, from the likes of retailers like Ikea to car manufacturers and oil giants like BP and Exxon, have quickly complied with the sanctions in response to the invasion of Ukraine this past week.



> “Russia will pay an enormous price in the economy. … The future is very dark,” Aleksashenko said.
> If new leadership somehow comes to power in Russia and halts the war, it is possible trade ties can be slowly rebuilt, he said.
> 
> But “if Putin stays in power another 10 or 15 years,” he said, “I think by that time Russia will be more isolated from the global economy than it was in the time of the Soviet Union.”


----------



## Macky-Mac

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Trump has now also called it a holocaust by the Russians.  Maybe Trump should debate himself of 5 minutes ago.



his pollsters must have gotten to him


----------



## Pumbaa

Macky-Mac said:


> his pollsters must have gotten to him



Or a lack of access to Russian money.


----------



## User.45

Pumbaa said:


> Or a lack of access to Russian money.



Was about to respond the same. Russian assets realized, 1) payments aren't coming 2) Putin's too busy to release the kompromat.

Boy if Putin went out with all the kompromat released what a beautiful would we'd end up with...


----------



## yaxomoxay

Italian news is reporting that Ukraine killed one of its own main negotiators as he was a Russian spy.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Italian news is reporting that Ukraine killed one its own main negotiators as he’s was a Russian spy.
> 
> View attachment 12204





Here's a link from Ukrayinska Pravda:

*Security Service of Ukraine shoots Ukrainian negotiator suspected of treason in Gomel*
Link


Edit: Just curious, is 007 shorthand in Italian for spy?


----------



## yaxomoxay

Arkitect said:


> Edit: Is 007 shorthand in Italian for spy?



Kind of. I guess a romanticized movie-like way to say it. In this case it’s plural.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Kind of. I guess a romanticized movie-like way to say it. In this case it’s is plural.



Grazie!


----------



## User.45

Over 66,200 Ukrainian men have returned from abroad to fight, says defence minister
					

Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov said on Saturday that 66,224 Ukrainian men had returned from abroad to join the fight against Russia's invasion.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Alli

SuperMatt said:


> It would make zero sense to set off a nuclear bomb so close to his own country. And nobody wants to annex a nuclear wasteland, so it would be pointless to use a nuclear weapon on land you want to take over.



That is rational thinking. I don’t believe Putin is rational.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Herdfan said:


> What choices do we have?  We sure don't want to engage in actual war with Russia.  But it does seem the other option, economic sanctions, won't stop him.



Despite the direness of the situation right now, I'm not sure economic sanctions _won't_ stop him. But...

The problem is we can't predict much because there are several moving parts, all of which are pretty opaque.

Sanctions, even ones as harsh as the ones we have imposed, will take time. It's entirely possible we could see the country collapse the way the Soviet Union did. Putin may have money squirreled away, but how long until he can't pay the military? Until Russian stores close? Until banks collapse?
We have no idea how long it will take (_if_ it happens at all) for the majority of citizens to revolt. If it happens, it probably won't be the citizens themselves who take back power, but the military seeing that Putin is the only one who still believes in the "mission".
Until such time (if it comes), Putin has gotten himself in way, way too deep to back off how. He acts as if he equates retreat with castration. He is the proverbial guy who, having dug himself into a hole, keeps digging...and he's dug himself a veritable Project Mohole here.



SuperMatt said:


> It would make zero sense to set off a nuclear bomb so close to his own country. And nobody wants to annex a nuclear wasteland, so it would be pointless to use a nuclear weapon on land you want to take over.



This comment sounded reasonable on Wednesday. Not so much today, since they bombed a nuclear power plant. Luckily they didn't hit the reactors themselves, but it does indicate a horrifying recklessness previously not seen. Should there be a radioactive cloud, Putin doesn't seem concerned at all that wind tends to blow from west to east.


----------



## Huntn

The West is in the position of resisting and punishing this aggression from a nuclear power or folding. I don’t see the latter. Vlad maybe bluffing, but until neutralized he may stand as almost a singular threat to the future of the species.

For a parallel, this is the equivalent of giving an unstable person a gun and on a tremendously larger scale illustrative of the danger of nuclear weapons wielded by humans. I don’t think average citizens think about this daily, until something like this happens, but the moves to de-escalate nuclear weapons in the past, needs to continue. And to illustrate the vital need of a competent leadership, Trump let the INF slide.









						Here are all the treaties and agreements Trump has abandoned | CNN Politics
					

President Donald Trump's decision to begin the process of withdrawing the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty will end an arms control agreement with Russia that has been a centerpiece of European security since the Cold War.




					www.cnn.com
				












						Ukraine invasion: Western sanctions 'equivalent to declaring war' Putin claims as he defends military action
					

Vladimir Putin has described Western sanctions on Russia as being equivalent to declaring a war, insisting that his invasion of Ukraine was driven by a need to protect Russian speakers in the country.




					www.manxradio.com
				




Vladimir Putin has described Western sanctions on Russia as being "equivalent to declaring a war", insisting that his invasion of Ukraine was driven by a need to protect Russian speakers in the country.


----------



## Edd

Are we sure the damage to the nuclear power plant was intentional? Could it have been incompetence?


----------



## lizkat

Edd said:


> Are we sure the damage to the nuclear power plant was intentional? Could it have been incompetence?




Who knows?  Fog of war can obscure a lot of things,  including the source of any order to take aim and fire, never mind issues of incompetence, bad judgment, bad hardware, carelessness, a bad hair day or just another demo of the gods of war making people crazy.

  But the idea that shelling or bombing took place anywhere near Europe's largest operating nuclear power plant is just appalling, if only on the too often reliable grounds of Murphy's Law.   The incident must surely remind all that reality is not a video game with  endless options of "Game Over! Play Again?"  --  and much less a videotape that can just be rewound and written over.


----------



## yaxomoxay

There is a question no one is asking - maybe it’s premature or maybe no one wants to talk about.

Suppose that Senator Graham gets his wish true and Mr Putin is deposed or even killed. Someone else will need to take over, while troops are in Ukraine and while sanctions are on. After all the Russian losses only a suicidal politician with a strong desire to die in office could just give up and leave Ukraine as if nothing happened, especially considering that the easement of sanctions would take months to be noticed by the Russian populations. Also, the Russian generals would never allow for such a visible loss and for a weakening of Russian military weapons.

In other words, be careful what we wish for, if doesn’t  include a Russian loss on the ground in Ukraine.


----------



## SuperMatt

Sanctions on Russian oligarchs seem to be having an effect.









						The Russian Elite Can’t Stand the Sanctions — The Atlantic
					

The latest measures are far more effective than Western powers’ past efforts to target Russia’s elite.




					apple.news


----------



## Pumbaa

yaxomoxay said:


> There is a question no one is asking - maybe it’s premature or maybe no one wants to talk about.
> 
> Suppose that Senator Graham gets his wish true and Mr Putin is deposed or even killed. Someone else will need to take over, while troops are in Ukraine and while sanctions are on. After all the Russian losses only a suicidal politician with a strong desire to die in office could just give up and leave Ukraine as if nothing happened, especially considering that the easement of sanctions would take months to be noticed by the Russian populations. Also, the Russian generals would never allow for such a visible loss and for a weakening of Russian military weapons.
> 
> In other words, be careful what we wish for, if doesn’t  include a Russian loss on the ground in Ukraine.



The esteemed senator is probably only concerned with certain kompromat dying along with Putin.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> There is a question no one is asking - maybe it’s premature or maybe no one wants to talk about.
> 
> Suppose that Senator Graham gets his wish true and Mr Putin is deposed or even killed. Someone else will need to take over, while troops are in Ukraine and while sanctions are on. After all the Russian losses only a suicidal politician with a strong desire to die in office could just give up and leave Ukraine as if nothing happened, especially considering that the easement of sanctions would take months to be noticed by the Russian populations. Also, the Russian generals would never allow for such a visible loss and for a weakening of Russian military weapons.
> 
> In other words, be careful what we wish for, if doesn’t  include a Russian loss on the ground in Ukraine.




If Senator Graham wants to make foreign policy then 1) let him run for President and 2) meanwhile how about brushing up on the US Constitution (with which he used to be quite familiar as a lawyer serving in the  JAG Corps of USAF), and so quit talking up the idea of assassinating a head of state.

 It was bad enough that Graham defended Trump's having ordered the 1/3/2020 drone strike on Qasem Soleimani, the right hand man to the Iranian head of state.   That killing was judged as "unlawful" by  UN Human Rights Council, since the death was not on a battlefield between the US and Iran but on a commercial airport ramp in a third country ,Iraq) and Soleimani had specifically been invited to Baghdad by the Iraqi head of state.  The US representative to the UN objected to the assessment.  Other lawyers suggested the execution violated both the Hague and Geneva conventions since "self defense" did not appear to be an imminent issue when the drone strike was ordered

 Anyway as of now, Senator Graham's taking heat from both sides of the aisle for his remark on Putin...

As for matters of succession to Putin (no matter for what reason),  who knows.  Autocrats figure on sticking around.

But, one of the reasons Putin was trading weapons for gold with Venezuela while Maduro still had some in its central bank was to be able to pay both the Russian arms manufacturers and the Russian military forces he was trying to rebuild.  This because aside from however Putin has vastly tweaked rule of law in his favor, it's the military from which any credible effort to dislodge him would likely arise.

 Still, if any people think that Putin has the undivided loyalty of all generals in Russia's military,  they have probably been reading too much Russian propaganda.  But the game of the century-- among those with any serious potential for centralized political power in Russia-- is probably down to "how do I find out who else wants to get with a different program"?  The risks in the outcome of a sting or just a wrong guess are probably lethal.


----------



## lizkat

SuperMatt said:


> Sanctions on Russian oligarchs seem to be having an effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Russian Elite Can’t Stand the Sanctions — The Atlantic
> 
> 
> The latest measures are far more effective than Western powers’ past efforts to target Russia’s elite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news




Gotta love this bit from that article.



> Oligarchs who are cut off from accessing their offshore wealth won’t starve, but they will be unable to maintain their jet-setting luxury lifestyle. As Josep Borrell, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, quipped in a now-deleted tweet, this means:
> 
> No more:
> 
> Shopping in #Milano
> 
> Partying in #SaintTropez
> 
> Diamonds in #Antwerp
> 
> That tweet attracted attention precisely because it touches on a phenomenon of great significance that is often overlooked: Looting your country’s wealth is pointless if you can’t show off the spoils.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> Sanctions on Russian oligarchs seem to be having an effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Russian Elite Can’t Stand the Sanctions — The Atlantic
> 
> 
> The latest measures are far more effective than Western powers’ past efforts to target Russia’s elite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news




This is a pretty good paragraph:


> I have been astonished again and again at how many oligarchs cannot seem to live without the splashy public display of their wealth, even when it puts them at risk. In recent days, Internet sleuths and government agents alike have been closely tracking the movements of Russian oligarchs’ private jets and multimillion-dollar yachts. Instagram posts from plush locations are a major strategic asset for anyone seeking to impose accountability on people who otherwise seem to be untouchable. For example, a niche profession has developed in tracking down transnational oligarchs via their social-media posts so they can be served with legal papers to freeze their assets in debt-collection proceedings.* These high-end collection agents, the Boba Fetts of the ultra-high-net-worth crowd, can do their job precisely because the oligarchs and their globe-trotting family members can’t help themselves.*



That last sentence is pop culture gold.


----------



## User.45

lizkat said:


> Gotta love this bit from that article.



It's a really good article and what I especially love, not overly verbose, but manages to drop really good lines.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> There is a question no one is asking - maybe it’s premature or maybe no one wants to talk about.
> 
> Suppose that Senator Graham gets his wish true and Mr Putin is deposed or even killed. Someone else will need to take over, while troops are in Ukraine and while sanctions are on. After all the Russian losses only a suicidal politician with a strong desire to die in office could just give up and leave Ukraine as if nothing happened, especially considering that the easement of sanctions would take months to be noticed by the Russian populations. Also, the Russian generals would never allow for such a visible loss and for a weakening of Russian military weapons.
> 
> In other words, be careful what we wish for, if doesn’t  include a Russian loss on the ground in Ukraine.



While I would  not mind Putin being removed from power, obviously the hope that he would be replaced by someone more reasonable with a clearer head as to what is good for the Motherland.

By what I know of Putin, the man is a power hungry sociopath. He appears to be smart but power hungary to a dangerous point. As far as I know Russia today faces no significant external threats, but there maybe internal threats to his power, and as someone who appears to be empire building, calculating to resurrect the USSR, he is clearly dangerous and making decisions bad for his country. But if he can hold onto power and acquire Ukraine, he’ll consider it a win and he is willing to take the chance.

As far as pushing the button when it all goes wrong for him, this something to be concerned about, but I have no clue what the counter would be. It seems clear that allowing him to have his way with Europe, that changing our actions when he says “sanctions are an act of war”, is a non-starter. We’ll take our chances and hope that he is not insane or powerfully suicidal.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> If Senator Graham wants to make foreign policy then 1) let him run for President and 2) meanwhile how about brushing up on the US Constitution (with which he used to be quite familiar as a lawyer serving in the  JAG Corps of USAF), and so quit talking up the idea of assassinating a head of state.
> 
> It was bad enough that Graham defended Trump's having ordered the 1/3/2020 drone strike on Qasem Soleimani, the right hand man to the Iranian head of state.   That killing was judged as "unlawful" by  UN Human Rights Council, since the death was not on a battlefield between the US and Iran but on a commercial airport ramp in a third country ,Iraq) and Soleimani had specifically been invited to Baghdad by the Iraqi head of state.  The US representative to the UN objected to the assessment.  Other lawyers suggested the execution violated both the Hague and Geneva conventions since "self defense" did not appear to be an imminent issue when the drone strike was ordered
> 
> Anyway as of now, Senator Graham's taking heat from both sides of the aisle for his remark on Putin...
> 
> As for matters of succession to Putin (no matter for what reason),  who knows.  Autocrats figure on sticking around.
> 
> But, one of the reasons Putin was trading weapons for gold with Venezuela while Maduro still had some in its central bank was to be able to pay both the Russian arms manufacturers and the Russian military forces he was trying to rebuild.  This because aside from however Putin has vastly tweaked rule of law in his favor, it's the military from which any credible effort to dislodge him would likely arise.
> 
> Still, if any people think that Putin has the undivided loyalty of all generals in Russia's military,  they have probably been reading too much Russian propaganda.  But the game of the century-- among those with any serious potential for centralized political power in Russia-- is probably down to "how do I find out who else wants to get with a different program"?  The risks in the outcome of a sting or just a wrong guess are probably lethal.



The GOP seems to love displaying their ignorance regarding our policy, our laws, understanding of international law. Trump was an ignoramus as POTUS. Some prominent politicians on the right seems to think that following in his footsteps and macho talk is what will keep them being elected.


----------



## Yoused

Despite being asked not to, Senators Marco Rubio and Steve Daines could not help themselves, tweeting screenshots of Volodymir Zelenskyy *while they were on a zoom call with him*.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Yoused said:


> Despite being asked not to, Senators Marco Rubio and Steve Daines could not help themselves, tweeting screenshots of Volodymir Zelenskyy *while they were on a zoom call with him*.




WTF. How hard is it to comply with that? I’ve worked with stuff the public couldn’t care less about… maybe a graphic promoting a local play nobody cares about - and would get fired if I posted a well-intended promo for it without permission. We’ve got way too much leniency for very serious government jobs that are based more on good faith than actual repercussions. Revoke whatever clearances Rubio and this other guy has and bar them from future conference calls like this.


----------



## Zoidberg

Yoused said:


> Despite being asked not to, Senators Marco Rubio and Steve Daines could not help themselves, tweeting screenshots of Volodymir Zelenskyy *while they were on a zoom call with him*.



Meanwhile, the guy whom Trump nominated as ambassador to Germany and when it didn't work out because he was clearly compromised, was placed as advisor to the secretary of defense, just said:

"*Zelenskyy is a puppet, I don't see anything heroic about the man. And I think he should neutralise Ukraine*, this is not a bad thing."

"And quite frankly most of what comes out of Ukraine is lies. Taking and retaking airfields, all of this is nonsense, it hasn't happened."

"Russian forces *were too gentle,* they have corrected that now, in ten or twelve days all this should be over."

Bloody hell, who does he work for? They don't even pretend that they are not on Russia's payroll now.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500225329595617286/


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> There is a question no one is asking - maybe it’s premature or maybe no one wants to talk about.
> 
> Suppose that Senator Graham gets his wish true and Mr Putin is deposed or even killed. Someone else will need to take over, while troops are in Ukraine and while sanctions are on. After all the Russian losses only a suicidal politician with a strong desire to die in office could just give up and leave Ukraine as if nothing happened, especially considering that the easement of sanctions would take months to be noticed by the Russian populations. Also, the Russian generals would never allow for such a visible loss and for a weakening of Russian military weapons.
> 
> In other words, be careful what we wish for, if doesn’t  include a Russian loss on the ground in Ukraine.



At this point a sane military junta would be better than an insane dictator. Not _much_ better –mind you– but better.


----------



## User.45

Putin wanted to be someone like Hitler, he's working on the war crime stuff diligently, but he has yet to achieve at least the initial winning part. In the meantime, if we're lucky, this conflict will help us root out russian assets and prop up the push for the renewable revolution. 









						Russia’s attack on Ukraine is a clear warning to US to become energy independent with renewables
					

The geopolitics of the last century have shifted, and the United States must shift with it if we are to take a leading role.




					thehill.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Looks like Putin said that sanctions are an act of war. Which means he sees Russia at war with the EU and the US


----------



## Yoused

GermanSuplex said:


> WTF. How hard is it to comply with that?



It appears that Daines is a Moscow-nipple-suckler, so "compliance" was not a thing he intended ITFP. As for Rubio, he is just a garden variety bag-o-turds.


----------



## Yoused

NT1440 said:


> Why are we supporting literal nazis like the Azov battalion?



Are you validating Vlad's original assertion that he is about rooting out Nazis?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Putin said that sanctions are an act of war. Which means he sees Russia at war with the EU and the US



Yes, I have read that; it seems to have been widely reported.

Meanwhile, both Visa and Mastercard have decided to suspend all of their operations in Russia.

This means that cards isseud by Russian banks will not work in their systems, and that foreign issued cards will no longer work in Russia.

Strong echoing vibes of what happened in the Sudetenland, (and I visited the Sudetenland a good few years ago, the German presence there is obliterated, - they were expelled, none too kindly, immediately after WW2; while there, I was taken to visit some cemeteries, and examine some municipal records), the 1939 Russo-Finnish war, and the Spanish Civil War (and the role played by the International Brigades).

This evening, I saw a piece (by Julia Ioffe) who argued that the invasion of Ukraine "is Europe's 9-11."

She could very well be right.


----------



## Yoused

Scepticalscribe said:


> This evening, I saw a piece (by Julia Ioffe) who argued that the invasion of Ukraine "is Europe's 9-11."
> 
> She could very well be right.



Which date format is being used here, the Eleventh of September attacks by al Qaeda on US targets, or the Ninth of November (election day '16) attack on the US by a low-class vulgar loudmouth "rich" guy?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Yoused said:


> Which date format is being used here, the Eleventh of September attacks by al Qaeda on US targets, or the Ninth of November (election day '16) attack on the US by a low-class vulgar loudmouth "rich" guy?




Is this a serious question?

From the context of the article, i can only assume that it refers to the events of 11th September, 2001, - referred to by Americans as "9-11", and - since then - accepted by those of us (in Europe) who usually render dates differently, as it refers to an event - of extraordinary importance - in recent US and world history.


----------



## User.45

Defiant Putin warns the west: your sanctions are akin to an act of war
					

Ukraine told: your statehood is in doubt as Russian bombs end ceasefire in Mariupol




					www.theguardian.com
				




This is getting interesting



> “The current leadership needs to understand that if they continue doing what they are doing, they risk the future of Ukrainian statehood,” Putin said. “If that happens they will have to be blamed for that.”
> 
> His intervention, in which he hinted the conflict could soon spread beyond Ukraine unless the west changed course, came as Moscow broke a ceasefire agreement to allow Ukrainian civilians to flee after 10 days of bombing and devastation.



Someone help me out, is this even a threat in the present context? "Stop making my job harder destroying Ukraine, otherwise, I'll destroy Ukraine!!!1!!11!!" This seems truly desperate.



> Later, Russia’s foreign ministry followed up Putin’s warning by specifically singling out the UK for what it called “sanctions hysteria” and its prominent role in supporting Ukraine. Maria Zakharova, the foreign ministry spokeswoman, said Russia would not forget the UK’s cooperation with Kyiv.
> 
> “The sanctions hysteria in which London plays one of the leading, if not the main, roles, leaves us no choice but to take proportionately tough retaliatory measures,” she said, adding that Britain’s Russian interests would be “undermined” by Moscow’s response.



"We have no choice but to open a new front to prevent you from making us embarrass our military!!!!!1!!11!!!"
I can interpret the threat 3 ways:
A) Regular war. - No way.
B) Nuclear war. - Not yet
C) Cyberwar.

Considering that I already expected their hackers to bring it on at full scale, this impresses as bluff from someone who's getting desperate.


----------



## GermanSuplex

So sad looking at the imagery from this war. 2022 and it looks like a third-world country scene right now. Totally unnecessary and all for ego.

Putin seems to be acting out of desperation. Joe Biden walked into a hell of a number of crisis. And we have half the country who think Trump’s approach to Putin was “strength” and he only attacked because of Biden. 

So our usual strength in bad times is no more, as seen with how we handle voting, the pandemic, January 6 and now this.

We have the leading cable news host spouting pro-Russia propaganda, along with the most recent former-president and his Secretary of State. Then you have other loons on the right calling for assassination and GOP senators sharing photos of the Ukrainian president after being asked not to. Sitting members of congress attending white nationalist conferences…

Not a good time.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

P_X said:


> Defiant Putin warns the west: your sanctions are akin to an act of war
> 
> 
> Ukraine told: your statehood is in doubt as Russian bombs end ceasefire in Mariupol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is getting interesting
> 
> 
> Someone help me out, is this even a threat in the present context? "Stop making my job harder destroying Ukraine, otherwise, I'll destroy Ukraine!!!1!!11!!" This seems truly desperate.
> 
> 
> "We have no choice but to open a new front to prevent you from making us embarrass our military!!!!!1!!11!!!"
> I can interpret the threat 3 ways:
> A) Regular war. - No way.
> B) Nuclear war. - Not yet
> C) Cyberwar.



Yes, it is a threat.

However, - and I suspect that in his (Mr Putin's, that is) closed, almost hermetically sealed, self-referential, circle, where nobody dare "speak truth to power", that he wil not, or cannot, realise that this threat carries less weight than it did a week ago.

The invasion of Ukraine was bad enough, - profoundly shocking, in fact, - but, openly threatening Finland and Sweden was what seems to have finally galvanised Europe into action.


----------



## User.45

GermanSuplex said:


> So sad looking at the imagery from this war. 2022 and it looks like a third-world country scene right now. Totally unnecessary and all for ego.
> 
> Putin seems to be acting out of desperation. Joe Biden walked into a hell of a number of crisis. And we have half the country who think Trump’s approach to Putin was “strength” and he only attacked because of Biden.
> 
> So our usual strength in bad times is no more, as seen with how we handle voting, the pandemic, January 6 and now this.
> 
> We have the leading cable news host spouting pro-Russia propaganda, along with the most recent former-president and his Secretary of State. Then you have other loons on the right calling for assassination and GOP senators sharing photos of the Ukrainian president after being asked not to. Sitting members of congress attending white nationalist conferences…
> 
> Not a good time.





1) Considering Russia's currently limited means of paying assets, we now even get to know who is in it because of the kompromat only
2) If Russia declares war on the West, then well, Putin's not gonna look great worldwide similarly to the American pro-russia chickenhawks who would then have to take a stance

(Don't get me wrong, all of this is awful and this war had most likely took humanity closer to annihilation than anything, but at this point the absurdity is taking me back to my fond memories of 20th century existentialist literature).


----------



## Yoused

Scepticalscribe said:


> Is this a serious question?



It was a bit jokey, yes, but you must admit that both of those nines eleven have had seriously tragic effects upon the US.


----------



## fooferdoggie

yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like Putin said that sanctions are an act of war. Which means he sees Russia at war with the EU and the US



just about everyone the Man is insane. thats what happens when trump loves you.


----------



## quagmire

P_X said:


> Someone help me out, is this even a threat in the present context? "Stop making my job harder destroying Ukraine, otherwise, I'll destroy Ukraine!!!1!!11!!" This seems truly desperate.




This may be an attempt to change the narrative in Russian propaganda. The official Russian narrative is they are doing a limited special operation to denazify Ukraine( not a full scale invasion despite this being contrary, etc). Putin may be going to try to blame the West for now having to do a full scale invasion of Ukraine. " Fellow Russians, due to the West putting sanctions on Russia and propping up a neo Nazi Ukrainian regime, it has given me no choice, but to fully invade and make Ukraine a part of Russia. This is the only way left to us to save the Ukrainian people."


----------



## User.45

quagmire said:


> This may be an attempt to change the narrative in Russian propaganda. The official Russian narrative is they are doing a limited special operation to denazify Ukraine( not a full scale invasion despite this being contrary, etc). Putin may be going to try to blame the West for now having to do a full scale invasion of Ukraine. " Fellow Russians, due to the West putting sanctions on Russia and propping up a neo Nazi Ukrainian regime, it has given me no choice, but to fully invade and make Ukraine a part of Russia. This is the only way left to us to save the Ukrainian people."



the issue with high maintenance lies is that they are high maintenance.


----------



## Yoused

These Russians say that the orders that sent them to Ukraine were unlawful and urge any Russian combatants that might see this to stand up against their commanding officers.

This video may also violate the Geneva Convention, which prohibits putting POWs on TV.


----------



## Yoused

Quebec diner drops the word "poutine" from its menu, replacing it with "mess of stuff" or something like that.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Yoused said:


> Quebec diner drops the word "poutine" from its menu, replacing it with "mess of stuff" or something like that.



Don’t want your fries thought of as a pile of shit.


----------



## Zoidberg

> Looks like Putin said that sanctions are an act of war. Which means he sees Russia at war with the EU and the US




When it comes to public announcements, with the Russians there’s:
what they say
what they mean
what they think

What they say is irrelevant because they don’t mean it.
And they would never tell us what they really think.

Examples:
-Those hackers have a mind of their own
-That BUK missile wasn’t ours
-It’s just exercises
-Okay, fine we are taking troops away from the border now (as they were _increasing_ their numbers)
-We want to denazify Ukraine
-It’s a peacekeeping mission
-Sanctions won’t affect us, we are well prepared
-Without our rockets the ISS will fall off the sky on the US
-We agree to a ceasefire
-Because of yoir actions we will have to open a new front

In short, don’t listen to what they say. They are trolls.

(There’s a few exceptions, such as Putin’s rage-speech the other day where it is possible to learn more)



P_X said:


> "We have no choice but to open a new front to prevent you from making us embarrass our military!!!!!1!!11!!!"
> I can interpret the threat 3 ways:
> A) Regular war. - No way.
> B) Nuclear war. - Not yet
> C) Cyberwar.




D) He’s running his mouth as usual, just last year they hacked the fuel distribution system on the West coast, and the same goes for power  grids, US elections, Brexit campaigns… they have been at war for years.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> D) He’s running his mouth as usual



That's what I was eluding to. The more empty threats, the more the threats devalue. Like inflation. "Threatflation"?


----------



## User.45

GermanSuplex said:


> So sad looking at the imagery from this war. 2022 and it looks like a third-world country scene right now. Totally unnecessary and all for ego.
> 
> Putin seems to be acting out of desperation. Joe Biden walked into a hell of a number of crisis. And we have half the country who think Trump’s approach to Putin was “strength” and he only attacked because of Biden.
> 
> So our usual strength in bad times is no more, as seen with how we handle voting, the pandemic, January 6 and now this.
> 
> We have the leading cable news host spouting pro-Russia propaganda, along with the most recent former-president and his Secretary of State. Then you have other loons on the right calling for assassination and GOP senators sharing photos of the Ukrainian president after being asked not to. Sitting members of congress attending white nationalist conferences…
> 
> Not a good time.











						‘Key to white survival’: how Putin has morphed into a far-right savior
					

The Russian president’s ‘strong man’ image and disdain for liberals has turned him into a hero for white nationalists




					www.theguardian.com
				




good article on this


----------



## User.45

Neat


----------



## User.45




----------



## Alli

yaxomoxay said:


> There is a question no one is asking - maybe it’s premature or maybe no one wants to talk about.
> 
> Suppose that Senator Graham gets his wish true and Mr Putin is deposed or even killed. Someone else will need to take over, while troops are in Ukraine and while sanctions are on. After all the Russian losses only a suicidal politician with a strong desire to die in office could just give up and leave Ukraine as if nothing happened, especially considering that the easement of sanctions would take months to be noticed by the Russian populations. Also, the Russian generals would never allow for such a visible loss and for a weakening of Russian military weapons.
> 
> In other words, be careful what we wish for, if doesn’t  include a Russian loss on the ground in Ukraine.






Huntn said:


> While I would not mind Putin being removed from power, obviously the hope that he would be replaced by someone more reasonable with a clearer head as to what is good for the Motherland.




As soon as something happens to Putin, I would hope that they let Navalny out of prison and place him in charge.


----------



## Alli

And then there’s the exemplary preparedness of the well-trained Russian forces. I wish I thought to link the video when I saw it yesterday, but it’s an elevator full of Russian soldiers. Yes. They were trying to take over a building, but couldn’t be arsed to use the stairs. Once in the elevator, the Ukrainians turned off the power, leaving them caged. 

You can’t make this stuff up.


----------



## Pumbaa

Alli said:


> And then there’s the exemplary preparedness of the well-trained Russian forces. I wish I thought to link the video when I saw it yesterday, but it’s an elevator full of Russian soldiers. Yes. They were trying to take over a building, but couldn’t be arsed to use the stairs. Once in the elevator, the Ukrainians turned off the power, leaving them caged.
> 
> You can’t make this stuff up.



Ah yes, saw that one on Reddit.


----------



## Thomas Veil

That would be sweet, if that happens. 

I don't think it will, but OTOH I'm not as convinced as others that an internal "liquidation" of Putin will necessarily result in something as bad or worse. At the very worst, I'd hope it would be a return to the pre-invasion status quo. Stories out of Russia have indicated some of his staff are going along with this only out of fear of defying Putin (which is what happens when you have a madman in charge...look at the US 2017-2020).


----------



## SuperMatt

Nikki Haley went on Meet the Press today to discuss the Russia/Ukraine war. After watching it, you can see why our country lost so much cachet in the world when she was our ambassador to the UN. She is absolutely clueless. And the “Trump was tougher on Putin than Biden”  is still coming out of her mouth? Unbelievable. Here in the real world, everybody saw that 4 years of Trump‘s disastrous foreign policy helped lead directly to this.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes, I have read that; it seems to have been widely reported.
> 
> Meanwhile, both Visa and Mastercard have decided to suspend all of their operations in Russia.
> 
> This means that cards isseud by Russian banks will not work in their systems, and that foreign issued cards will no longer work in Russia.
> 
> Strong echoing vibes of what happened in the Sudetenland, (and I visited the Sudetenland a good few years ago, the German presence there is obliterated, - they were expelled, none too kindly, immediately after WW2; while there, I was taken to visit some cemeteries, and examine some municipal records), the 1939 Russo-Finnish war, and the Spanish Civil War (and the role played by the International Brigades).
> 
> This evening, I saw a piece (by Jukia Ioffe) who argued that the invasion of Ukraine "is Europe's 9-11."
> 
> She could very well be right.



Another parallel between the early WW2 and today’s situation:

In 1936, Goering, in charge of the Nazi air force, used the Spanish civil war as a training ground to prepare ahead of what would become WW2. He sent pilots to test airplanes, bombs and train them by bombing everything they wanted (civilians, whole villages, armed forces…)

Putin did a similar thing by using Syria as a training ground. If they use the same tactics they used in Aleppo, not much will be left of Kyiv when they are done.


----------



## Yoused

Meanwhile, our national genius,

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500325620789743622/

thinks tie F-22 is a bomber.


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> Another parallel between the early WW2 and today’s situation:
> 
> In 1936, Goering, in charge of the Nazi air force, used the Spanish civil war as a training ground to prepare ahead of what would become WW2. He sent pilots to test airplanes, bombs and train his pilots by bombing everything they wanted (civilians, whole villages, armed forces…)
> 
> Putin did a similar thing by using Syria as a training ground. If they use the same tactics they used in Aleppo, not much will be left of Kyiv when they are done.



They'll need air superiority first. If they've really had that, they wouldn't have lost so many ground vehicles. Drones had really changed the equation since WW2


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> They'll need air superiority first. If they've really had that, they wouldn't have lost so many ground vehicles. Drones had really changed the equation since WW2



I meant in terms of destruction. They might keep using artillery if they cannot keep their airplanes safe (although that's just a matter of time).


----------



## User.45

Zoidberg said:


> I meant in terms of destruction. They might keep using artillery if they cannot keep their airplanes safe (although that's just a matter of time).



Yes, at this point all they can consistently do is park their artilleries at city borders and “shell” the cities until the artilleries run out. But to date to the best of my knowledge, their airstrikes have been at least cautious


----------



## yaxomoxay

Thomas Veil said:


> At the very worst, I'd hope it would be a return to the pre-invasion status quo.




This is what I am not entirely convinced about. 

We might get a much saner person that Putin (ok, it’s a low bar), but they doesn’t meant that the person will not have to face certain realities. I don’t see a Russian leader, as sane as he might be, saying to Russians that they wasted counted lives, and that they will suffer for years all for nothing and all without an actual military loss on the ground. That would be suicidal and the Russian people, as starved as they might become, will never ever accept. They’re a very proud nation. If nothing else an even stronger form of Russian nationalism might arise very quickly, especially if the change in leadership and the loss are due to sanctions on what could be a result of globalization. 

Also, to no Russian the fact that pre-invasion status quo will be impossible will escape. Even if tomorrow Russia retreats from Ukraine, and even if the next leader is the Russian reincarnation of Lincoln, the geopolitical chessboard is forever changed. There is no “sorry, we joked”. Ukraine will arm itself to the teeth, NATO will have to guarantee protections to surrounding countries, while at the same time Russia will have to be kept in check through sanctions and other means.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Yoused said:


> Quebec diner drops the word "poutine" from its menu, replacing it with "mess of stuff" or something like that.



The dish "poutine" - is an old, traditional, working-class, French-Canadian (i.e. Québécoise) dish where chips (French fries to Our Transatlantic Cousins) are served with gravy and cheese curds.  At its best, it is delicious.

This dish - it dates from at least the 1950s, - long precedes Mr Putin's rise to power, and has nothing whatsoever to do with him.

Anyway, I, personally would both deplore and regret that a restaurant would feel the need to do this.  "Poutine" has its own history and traditions, and Mr Putin's disgraceful invasion of Ukraine should not have any influence on how this dish is named.

It is every bit as idiotic as the fatuous attempt (in parts of the US) to change the name of "French fries" to the ludicrous "freedom fries" when France made clear their lack of enthusiasm for the wars of President Bush.


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> The dish "poutine" - is an old, traditional, working-class, French-Canadian (i.e. Québécoise) dish where chips (French fries to Our Transatlantic Cousins) are served with gravy and cheese curds.  At its best, it is delicious.
> 
> This dish - it dates from at least the 1950s, - long precedes Mr Putin's rise to power, and has nothing whatsoever to do with him.
> 
> Anyway, I, personally would both deplore and regret that a restaurant would feel the need to do this.  "Poutine" has its own history and traditions, and Mr Putin's disgraceful invasion of Ukraine should not have any influence on how this dish is named.
> 
> It is every bit as idiotic as the fatuous attempt (in parts of the US) to change the name of "French fries" to the ludicrous "freedom fries" when France made clear their lack of enthusiasm for the wars of President Bush.



Definitely agree with you.
What a silly, uninformed, bit of "virtue signalling" that is. SMFH.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> When it comes to public announcements, with the Russians there’s:
> what they say
> what they mean
> what they think
> 
> What they say is irrelevant because they don’t mean it.
> And they would never tell us what they really think.
> 
> Examples:
> -Those hackers have a mind of their own
> -That BUK missile wasn’t ours
> -It’s just exercises
> -Okay, fine we are taking troops away from the border now (as they were _increasing_ their numbers)
> -We want to denazify Ukraine
> -It’s a peacekeeping mission
> -Sanctions won’t affect us, we are well prepared
> -Without our rockets the ISS will fall off the sky on the US
> -We agree to a ceasefire
> -Because of yoir actions we will have to open a new front
> 
> In short, don’t listen to what they say. They are trolls.
> 
> (There’s a few exceptions, such as Putin’s rage-speech the other day where it is possible to learn more)
> 
> 
> 
> D) He’s running his mouth as usual, just last year they hacked the fuel distribution system on the West coast, and the same goes for power  grids, US elections, Brexit campaigns… they have been at war for years.



Actually, I disagree, because quite a number of Mr Putin's speeches - as far back as his speech in Munich in 2007 - unfortunately, made it abundantly clear that he did mean what he said.

The problem there was that many of us didn't actually believe that he really meant what he said.

So, when Mr Putin spoke, it paid to pay attention. 

The fact that he seems to be increasingly prey to deranged delusions doesn't change the fact that they serve as excuses, or explanations, or motivations for his actions.

Now, when the mouthpieces of officialdom spoke, yes, I would be broadly in agreement with you.

That was just a megamix, a cunning blend of lies, propaganda, mendacity, excuses, distraction, distortion, and trolling.


P_X said:


> Yes, at this point all they can consistently do is park their artilleries at city borders and “shell” the cities until the artilleries run out. But to date to the best of my knowledge, their airstrikes have been at least cautious



This is because, I would imagine, of the fact that Ukrainians are still seen as fraternal brother Slavs, even if erring and errant ones; besides, I cannot imagine that many in the Russian army (at least, those from Russia) - many of whom have friends and family and kinship networks in Ukraine - are all too keen to escalate the war further.

If they do, not only will they be facing a fierce resistance (again, a horrid hybrid  of the Spanish Civil War and the Russo-Finnish War comes to mind) and will take horrendous casualties, but they will be facing something akin to a civil war, which did not trouble them in Afghanistan or Syria, or Chechenya, and which they have not faced for a century, but which will pose existential challenges to Russian society that I am not sure they are quite ready to face.


----------



## Yoused

P_X said:


> park their artilleries at city borders and “shell” the cities until the artilleries run out



The Russians have a very serious problem with their logistics – when "the artilleries run out" is likely to be much sooner than they would hope for.


----------



## DT

Arkitect said:


> Definitely agree with you.
> What a silly, uninformed, bit of "virtue signalling" that is. SMFH.




The restaurant is Le Roy Jucep, who is one of a handful of restaurants who claim to be the originator of poutine, who I'm sure has some sense of the origin, i.e., this was done, purely in jest, as a show of solidarity.

From the article:

_The diner also shared a video on its Facebook page of a Ukrainian woman who appeared on Radio-Canada and thanked the restaurant for the gesture.

“If we were able to make someone smile over there, it’s already a win!” the restaurant wrote on Facebook.

“We are with you with all our hearts.”_


----------



## Yoused

Let me see, what was it happened to Nicky Romanov when he persisted in prosecuting an unpopular war? Gavrilo Princep snickers from his grave.


----------



## Arkitect

DT said:


> The restaurant is Le Roy Jucep, who is one of a handful of restaurants who claim to be the originator of poutine, who I'm sure has some sense of the origin, i.e., this was done, purely in jest, as a show of solidarity.
> 
> From the article:
> 
> _The diner also shared a video on its Facebook page of a Ukrainian woman who appeared on Radio-Canada and thanked the restaurant for the gesture.
> 
> “If we were able to make someone smile over there, it’s already a win!” the restaurant wrote on Facebook.
> 
> “We are with you with all our hearts.”_



It is still a silly thing to do.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> It is still a silly thing to do.



Completely agree with you.


----------



## MEJHarrison

Arkitect said:


> It is still a silly thing to do.




There's no shame in being silly if it brings joy or hope to someone else who desperately needs those things.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> Actually, I disagree, because quite a number of Mr Putin's speeches - as far back as his speech in Munich in 2007 - unfortunately, made it abundantly clear that he did mean what he said.
> 
> The problem there was that many of us didn't actually believe that he really meant what he said.
> 
> So, when Mr Putin spoke, it paid to pay attention....




While many in the West have previously preferred to ignore what Putin has said, no doubt some of the former Soviet territories have had a clearer understanding of the danger they're in. My recollection is that back during the Crimea crisis, the Russian Federal Assembly passed bills authorizing an investigation into the "legality" of the process that lead to the independence of the Baltic countries, which certainly suggests that Russia has continuing interests elsewhere beyond Ukraine ....hopefully NATO is now really making some more serious defensive arrangements in its eastern countries.


----------



## Alli

This is what I was talking about in an earlier post.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500147298520768515/


----------



## Huntn

Alli said:


> This is what I was talking about in an earlier post.
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500147298520768515/



Is this the basis of a new brand of Russian jiokes?


----------



## Pumbaa

Delivery completed according to the Swedish Commander-in-Chief.

Congrats, Russia, hope you really appreciate just how big of a deal this was and that _you_ made it happen! Probably the only country in the world who could…

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500479931981180933/


----------



## Eric

Just wondering how much of this horror show we can keep watching without stepping in, the world can unite against this monster but instead we're just looking on as their leader beg for help and families and children getting indiscriminately murdered. It will only get worse under Putin if nobody acts.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Just wondering how much of this horror show we can keep watching without stepping in, the world can unite against this monster but instead we're just looking on as their leader beg for help and families and children getting indiscriminately murdered. It will only get worse under Putin if nobody acts.



Many nations are acting. What actions are you suggesting that are not being taken?

Follow-up question: what consequences might result from those actions?


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Many nations are acting. What actions are you suggesting that are not being taken?



Sanctions, arming an underwhelmed military and well wishing is not going to save these people.



SuperMatt said:


> Follow-up question: what consequences might result from those actions?



I get it, everyone fears Putin but it's the fact that nobody will stand up to him that emboldens him, we're essentially letting the bully be a bully at the expense of Ukraine and their people. 

We also understand there are consequences, who is to say us giving them planes or cutting off Netflix won't tip him off, either? The guy is a lunatic. The only way you deal with a bully is to put them down.

Gotta wonder how many asked this same question about Hitler before he killed 6 million Jews.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> Just wondering how much of this horror show we can keep watching without stepping in











						Blinken says NATO countries have "green light" to send fighter jets to Ukraine
					

The secretary of state says the U.S. is considering providing fighter jets to Poland if the country sends its own to Ukraine.




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## Yoused

Also, the numbers here are almost certainly overstated, but





the fatalities graphic is awesome.


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> Blinken says NATO countries have "green light" to send fighter jets to Ukraine
> 
> 
> The secretary of state says the U.S. is considering providing fighter jets to Poland if the country sends its own to Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com



It's a good start. IMO all NATO countries should together with a united front and defend Ukraine. There is always a threat of nuclear war, time to put the whole "don't piss of Putin" stance behind us and take him out.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Sanctions, arming an underwhelmed military and well wishing is not going to save these people.
> 
> 
> I get it, everyone fears Putin but it's the fact that nobody will stand up to him that emboldens him, we're essentially letting the bully be a bully at the expense of Ukraine and their people.
> 
> We also understand there are consequences, who is to say us giving them planes or cutting off Netflix won't tip him off, either? The guy is a lunatic. The only way you deal with a bully is to put them down.
> 
> Gotta wonder how many asked this same question about Hitler before he killed 6 million Jews.



This seems like quite a flippant attitude towards the possible end of all human life.

Thank goodness Biden takes consequences seriously. This isn’t a playground fight. 

Also, you don’t “put down” bullies. You stand up to them. And the world is doing that. Maybe not in the way you want, but the way you want is way too high risk. I don’t want to die in a nuclear blast.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> It's a good start. IMO all NATO countries should together with a united front and defend Ukraine. There is always a threat of nuclear war, time to put the whole "don't piss of Putin" stance behind us and take him out.




You're more than welcome to go to the front lines.....

Just curious... Would you be war hawking this bad if it was Iran invading Ukraine? Or what if it was Zimbabwe invading Somalia? What conflict do you feel like it is worth the US and EU get militarily involved in another countries affairs?

Why so eager for WWIII?


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> This seems like quite a flippant attitude towards the possible end of all human life.



Bullshit. THIS is a flippant attitude towards life. Cowering to a ruthless dictator is what led to it, he has just as much to lose as the rest of the world in a nuclear war.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500469003780771846/



SuperMatt said:


> Thank goodness Biden takes consequences seriously. This isn’t a playground fight.
> 
> Also, you don’t “put down” bullies. You stand up to them. And the world is doing that. Maybe not in the way you want, but the way you want is way too high risk. I don’t want to die in a nuclear blast.



Nobody is standing up to Putin. At most we're inconveniencing their people with sanctions that Putin doesn't care about.


----------



## Eric

quagmire said:


> *You're more than welcome to go to the front lines.....*



At least I would be willing to stand up for them instead taking to social media and saying "sorry about all your dead, Ukraine, we tried with prayers and sanctions".



quagmire said:


> Just curious... Would you be war hawking this bad if it was Iran invading Ukraine? Or what if it was Zimbabwe invading Somalia? What conflict do you feel like it is worth the US and EU get militarily involved in another countries affairs?
> 
> *Why so eager for WWIII?*



I have stated publicly on several fronts that we should be standing up to dictators, whether it's Putin, Kim Jong Un, or any of them. If you are in a position to defend the defenseless, you should be defending them IMO. It doesn't mean I "want WWIII" it means it's saddening to watch bully dictators slaughtering innocent people and we need to stand up to it.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> At least I would be willing to stand up for them instead taking to social media and saying "sorry about all your dead, Ukraine, we tried with prayers and sanctions".
> 
> 
> I have stated publicly on several fronts that we should be standing up to dictators, whether it's Putin, Kim Jong Un, or any of them. If you are in a position to defend the defenseless, you should be defending them IMO. It doesn't mean I "want WWIII" it means it's saddening to watch bully dictators slaughtering innocent people and we need to stand up to it.




So should the EU and Russia come to Panama's aid when we invaded them? Or how about Iraq? 

We would be in a constant state of war if we got involved in every damn conflict. I know I am sounding heartless, but unless they are lobbing nukes, chemical weapons, other form of WMD's, or genocide other countries conflicts are not our concern to get to the level of getting militarily involved. What we are doing now is the proper response as of now.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Bullshit. THIS is a flippant attitude towards life. Cowering to a ruthless dictator is what led to it, he has just as much to lose as the rest of the world in a nuclear war.



The guy is throwing empty threats, but the one about using his nukes wasn't one. It's one of the actual real threats. Better being cautious about direct international intervention.


----------



## Citysnaps

Also...no doubt in my mind the US is also supplying real-time strategic and tactical intelligence to Ukraine. And I wouldn't be shocked if we were employing electronic counter measures to degrade Russia's communications and war fighting capabilities.


----------



## Yoused

P_X said:


> The guy is throwing empty threats, but the one about using his nukes wasn't one. It's one of the actual real threats. Better being cautious about direct international intervention.



Nuclear threats may be genuine, but they are also a bit dodgy. Vlad himself does not hold a lanyard that he can just yank to send nuclear missiles on their way. Nuclear attack orders must precipitate through the chain of command: one weak link – an officer whose subscription to the crazy has lapsed – is all it takes to scuttle armageddon. As long as the west makes sure Vlad is the only Russian who genuinely feels cornered, we might be ok.


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> Nuclear threats may be genuine, but they are also a bit dodgy. Vlad himself does not hold a lanyard that he can just yank to send nuclear missiles on their way. Nuclear attack orders must precipitate through the chain of command: one weak link – an officer whose subscription to the crazy has lapsed – is all it takes to scuttle armageddon. As long as the west makes sure Vlad is the only Russian who genuinely feels cornered, we might be ok.



Which takes us back to why that chain of command also has to think Putin is crazy and there's no justification for nuking.


----------



## Macky-Mac

One problem with Putin's nuclear threat being anything more than a threat, is that Russia isn't the only country with nukes........Is he crazy in a suicidal way? 

I have my doubts about that


----------



## Yoused

Macky-Mac said:


> Is he crazy in a suicidal way? I have my doubts about that



He dug himself into a hole, and now he is a cornered animal, which means that he must be approached with great caution.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500631918584467464/


----------



## GermanSuplex

SuperMatt said:


> Nikki Haley went on Meet the Press today to discuss the Russia/Ukraine war. After watching it, you can see why our country lost so much cachet in the world when she was our ambassador to the UN. She is absolutely clueless. And the “Trump was tougher on Putin than Biden”  is still coming out of her mouth? Unbelievable. Here in the real world, everybody saw that 4 years of Trump‘s disastrous foreign policy helped lead directly to this.




It’s funny hearing folks like her and Lindsey Graham - who called for assassination - talk about what needs to be done when they are impotent when it comes to standing up to Trump.

Everything Graham said about the Russian people needing to stand up is the same thing we’ve been saying about the GOP for five years now. Takes a lot of courage to ask people to risk their lives when he won’t even risk his political career.


----------



## Eric

GermanSuplex said:


> It’s funny hearing folks like her and Lindsey Graham - who called for assassination - talk about what needs to be done when they are impotent when it comes to standing up to Trump.
> 
> Everything Graham said about the Russian people needing to stand up is the same thing we’ve been saying about the GOP for five years now. Takes a lot of courage to ask people to risk their lives when he won’t even risk his political career.



I haven't followed all the other anti-Biden comments, that's just Republicans being Republicans. But calling for the assassination of Putin is 100% the right thing to do, cut the head off the snake. I don't see how this is a partisan talking point, we should all agree on this.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Re assassination, (as a proposed policy) - of Mr Putin, or any other head of state - and states - or individuals - recommending it:

No, I don't agree with, or on, or about, this.

I didn't agree with it re Mr Trump, - except as a joke in poor taste - and nor do I agree with it as a suggestion for how "we" should deal with Mr Putin.

We are either for the rule of law, or we are not.  

We don't get to pick and choose when we (and our states, and our foreign policy) decide to abide by the rule of law, and when we choose to discard the inconvenience of the rule of law.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Bullshit. THIS is a flippant attitude towards life. Cowering to a ruthless dictator is what led to it, he has just as much to lose as the rest of the world in a nuclear war.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500469003780771846/
> 
> 
> Nobody is standing up to Putin. At most we're inconveniencing their people with sanctions that Putin doesn't care about.




I don’t think Biden should risk the lives of all humanity by rushing into nuclear war.

Putin is the bad guy here, not Europe or America.

Also, history should show us that direct American military involvement in a bad situation doesn’t always it better.

Right now we should tell American oil companies to immediately increase production so we can embargo Russian oil. Good story on big oil’s nonsense here:









						The audacity of oil
					

The American Petroleum Institute (API), the lobbying arm of the oil and gas industry, has intensified its efforts to exploit Russia's invasion of Ukraine to push the United States government to roll back environmental protections, open up more federal land for drilling, and greenlight the...




					popular.info


----------



## Eric

As we debate how many lives "could" be lost if we involved ourselves, actual civilian lives are being lost on a daily basis in Ukraine, imagine if you all felt as passionately about them as you do cowering to a dictator. I mean you guys don't even want to see Putin taken out which is flat out mind boggling. Maybe we should take him to lunch and kiss his ring some more, it's worked out well so far.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Well...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500794400657584131/

This is what happens when you can't even "Netflix & Chill" like we kept saying during the pandemic, because one goes full dictator.



> Netflix, China-based TikTok join Google, Apple, other companies cutting ties with Russia
> 
> 
> As Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine escalates, private companies are severing their own ties to Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> fortune.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Scepticalscribe said:


> Re assassination, (as a proposed policy) - of Mr Putin, or any other head of state - and states - or individuals - recommending it:
> 
> No, I don't agree with, or on, or about, this.
> 
> I didn't agree with it re Mr Trump, - except as a joke in poor taste - and nor do I agree with it as a suggestion for how "we" should deal with Mr Putin.
> 
> We are either for the rule of law, or we are not.
> 
> We don't get to pick and choose when we (and our states, and our foreign policy) decide to abide by the rule of law, and when we choose to discard the inconvenience of the rule of law.




I think this depends. I’m sure it wouldn’t be too hard for you to think of historical leaders where the world would be a better place had they been assassinated. But it also depends on who/what would replace them and if the assassination would get the result hoped for. If a US President was assassinated over current war actions I highly doubt that would have the desired effect of ending the war.

I don’t know much about the true feelings of the Russians but it sounds like there is no shortage of them even before this who would like to see Putin out of office permanently. So if he got assassinated (by whoever) would this attempted empire expansion continue? It doesn’t sound like it to me. Putin taking a dirt nap might be their greatest hope at this point.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JayMysteri0 said:


> Well...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500794400657584131/
> 
> This is what happens when you can't even "Netflix & Chill" like we kept saying during the pandemic, because one goes full dictator.




Fucking Icelanders. About time somebody called them on their shit!!


----------



## Macky-Mac

Yoused said:


> He dug himself into a hole, and now he is a cornered animal, which means that he must be approached with great caution.




Definitely great caution is called for when dealing with him. 

But while things certainly have not gone as smoothly as he'd expected, I wouldn't agree that he's in the "cornered animal" category.


----------



## Arkitect

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I think this depends. I’m sure it wouldn’t be too hard for you to think of historical leaders where the world would be a better place had they been assassinated. But it also depends on who/what would replace them and if the assassination would get the result hoped for. If a US President was assassinated over current war actions I highly doubt that would have the desired effect of ending the war.
> 
> I don’t know much about the true feelings of the Russians but it sounds like there is no shortage of them even before this who would like to see Putin out of office permanently. So if he got assassinated (by whoever) would this attempted empire expansion continue? It doesn’t sound like it to me. Putin taking a dirt nap might be their greatest hope at this point.




Beware the law of unintended consequences.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> As we debate how many lives "could" be lost if we involved ourselves, actual civilian lives are being lost on a daily basis in Ukraine, imagine if you all felt as passionately about them as you do cowering to a dictator. I mean you guys don't even want to see Putin taken out which is flat out mind boggling. Maybe we should take him to lunch and kiss his ring some more, it's worked out well so far.




How is it mind boggling? How would you feel about Putin having Biden assassinated? What response would that trigger from us? 

Look I am all for encouraging the Russian people to stand up to Putin and overthrow him. But will not in any way condone the US/EU to assassinate Putin. Just as much as I was against us taking out that Iranian general. Remember how we thought that could trigger a war with Iran?


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> As we debate how many lives "could" be lost if we involved ourselves, actual civilian lives are being lost on a daily basis in Ukraine, imagine if you all felt as passionately about them as you do cowering to a dictator. I mean you guys don't even want to see Putin taken out which is flat out mind boggling. Maybe we should take him to lunch and kiss his ring some more, it's worked out well so far.



Where was this passion for starting WW3 and assassinating Putin when Russia was killing civilians in Syria?


----------



## SuperMatt

quagmire said:


> How is it mind boggling? How would you feel about Putin having Biden assassinated? What response would that trigger from us?
> 
> Look I am all for encouraging the Russian people to stand up to Putin and overthrow him. But will not in any way condone the US/EU to assassinate Putin. Just as much as I was against us taking out that Iranian general. Remember how we thought that could trigger a war with Iran?



If Iran had nukes, they never would have taken him out. The dumb thing is that with Trump killing the Iran nuclear deal, they are closer to nuclear weapons now.

But plenty of people seem to think nuclear war is just a fantasy that could never happen, so just act rashly as if nukes don’t even exist!


----------



## Eric

quagmire said:


> How is it mind boggling? How would you feel about Putin having Biden assassinated? What response would that trigger from us?
> 
> Look I am all for encouraging the Russian people to stand up to Putin and overthrow him. But will not in any way condone the US/EU to assassinate Putin. Just as much as I was against us taking out that Iranian general. Remember how we thought that could trigger a war with Iran?







SuperMatt said:


> *Where was this passion for starting WW3* and assassinating Putin when Russia was killing civilians in Syria?



Yes Matt, my goal is to start WWIII . My statement stands for anywhere a ruthless dictator is deliberately killing innocent people trying and attempting to take over sovereign countries.

If this were your neighborhoods being bombed and you were fleeing for any help you could get, you would've be on such a high horse about it. IMO there's just as much of a lack of empathy here as we all bash Trump supporters for. I've got mine, don't worry about everyone else.


----------



## Yoused

Saw a terrible pun. The Russians are using odd symbology on their equipment, including the "Z", which is sometimes in a triangle or box, sometimes just spray painted on its own. This is a glyph (letterform) which is not found in any version of Cyrillic (the alphabets used for Russian, Ukrainian, Kazak, Mongolian and some others). One person suggested that they are trolling English-speakers: the Russians are the Zs, so therefore their foes are Not-Zs.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Yes Matt, my goal is to start WWIII . My statement stands for anywhere a ruthless dictator is deliberately killing innocent people trying and attempting to take over sovereign countries.
> 
> If this were your neighborhoods being bombed and you were fleeing for any help you could get, you would've be on such a high horse about it. IMO there's just as much of a lack of empathy here as we all bash Trump supporters for. I've got mine, don't worry about everyone else.



A high horse - says the person that is telling everybody else they lack empathy. 

Foreign policy should be all about emotional reactions and assassinating other nation’s leaders. Let’s see where that gets the world... oh wait, we already know.

The thing is, when America WAS bombed (9/11), we overreacted. We deposed the evil dictator Saddam Hussein, which led to peace and safety hundreds of thousands of casualties and the genesis of ISIS in the Middle East. And we all know how the Afghanistan invasion worked out. Trillions of dollars, countless lives wasted, and the world is not any safer.

You want an instant solution to this? There isn’t one. Even if we launched the entire military might of NATO into Ukraine, now you’re talking about massive battles, fought on Ukrainian soil, with maybe more casualties than the current invasion.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> A high horse - says the person that is telling everybody else they lack empathy.



You do lack empathy. Throughout this entire thread you've kissed Biden's ass, praised the powers that be for doing such a great job throughout this invasion, all from the comfort of your couch.

Meanwhile, the people of Ukraine are getting bombed and ravage by Putin and his army and you can't even see fit to take him out. So yes, you're sitting on your high horse and it stinks for those people you refuse to empathize with but Putin is glad for your support.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> You do lack empathy. Throughout this entire thread you've kissed Biden's ass, praised the powers that be for doing such a great job throughout this invasion, all from the comfort of your couch.
> 
> Meanwhile, the people of Ukraine are getting bombed and ravage by Putin and his army and you can't even see fit to take him out. So yes, you're sitting on your high horse and it stinks for those people you refuse to empathize with but Putin is glad for your support.




Are you on a flight to Ukraine yet to help Ukraine out by either fighting the Russians or aiding in the evacuation?


----------



## Eric

quagmire said:


> Are you on a flight to Ukraine yet to help Ukraine out by either fighting the Russians or aiding in the evacuation?



I would be willing to assist or fight for these people in any capacity possible. Just as you would for Putin, apparently.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> I would be willing to assist or fight for these people in any capacity possible. Just as you would for Putin, apparently.




You don't need to wait for the US to take military action. I am sure Ukraine would welcome you if you wanted to go right now.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> You do lack empathy. Throughout this entire thread you've kissed Biden's ass, praised the powers that be for doing such a great job throughout this invasion, all from the comfort of your couch.
> 
> Meanwhile, the people of Ukraine are getting bombed and ravage by Putin and his army and you can't even see fit to take him out. So yes, you're sitting on your high horse and it stinks for those people you refuse to empathize with but Putin is glad for your support.



Hey, Eric, I have an idea: why not just brutally (or humanely) murder Putin's daughters? That might be more effective than taking him out.


----------



## User.45

Time to chill guys. 

It’s pointless to insult each other.


----------



## Eric

quagmire said:


> You don't need to wait for the US to take military action. I am sure Ukraine would welcome you if you wanted to go right now.



And you don't need to wait to start a drum circle with flowers in your hair humming for peace, though it seems like you may have done so already so don't let me get ahead of you.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> Time to chill guys.
> 
> It’s pointless to insult each other.



Fine but I REALLY wanted to hear their rendition of kumbaya.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> You do lack empathy. Throughout this entire thread you've kissed Biden's ass, praised the powers that be for doing such a great job throughout this invasion, all from the comfort of your couch.
> 
> Meanwhile, the people of Ukraine are getting bombed and ravage by Putin and his army and you can't even see fit to take him out. So yes, you're sitting on your high horse and it stinks for those people you refuse to empathize with but Putin is glad for your support.





Eric said:


> Fine but I REALLY wanted to hear their rendition of kumbaya.



Personal attacks don’t help one’s argument.

Zelensky isn’t calling for Putin to be “put down.” Does he lack empathy for himself? Putin has tried to kill him 3 times in a week, and I don’t see him asking for Putin to be killed.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Personal attacks don’t help one’s argument.



LOL dude, literally look a few posts back. Man you are so full of yourself you don't even see it.



SuperMatt said:


> Zelensky isn’t calling for Putin to be “put down.” Does he lack empathy for himself? *Putin has tried to kill him 3 times,* and I don’t see him asking for Putin to be killed.



This should be the takeaway, three attempts on Zelensky and we still can't wish death on Putin. Yet we can for Trump for having a rally in the middle of a COVID outbreak. We have some priorities.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> This should be the takeaway, three attempts on Zelensky and we still can't wish death on Putin.



You like martyrs?


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> You like martyrs?



You mean Putin as a martyr? Yes, I can see the headlines of sympathy that a ruthless dictator who was only trying to murder tens of thousands of innocent people in the gentle annexation of a nation. We all wept.

BTW do the Ukrainian people get the same level of empathy as you give Putin? He's gotta be loving the support in this thread.


----------



## Deleted member 215

How is thinking that the U.S. assassinating him is a bad idea the same as empathy and loving support? There are a lot of people I don't think should be assassinated for various, that doesn't mean I empathize with them.


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> How is thinking that the U.S. assassinating him is a bad idea the same as empathy and loving support? There are a lot of people I don't think should be assassinated for various, that doesn't mean I empathize with them.



I never once specified that it be sanctioned nor committed by the US, I don't even think even Graham or Republicans went that far (maybe but I have not personally seen it). I am talking about taking him out by any means necessary, no matter who does it.

There is a real sentiment here about protecting Russia, Putin and their invasion as being justified because it's "not our fight". And while some think I only care about this particular conflict, they would be wrong. I have always advocated for those who are being ruthlessly taken over, I don't care if it's in the middle east, Europe, North Korea, etc. The world (not just the US) has an alliance with NATO, if not to protect people who can't protect themselves from dictators, then I would ask to what end?

See, what Ukraine lacks is oil, or we would've had troops on the ground a month ahead of the invasion. If we only put the same value on human life as we do fossil fuels.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> The world (not just the US) has an alliance with NATO, if not to protect people who can't protect themselves from dictators, then I would ask to what end?




Please read up on NATO....... 

NATO only gets involved if Article 5 is activated because a country attacked a member nation. The world is not apart of NATO......

But we have discussed this already. NATO is a defensive alliance that will only act in the defense of a country that is a member of NATO, not the World Police Organization.


----------



## Eric

quagmire said:


> Please read up on NATO....... NATO will not get involved if Zimbabwe invades Somalia because Somalia is not a member of NATO.
> 
> NATO only gets involved if Article 5 is activated because a country attacked a member nation. The world is not apart of NATO......
> 
> But we have discussed this already. NATO is a defensive alliance, not the World Police Organization.




Interesting...


> Formed in 1949 with the signing of the Washington Treaty, NATO is a security alliance of 30 countries from North America and Europe. *NATO's fundamental goal is to safeguard the Allies' freedom and security by political and military means.*



Please, read up on NATO yourself, or at least Google it before making a fool of yourself.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> Interesting...
> 
> Please, read up on NATO yourself, or at least Google it before making a fool of yourself.




Safeguard's the  freedom and security the countries that are *IN* the alliance.

Russia attacks Poland? NATO joins in because Poland is apart of the alliance.

Russia attacks China? NATO doesn't join. China is not in the alliance.

Russia attacks Iceland? NATO comes to the aid of Iceland. Iceland is a member of the alliance.

Russia attacks South Korea? NATO does not help in the defense of South Korea. South Korea is not a apart of the security alliance that makes up NATO.

Russia attacks Mexico? NATO does not help because Mexico is not a member of NATO.

Article 5 is the one that dictates how/when NATO gets involved militarily.....



> Article 5​The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
> 
> Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security ."




Specifically references the parties to the alliance will treat an attack on any of them will trigger every party in NATO getting militarily involved. That is the only way NATO will come in with military force. You have to be a party/member of NATO to gain Article 5 protection. Not a member of NATO= no Article 5 protection.


----------



## Arkitect

Eric said:


> . The world (not just the US) has an alliance with NATO, if not to protect people who can't protect themselves from dictators, then I would ask to what end?





The "World" most certainly does not have an alliance with NATO.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation exists solely to defend itself.

Ukraine is not a part of NATO and thus while they have the support of countries belonging to NATO, this treaty organisation cannot go and fight on Ukraine's behalf.

Thems the rules.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Fucking Icelanders. About time somebody called them on their shit!!




Heh, with countries like Monaco in the mix,   looks like Putin is including states that perhaps have not stood in the way of seizure of yachts belonging to oligarchs on the sanctions lists.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Arkitect said:


> The "World" most certainly does not have an alliance with NATO.
> The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation exists solely to defend itself.
> 
> Ukraine is not a part of NATO and thus while they have the support of countries belonging to NATO,* this treaty organisation cannot go and fight on Ukraine's behalf*.
> 
> Thems the rules.




I don't think the part of your post that I put in bold is true.

NATO's involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo are examples of it taking action in non member states.

While Article 5 REQUIRES action under certain conditions, there doesn't seem to be text in the treaty that prevents NATO from deciding to take action in all other situations. And Article 4 seems to allow NATO flexibility in determining and deciding when and where to act.

I suspect that there are currently several NATO states that could say their  "_...territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened..._." by the fighting in Ukraine, and under Article 4, that would certainly allow NATO to consider whether action should be taken

edit; mind you, I don't think NATO is currently prepared to send troops into Ukraine


----------



## quagmire

nvm….


----------



## Eric

Arkitect said:


> The "World" most certainly does not have an alliance with NATO.
> The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation exists solely to defend itself.
> 
> Ukraine is not a part of NATO and thus while they have the support of countries belonging to NATO, this treaty organisation cannot go and fight on Ukraine's behalf.
> 
> Thems the rules.



Yes, sadly they didn't have enough unobtainium to join. My point is those of us who can stand up and fight for an oppressed nation being taken over by a dictator, should.

Another point I'll make here, Democrats and Republicans may have different ideas about our involvement, but they both agree about leaving Russia alone. The end result is the same whether you support Trump, watch Fox News or watch MSNBC. I get that I'm the outlier here and have to deal with the Liberal hostility, but the Ukrainian people are getting fucked and we're doing nothing to help them, that's the bottom line.


----------



## Arkitect

Macky-Mac said:


> I don't think the part of your post that I put in bold is true.
> 
> NATO's involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo are examples of it taking action in non member states.
> 
> While Article 5 REQUIRES action under certain conditions, there doesn't seem to be text in the treaty that prevents NATO from deciding to take action in all other situations. And Article 4 seems to allow NATO flexibility in determining and deciding when and where to act.
> 
> I suspect that there are currently several NATO states that could say their  "_...territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened..._." by the fighting in Ukraine, and under Article 4, that would certainly allow NATO to consider whether action should be taken



Apparently it means whatever we want it to mean.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Yeah, it's not completely correct
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500928514060525571/
But it does drive home how isolated putin has made his own country, over his delusions.


----------



## Citysnaps

Eric said:


> Another point I'll make here, Democrats and Republicans may have different ideas about our involvement, but they both agree about leaving Russia alone. The end result is the same whether you support Trump, watch Fox News or watch MSNBC. I get that I'm the outlier here and have to deal with the Liberal hostility, but the Ukrainian people are getting fucked and we're doing nothing to help them, that's the bottom line.




I'm trying to keep an open mind on this.

I'm curious...If you were Joe Biden, specifically, what would you do beyond sending Ukraine thousands of Javelin/Stinger/NLAWS man-portable missiles, several hundred thousand tons of ammunition, tactical intelligence on what Russia is doing, and engaging in electronic counter measures against the invading Russian military? Also, I wouldn't be shocked if there were some US special forces in Ukraine helping in some capacity.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Macky-Mac said:


> I don't think the part of your post that I put in bold is true.
> 
> NATO's involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo are examples of it taking action in non member states.
> 
> While Article 5 REQUIRES action under certain conditions, there doesn't seem to be text in the treaty that prevents NATO from deciding to take action in all other situations. And Article 4 seems to allow NATO flexibility in determining and deciding when and where to act.
> 
> I suspect that there are currently several NATO states that could say their  "_...territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened..._." by the fighting in Ukraine, and under Article 4, that would certainly allow NATO to consider whether action should be taken
> 
> edit; mind you, I don't think NATO is currently prepared to send troops into Ukraine



NATO's missions in Kosovo and in Afghanistan have both occurred under a UN mandate,  - NATO's presence and mandate derived from UN authority - whereas NATO's mission in Iraq is a capacity-building (in other words, a non-combat) mission, where they are present at the request of the host government.


----------



## quagmire

Macky-Mac said:


> I don't think the part of your post that I put in bold is true.
> 
> NATO's involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo are examples of it taking action in non member states.
> 
> While Article 5 REQUIRES action under certain conditions, there doesn't seem to be text in the treaty that prevents NATO from deciding to take action in all other situations. And Article 4 seems to allow NATO flexibility in determining and deciding when and where to act.
> 
> I suspect that there are currently several NATO states that could say their  "_...territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened..._." by the fighting in Ukraine, and under Article 4, that would certainly allow NATO to consider whether action should be taken
> 
> edit; mind you, I don't think NATO is currently prepared to send troops into Ukraine




Are you talking about post 9/11 Afghanistan War? That was the US activating Article 5 after the 9/11 attacks ( only time Article 5 was ever activated). That is how NATO got involved.

Whether a country hosting the terror group that attacked the US is a legitimate activation, that is another discussion.


----------



## Eric

citypix said:


> I'm trying to keep an open mind on this.
> 
> I'm curious...If you were Joe Biden, specifically, what would you do beyond sending Ukraine thousands of Javelin/Stinger/NLAWS man-portable missiles, several hundred thousand tons of ammunition, tactical intelligence on what Russia is doing, and engaging in electronic counter measures against the invading Russian military? Also, I wouldn't be shocked if there were some US special forces in Ukraine helping in some capacity.



I would be putting boots on the ground and asking the other nations to join in, America loves to use NATO when they don't want to do something and they also love to buck them when they don't, they're nothing more than a pawn on the world stage but can be useful if we can get everyone to unite. 

I would argue that Putin would (and already has) threaten nuclear war anyway. I see it like cops beating on unarmed black people who did nothing more than be black, it's wrong and we're outraged, but only here in America. We should all be defending those who cannot defend themselves.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> You mean Putin as a martyr? Yes, I can see the headlines of sympathy that a ruthless dictator who was only trying to murder tens of thousands of innocent people in the gentle annexation of a nation. We all wept.
> 
> BTW do the Ukrainian people get the same level of empathy as you give Putin? He's gotta be loving the support in this thread.



Why do you insist on calling it "empathy"? Please try to find one person here who feels empathy for Vlad. You will not. He is a reckless piece of shit. But if you have him taken out, suddenly you have a whole nation of people who are no longer on the fence. _Ukraine had our President murdered, we must turn that country into a glass parking lot!_ Not killing Putin is more a practical mather than one of political alignment. If you go on up to Moscow and take him out, the world will thank you as a hundred crazy Russians burn everything to the ground.


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> Why do you insist on calling it "empathy"? Please try to find one person here who feels empathy for Vlad. You will not. He is a reckless piece of shit. But if you have him taken out, suddenly you have a whole nation of people who are no longer on the fence. _Ukraine had our President murdered, we must turn that country into a glass parking lot!_ Not killing Putin is more a practical mather than one of political alignment. If you go on up to Moscow and take him out, the world will thank you as a hundred crazy Russians burn everything to the ground.



Saddam Hussein was found in a bunker and hung by his own people, did he become a martyr? Most of the Russian people, that we're all thrilled about applying sanctions on, do not want this war either. So you have both Ukraine and Russian people suffering because of Putin. Stop giving him so much credit.


----------



## Macky-Mac

quagmire said:


> Are you talking about post 9/11 Afghanistan War? That was the US activating Article 5 after the 9/11 attacks ( only time Article 5 was ever activated). That is how NATO got involved.
> 
> Whether a country hosting the terror group that attacked the US is a legitimate activation, that is another discussion.




NATO has been involved in a variety of actions without article 5 activation, some under UN request (as Scepticalscribe pointed out), some requested by host countries, some by other international organizations, the African Union for example....some seem to be on NATO's own initiative)

The point was that an article 5 response after an attack on a NATO member isn't the only way that NATO can get involved.....something that you and others had been suggesting

Here's NATO's website listing some of their missions over the years;

Operations and missions: past and present​
(note that article 5 is only cited twice, both after 9/11, but it's not cited for Afghanistan, which Scepticalscribe says was under a UN mandate)


----------



## Citysnaps

Eric said:


> I would be putting boots on the ground and asking the other nations to join in, America loves to use NATO when they don't want to do something and they also love to buck them when they don't, they're nothing more than a pawn on the world stage but can be useful if we can get everyone to unite.
> 
> I would argue that Putin would (and already has) threaten nuclear war anyway. I see it like cops beating on unarmed black people who did nothing more than be black, it's wrong and we're outraged, but only here in America. We should all be defending those who cannot defend themselves.




Let's say we did that. Perhaps 50-100K US troops. In order to protect them, for sure we'd want to have control of the air space via air superiority/supremacy. That usually means first destroying hostile air defense missile systems that pose a potential threat. In this particular situation those systems would be located in Russia, Belarus (I'm guessing), and Crimea - roughly more than half of Ukraine's land border. And Russian naval assets in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.

That's a big undertaking. I suspect Russia would not stand idly by and quickly ratchet up a response.  Then what?


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> Saddam Hussein was found in a bunker and hung by his own people, did he become a martyr? Most of the Russian people, that we're all thrilled about applying sanctions on, do not want this war either. So you have both Ukraine and Russian people suffering because of Putin. Stop giving him so much credit.



Do _*not*_ point to the death of Saddam Hussein as a net positive. Iraq was a comparatively stable country while he was in power. Not only did it get much worse with him gone, but within that power vacuum arose Daesh. I think I would much rather have Hussein than the psychotic wing of al Qaeda burning across the landscape.


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> Do _*not*_ point to the death of Saddam Hussein as a net positive. Iraq was a comparatively stable country while he was in power. Not only did it get much worse with him gone, but within that power vacuum arose Daesh. I think I would much rather have Hussein than the psychotic wing of al Qaeda burning across the landscape.



He was a horrible dictator who regularly murdered, raped and pillaged his people, who hung his ass when they found him crying in a bunker. A just and fitting ending for such a tyrant. Stop placating these evil fuckers, they deserve to die.


----------



## User.45

I’m late into the discussion because of work, but about the assassination The best way to think about it is what would One had felt if Trump was assassinated by a foreign power. Even dictators need to be removed by their own people with the most appropriate Tools for the job. For Trump, it was voting him out (first). I’m not sure what it is for Putin, but I’m sure that primarily the Russian people will need to take care of it. Otherwise you fix nothing just make the conflict a lot more ambiguous And actually give a reason to Russian forces to want to fight.

One thing I attribute to the Biden administration is that They placed Putin in a position where it is very obvious that he’s the bad guy. It would’ve been a lot more ambiguous if the USA had taken preemptive actions.

About the lives saved, and this is what is making me the most uncomfortable, saving a couple of thousands of innocent lives An exchange of tens to hundreds of thousands of casualties Accomplishes less in my opinion, than carefully calculating the level of intervention taken. It’s As easy to deescalate a worldwar level conflict as is it is to unsmoke a cigarette. The best outcome is still avoidance of a world war.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> He was a horrible dictator who regularly murdered, raped and pillaged his people, who hung his ass when they found him crying in a bunker. A just and fitting ending for such a tyrant. Stop placating these evil fuckers, they deserve to die.




Saddam Hussein wasn't assassinated after he was found in his bunker.

He was arrested, tried, sentenced and then hanged... all by Iraqis operating officially under auspices of the post-Hussien interim government.

The charges laid were for crimes against humanity, specifically the 1982 massacre of 148 Iraqi Shia then living in Dujail, Iraq.  That massacre was planned and directed by Hussein in retaliation for an attempted assassination attempt against him while he was in Dujail making a speech.​​In his retaliation, Hussein had also directed the razing of the homes and orchards belonging to the detained Shia who lived along the road where the assassination attempt had occurred.​
One point here is that if we believe in rule of law we can't just assassinate a rogue head of state.   Another is that the price for either a failed assassination attempt or a successful one is incalculable in advance.  Violence begets violence. Anything from the slaughter of innocents to a civil war and yet more slaughter is possible

Look back at assorted attempts or actual assassinations and coups even just over the 20th century, where a head of state ended up not just deposed but dead.  Sometimes anarchy ensued, sometimes civil war, sometimes another strongman emerged. 

Let Putin's constituents bring him to justice.   And let them consider that Hussein was brought to his end in courts of law and through legal process.  The Iraqis who first tried just to assassinate Hussein paid a heavy price, as did their families and community.   Nearly 20 years later he was ousted via the 2003 invasion, with intent to depose him,  but the occupiers did not assassinate him.  He was taken prisoner and turned over to the Iraqis for prosecution as they saw fit.

I certainly get why one can wish someone would off Putin.  People are suffering and dying in Ukraine and in the bordering countries with every hour this vile aggression continues. But assassination is not a solution.


----------



## Eric

lizkat said:


> Saddam Hussein wasn't assassinated after he was found in his bunker.
> 
> He was arrested, tried, sentenced and then hanged... all by Iraqis operating officially under auspices of the post-Hussien interim government.
> 
> The charges laid were for crimes against humanity, specifically the 1982 massacre of 148 Iraqi Shia then living in Dujail, Iraq.  That massacre was planned and directed by Hussein in retaliation for an attempted assassination attempt against him while he was in Dujail making a speech.​​In his retaliation, Hussein had also directed the razing of the homes and orchards belonging to the detained Shia who lived along the road where the assassination attempt had occurred.​
> One point here is that if we believe in rule of law we can't just assassinate a rogue head of state.   Another is that the price for either a failed assassination attempt or a successful one is incalculable in advance.  Violence begets violence. Anything from the slaughter of innocents to a civil war and yet more slaughter is possible
> 
> Look back at assorted attempts or actual assassinations and coups even just over the 20th century, where a head of state ended up not just deposed but dead.  Sometimes anarchy ensued, sometimes civil war, sometimes another strongman emerged.
> 
> Let Putin's constituents bring him to justice.   And let them consider that Hussein was brought to his end in courts of law and through legal process.  The Iraqis who first tried just to assassinate Hussein paid a heavy price, as did their families and community.   Nearly 20 years later he was ousted via the 2003 invasion, with intent to depose him,  but the occupiers did not assassinate him.  He was taken prisoner and turned over to the Iraqis for prosecution as they saw fit.
> 
> I certainly get why one can wish someone would off Putin.  People are suffering and dying in Ukraine and in the bordering countries with every hour this vile aggression continues. But assassination is not a solution.



The whole "rule of law" is always used when it favors one's talking points. Did the unarmed black man who resisted arrest and was shot and killed as a result because he wasn't following the "rule of law" deserve it? Use conveniently as you see fit.

If we had a chance to stop Hitler before he murdered 6 million Jews, would that have been acceptable?


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> The whole "rule of law" is always used when it favors one's talking points. Did the unarmed black man who resisted arrest and was shot and killed as a result because he wasn't following the "rule of law" deserve it? Use conveniently as you see fit.



But your analogy is like the British would come and stop the cop from shooting the unarmed black man. We are responsible for that shit, not some other country.


Eric said:


> If we had a chance to stop Hitler before he murdered 6 million Jews, would that have been acceptable?



If it happened before the 2nd WW, he would have just become a martyr and somebody else would have orchestrated the holocaust. Perhaps less effectively if it's a lucky timeline, or perhaps the nazis would have even won the war if it's not a lucky timeline.

I believe that most events, trends, happen not because of the individual, but because of society being primed for those to happen. Putin might be singlehandedly responsible for the war, but the emergence of Putin could happen because of Russia's readiness to produce a Putin. Assassinating a single person rarely achieves the unpriming effect we are all longing for.


----------



## chengengaun

Initially I did find the idea alluring (even before this was publicly talked about), since there is virtually no way for Putin to exit the situation gracefully and feel secure while not in power. However, I had to dismiss the idea upon further thought. Besides rule-of-law issues, the ensuing chaos and power struggle will probably be terrible - and the consequences unimaginable given Russia's nuclear capabilities. Someone who craves power may point to Ukraine and galvanise the Russian population to unite behind him/her and launch an all-out war (if it is not one already). And it will not solve the underlying cause which enabled Putin to rise to power; the institutions of oligarchy and 'mutual assistance/protection' will still be in place.

In any case, history taught us that removing a government/leadership is relatively straightforward; dealing with the aftermath and rebuilding a country is not.

p/s: I posed a question to _The Economist_ panel last Friday - what will happen _if_ Putin is indeed assassinated? It was not taken up probably due to lack of time, but will be interested to see what they think of it.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> But your analogy is like the British would come and stop the cop from shooting the unarmed black man. We are responsible for that shit, not some other country.



Right, if it doesn't affect me directly locally in my backyard then turn a blind eye. Got it.



P_X said:


> If it happened before the 2nd WW,* he would have just become a martyr and somebody else did the holocaust*. Perhaps less effectively if it's a lucky timeline, or perhaps the nazis would have even won the war if it's not a lucky timeline.
> 
> I believe that most events, trends, happen not because of the individual, but because of society being primed for those to happen. Putin might be singlehandedly responsible for the war, but the emergence of Putin could happen because of Russia's readiness to produce a Putin. Assassinating a single person rarely achieves the unpriming effect we are all longing for.



You have absolutely no way of knowing that, yet present it as fact. Defending the likes of Hitler, Putin and Hussein as better than an alternative you can't present is hardly a convincing argument.

BTW like it or not we're already involved in this war, we just don't have boots on the ground yet. Here are some stats on the polling data around what people think of further involving ourselves into it.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500894539304902659/


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Right, if it doesn't affect me directly locally in my backyard then turn a blind eye. Got it.



When was the last time you told someone how to raise their kids, or treat their loved ones even if you disagreed? Based on this logic, you continuously should do that without weighing your decisions.



Eric said:


> You have absolutely no way of knowing that, yet present it as fact. Defending the likes of Hitler, Putin and Hussein as better than an alternative you can't present is hardly a convincing argument.



This illogical. If the present is the only fact then the outcome of an imaginary assassination of Hitler should be treated as fantasy too.



Eric said:


> BTW like it or not we're already involved in this war, we just don't have boots on the ground yet.



And I've not seen anybody saying we should unconditionally avoid having boots on the ground.



Eric said:


> Here are some stats on the polling data around what people think of further involving ourselves into it.



That poll is from Feb 26 to March 1st. It really depends on whether it was explained what a no fly zone means... Because I suspect most people don't know it doesn't only mean sending fighter jets in, it also involves destroying Russian anti-air missile systems that threaten the zone and then at least intercepting, but more like shooting down any hostile planes in the zone. I personally wasn't aware of the anti-air defense action part, and I suspect most of the people asked a week ago weren't either.

Sauce:


			https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/aa58ig9d3b/econTabReport.pdf


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> The whole "rule of law" is always used when it favors one's talking points. Did the unarmed black man who resisted arrest and was shot and killed as a result because he wasn't following the "rule of law" deserve it? Use conveniently as you see fit.
> 
> If we had a chance to stop Hitler before he murdered 6 million Jews, would that have been acceptable?




Last thing first:  no one knows for sure what twist or turn history would have taken if not for some  particular person or some event seen as precipitated by that person.  It's not as clear-cut as in the proverb:

For the want of a nail the shoe was lost,​For the want of a shoe the horse was lost,​For the want of a horse the rider was lost,​For the want of a rider the battle was lost,​For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost,​And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail.​
Moving on:   It's not right to suggest that the west is not doing enough or not doing anything regarding Putin's unwarranted invasion of Ukraine.   So far we're not crazy enough to try to put up a no fly zone.  That would say  "_to hell with Ukraine,  this is between you and me now. buddy_,"  i.e. between Putin and Biden. No one in right mind wants that escalation. 

So then, what instead?    Yeah, poor old tired "rule of law".   Help without engaging directly.  Don't assassinate, offer to facilitate negotiations, find honest brokers acceptable to Russia --  France, Turkey, Israel, the Vatican...  And meanwhile arm the hell out of the Ukrainians trying to defend their country.  Publicize the facts on the ground as we find and verify them.

We're doing all that... The USA has been moving heaven and earth along with more and more EU and other European countries to try to get Ukraine's defenses bolstered, all without ending up having triggered a wider war via giving Putin an excuse to roll on to wherever else strikes his fancy...   maybe this revanchist wacko would like to go all the way back out to his old KGB era stomping ground in Dresden? 

I'm sure Putin still regards "East Germany" as part of his personal map of the Russian Empire.  What we don't know is how sound of mind Putin really is, and how much support or potential resistance there is for his "project" of roping all of Ukraine back into his sphere of influence.

The USA and NATO have been helping train Ukrainian defense for months now, supplying weapons, talking up sanctions with Europe, engaging in diplomacy up the kazoo with anyone who wants to talk or might have an in with Putin, and also being transparent about intel gathered on what Putin has been up to,   which info Biden has been declassifying a lot of in almost real time.

 All that --and more, e.g. cyberwatchfulness, social media etc,--  and all to the point of waking people up and building interest in presenting Putin with the one thing he didn't figure on, namely a united front from the west and neutral countries all saying "Don't do this, don't figure on this, turn around, this is not how it works now."   

People think of the UN as toothless, and in a way it is, but it SAYS SOMETHING when all but a tiny handful of the world's nations stood up for territorial integrity of Ukraine the other day in the General Assembly vote.   Those delegates can't agree on the time of day but they all understand they don't want some neighbor barging into their turf with intent to acquire it.

So all in all, what has been accomplished regarding Ukraine v Russia so far,  without nukes being launched,  is pretty impressive.  if you ask me.   Is it enough?  No.    It's tragic what's happening now, beyond tragic, and so unnecessary.  But the  USA and Russia are not minor players, we do have a fraught history,  and we both do have nukes and so do some other countries.

The first point is not to use the nukes, not over Ukraine, not over anything.  The idea of a mutally assured destruction counts on no one suddenly deciding they don't care and so going to launch anyway,..​
So the other point is not to make the other guy so angry he forgets the first point.  All we really have there is to remember to act under rule of law.​
Mistakes can be made, are being made right now:  the destruction in Ukraine being wreaked by Putin's doubling-down reaction to his own miscalculation is horrendous.   Human rights violations and war crimes are clearly taking place.   But the one mistake the planet can't absorb is two nuclear-armed powers engaging in nuclear warfare over geopolitical grievances that cannot in fact be resolved by force.   We can't keep Putin from using nuclear weapons but we need to stay clear of being stupid enough to provoke him into going first.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> When was the last time you told someone how to raise their kids, or treat their loved ones even if you disagreed? Based on this logic, you continuously should do that without weighing your decisions.
> 
> 
> This illogical. If the present is the only fact then the outcome of an imaginary assassination of Hitler should be treated as fantasy too.



Okay, most of this is simply nonsensical, as well as the British police analogy which had nothing to do with the point of "rule of law", which was that it's only used when convenient by either side. Otherwise you all would've been defending George Zimmerman when it was all found to be above board and legal.



P_X said:


> And I've not seen anybody saying we should unconditionally avoid having boots on the ground.



We agree here, is this what you meant to say?



P_X said:


> That poll is from Feb 26 to March 1st. It really depends on whether it was explained what a no fly zone means... Because I suspect most people don't know it doesn't only mean sending fighter jets in, it also involves destroying Russian anti-air missile systems that threaten the zone and then at least intercepting, but more like shooting down any hostile planes in the zone. I personally wasn't aware of the anti-air defense action part, and I suspect most of the people asked a week ago weren't either.
> 
> Sauce:
> 
> 
> https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/aa58ig9d3b/econTabReport.pdf



I don't think people are too stupid to understand what it means, the news has been saying it day in and day out. All politicians and NATO have also made it clear. They're just not all people sheltered in Liberal echo chambers.


----------



## Runs For Fun

chengengaun said:


> Initially I did find the idea alluring (even before this was publicly talked about), since there is virtually no way for Putin to exit the situation gracefully and feel secure while not in power. However, I had to dismiss the idea upon further thought. Besides rule-of-law issues, the ensuing chaos and power struggle will probably be terrible - and the consequences unimaginable given Russia's nuclear capabilities. Someone who craves power may point to Ukraine and galvanise the Russian population to unite behind him/her and launch an all-out war (if it is not one already). And it will not solve the underlying cause which enabled Putin to rise to power; the institutions of oligarchy and 'mutual assistance/protection' will still be in place.
> 
> In any case, history taught us that removing a government/leadership is relatively straightforward; dealing with the aftermath and rebuilding a country is not.
> 
> p/s: I posed a question to _The Economist_ panel last Friday - what will happen _if_ Putin is indeed assassinated? It was not taken up probably due to lack of time, but will be interested to see what they think of it.



I had the same thoughts as well initially. However I have since changed my stance.


----------



## Eric

chengengaun said:


> Initially I did find the idea alluring (even before this was publicly talked about), since there is virtually no way for Putin to exit the situation gracefully and feel secure while not in power. However, I had to dismiss the idea upon further thought. Besides rule-of-law issues, the ensuing chaos and power struggle will probably be terrible - and the consequences unimaginable given Russia's nuclear capabilities. Someone who craves power may point to Ukraine and galvanise the Russian population to unite behind him/her and launch an all-out war (if it is not one already). And it will not solve the underlying cause which enabled Putin to rise to power; the institutions of oligarchy and 'mutual assistance/protection' will still be in place.
> 
> *In any case, history taught us that removing a government/leadership is relatively straightforward; dealing with the aftermath and rebuilding a country is not.*
> 
> p/s: I posed a question to _The Economist_ panel last Friday - what will happen _if_ Putin is indeed assassinated? It was not taken up probably due to lack of time, but will be interested to see what they think of it.



If the atrocities are great, I'm of the opinion you cut the head off the monster. Even knowing what we know now, to say taking out Hitler would've been a bad idea because someone else may have killed 6 million Jews anyway is insane.

One thing is clear, Putin has a lot of people shaking in their boots and they want to capitulate and placate him, whether it's Liberals on social media or Fox News pundits, partisans seem to want the same thing.

Zelensky is the only one with any real backbone while we all sit here in our comfy homes bitching about how we should not help them as we watch their people being slaughtered in the streets every day on the nightly news.


----------



## JayMysteri0

It maybe comforting to think of the Russians who are not for the war, but there are those who do support what's going on in Ukraine.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500917263289008131/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501019219755876357/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501017431057313792/


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Okay, most of this is simply nonsensical, as well as the British police analogy which had nothing to do with the point of "rule of law", which was that it's only used when convenient by either side. Otherwise you all would've been defending George Zimmerman when it was all found to be above board and legal.



Thin is the line between bully and savior. Rittenhouse was also thinking he was doing the right thing. 
The british police analogy, is that the British cannot fix policing issues of the USA. You can't fix the root cause of others' issues based on your own outsider perception. Otherwise Afghanistan would be a functional democracy. 


Eric said:


> We agree here, is this what you meant to say?



Yes. Just chill



Eric said:


> I don't think people are too stupid to understand what it means, the news has been saying it day in and day out. All politicians and NATO have also made it clear. They're just not all people sheltered in Liberal echo chambers.



Well, then I'm apparently less informed and dumber than the average. Nobody's perfect, I guess.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Zelensky is the only one with any real backbone while we all sit here in our comfy homes bitching about how we should not help them as we watch their people being slaughtered in the streets every day on the nightly news.




I think this is what you're looking for:








						Instruction for foreigners on how to join International Legion to fight for Ukraine
					






					visitukraine.today
				




Keep us posted about the situation in Ukraine once you landed. Otherwise this is just a lot of talk.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> Well, then I'm apparently less informed and dumber than the average. Nobody's perfect, I guess.



Perfectly said, glad we can agree on something.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Perfectly said, glad we can agree on something.



This is getting petty, @Eric. You're better than this...


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> I think this is what you're looking for:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Instruction for foreigners on how to join International Legion to fight for Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> visitukraine.today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep us posted about the situation in Ukraine once you landed. Otherwise this is just a lot of talk.



STFU with that stupid trope, you guys can't argue your points clearly and keep reverting back to this stupid talking point.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> This is getting petty, @Eric. You're better than this...



Too bad you aren't.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> STFU with that stupid trope, you guys can't argue your points clearly and keep reverting back to this stupid talking point.



Let's summarize it. You claim moral superiority by saying we should support escalation no matter what the human cost, but are also not willing to give your own life for said superiority. Your insults saved 0 lives today, but at least you'll get to sleep feeling like you did something. Congrats.


----------



## quagmire

I miss PRSI…. Those were the days where things were civil…..


----------



## User.45

quagmire said:


> I miss PRSI…. Those were the days where things were civil…..



Touché


----------



## SuperMatt

Interesting video about the failures of Russian logistics.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> Let's summarize it. You claim moral superiority by saying we should support escalation no matter what the human cost, but are also not willing to give your own life for said superiority. Your insults saved 0 lives today, but at least you'll get to sleep feeling like you did something. Congrats.



I don't claim moral authority, I would like to see the people of Ukraine being defended. You just see that as me being a warmonger and then make childish talking points about those who disagree should all go fight the war themselves. Have you not seen some of the unjust causes we've sent people to war over? This is NOT one of them.

And when it comes to moral authority you have no room to talk, every other post you make is smug and snobbish. You like to talk down at people rather than to them, maybe you just don't realize it but you're also regularly insulting to others.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> I don't claim moral authority, I would like to see the people of Ukraine being defended. You just see that as me being a warmonger and then make childish talking points about those who disagree should all go fight the war themselves.



No, what I see is that you want this conflict to hastily go where it is likely going to go. What I hope for is not having to go there. Simple as that.



Eric said:


> Have you not seen some of the unjust causes we've sent people to war over? This is NOT one of them.



We agree about this.



Eric said:


> And when it comes to moral authority you have no room to talk, every other post you make is smug and snobbish.



The thing is, I don't claim moral superiority. I do have one principle. I don't demand others to do things I am not willing to do myself.


Eric said:


> You like to talk down at people rather than to them, maybe you just don't realize it but you're also regularly insulting to others.



If you want me to leave this forum, just say it and I'll leave. Let me know.


----------



## Yoused

I think we may be experiencing short tempers here because this situation is infuriating and frustrating, so we end up nipping at each other.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> If you want me to leave this forum, just say it and I'll leave. Let me know.



Absolutely not, you're free to do what you want but I won't be asking you to leave. I've said from the start things will get heated here. It's one issue and we clearly don't agree, it is what it is.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Absolutely not, you're free to do what you want but I won't be asking you to leave. I've said from the start things will get heated here. It's one issue and we clearly don't agree, it is what it is.



I'll sleep on it. I suggest you do the same.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> As far as how should we respond I'm split, I never like to see the slaughter of innocent people and that will likely happen here. I also think we don't need to be sticking our nose into every war out there and need to stop playing world police. In the end we have no real interests there and humans aren't as important as oil or we would've had troops en masse there months ago.



Our feelings change more often than we realize. I read back a couple of my early posts before the invasion and I was previously more hawkish on sending troops into Ukraine. I hadn’t thought through the fact that it could possibly lead to nuclear war, so I have changed my feelings on that now. I can see your feelings changed from 50/50 not wanting to interfere, to strong support of America and other nations stepping in. I can understand why, after seeing the civilians being killed by the Russian Army.

I recall right after 9/11, I was extremely angry and would have supported basically any action against any group of people I thought was in any way responsible, so I get where you’re coming from.

I want America to do the most it possibly can to help, without risking full-out war with Russia, which could be disastrous for the entire world.


----------



## quagmire

Eric said:


> Absolutely not, you're free to do what you want but I won't be asking you to leave. I've said from the start things will get heated here. It's one issue and we clearly don't agree, it is what it is.




And yet we are being accused of loving Putin for simply disagreeing with your view. 

This isn’t just about disagreeing on views anymore. 

I will not partake in this thread any further because it has lost civility.


----------



## Yoused

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500886251154685954/


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> I'll sleep on it. I suggest you do the same.



Take your own suggestions. I'm good.



quagmire said:


> And yet we are being accused of loving Putin for simply disagreeing with your view.
> 
> This isn’t just about disagreeing on views anymore.
> 
> I will not partake in this thread any further because it has lost civility.



You don't agree, you can't handle it, and if you're walking away then it's your call.


----------



## Eric

Those participating in this thread clearly do not want dissenting opinions, it's also the reason most Republicans won't touch this site with a 10 ft pole. However, if you want to start a new thread on this I'll close this one up and stay out of it going forward. I'll let you guys decide.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500886251154685954/




Tell ya what,  Putin has inadvertently but totally galvanized Ukrainians in the western provinces.  They all know they're_* Ukrainians. *_

Even now there are demonstrations of thousands of Ukrainians in the occupied cities.  They want the occupiers to go home. even as Russia still struggles with the logistics needed to support its effort to take control of Ukraine's municipal and central governments.

The Ukrainians will make Russia's experience in Afghanistan look like tryouts for junior varsity badminton,  if Putin decides to prolong presence in Ukraine to ensure safety of any puppet governments he tries to install.

And, the eight year slog the Russian-backed insurgents have had in the eastern provinces are nothing to what will go on in the west of the country in terms of resistance to Putin's efforts.   It could go on for decades, or longer.  Ukrainians did not provoke this invasion. And in the western part of Ukraine they are not bedeviled with tribal issues (as was and is the case in Afghanistan). By that I mean that they elected a central government they had actually wanted,  and it was making decisions on their behalf and with their approval.   They will not forgive this incursion and attempt at a takeover by Russia.

Russia should sit down and negotiate a way to go home real soon now,  with some duly signed paperwork that says OK Ukraine won't stick east-facing missile launchers smack on its easternmost border,  and Russia won't ever stop by for tea again without being invited.

Of course that would be too simple.



Eric said:


> Those participating in this thread clearly do not want dissenting opinions, it's also the reason most Republicans won't touch this site with a 10 ft pole. However, if you want to start a new thread on this I'll close this one up and stay out of it going forward. I'll let you guys decide.




Geez.  I don't actually get that vibe off this thread at all.     Maybe sleep on it... ?

EDIT:    also,   expressing dissent from someone else's post is not the same thing as not wanting dissent in a thread.


----------



## Yoused

If we cannot even manage to discuss this without fighting bitterly amongst ourselves, it just goes to show how incredibly adept Vladdy is at sowing discord and division. This is a battle we absolutely must not let him win.


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> If we cannot even manage to discuss this without fighting bitterly amongst ourselves, it just goes to show how incredibly adept Vladdy is at sowing discord and division. This is a battle we absolutely must not let him win.



We allow him to do it because everyone refuses to confront him, he's a corrupt piece of shit dictator who needs to be put down but instead we'll all protect him and let him kill anyone he wants with no consequences.

The latest...









						Russian soldiers murder volunteers helping starving animals near Kyiv
					

At noon on March 4, an SUV drove through the streets of Bucha, formerly a cozy green town near Kyiv, now a hotspot of Russia’s war against Ukraine.Three people were in the car: Serhiy Ustymenko, 25, a co-founder of a




					kyivindependent.com
				




Russian soldiers murder volunteers helping starving animals near Kyiv​







> At noon on March 4, an SUV drove through the streets of Bucha, formerly a cozy green town near Kyiv, now a hotspot of Russia’s war against Ukraine.
> 
> Three people were in the car: Serhiy Ustymenko, 25, a co-founder of a car repair shop, Maxym Kuzmenko, 28, a hookah server, and Anastasia Yalanska, 26, a lead recruiter at an IT company.
> 
> Bucha was and remains a dangerous place, now largely controlled by Russian forces. The three young Ukrainians were there on an important mission.
> 
> They had just delivered dog food to a dog shelter that had run out of it and were on their way back to pick up Ustymenko’s parents.
> 
> They had just nearly made it home. As the car was approaching their house, there was a deafening sound.
> 
> A Russian vehicle – witnesses identify it as either a tank or an infantry fighting vehicle – opened fire on the car.
> 
> Valeriy Ustymenko, the father of Serhiy, witnessed the attack. He saw the car be ripped apart, with his son in it.
> 
> When the shooting stopped, he ran to the car. Everyone inside was already dead.
> 
> He dragged out the three bodies and took them to his basement, where he has been hiding from the constant shelling, like most people in Bucha.
> 
> Three days later, the bodies are still there. Due to constant shelling, they can’t be buried. Their friends and families can’t say goodbye to their loved ones.
> 
> Ustymenko’s father is still in the basement, hiding from the shelling, with the bodies of his son and his son’s two friends.
> 
> There was no way that Russians didn’t know they were shooting at civilians, the victims’ friends say.
> 
> “The car was (obviously) civilian,” said Dmytro Zubkov, a friend of Maxym Kuzmenko. “Maxym was wearing a hat with a pom pom. They didn’t look like the military at all.”


----------



## MEJHarrison

Eric said:


> We allow him to do it because everyone refuses to confront him, he's a corrupt piece of shit dictator who needs to be put down but instead we'll all protect him and let him kill anyone he wants with no consequences.




Just to be clear, I have no desire, strong or otherwise, in seeing Putin having a nice retirement.  I suspect many here aren't rooting for that either.

I like to say "you do the right thing because it's the right thing to do".  As much as my heart likes your line of thinking, my brain doesn't.  Killing him might stop the current situation, or it might not.  My gut thinks the chances are low, but I can't predict the future.  I have to trust that those in charge of making such decisions know a lot more about those things than I do.

If you think we do the "right thing" regardless of the cost, then deal with the consequences afterwards, I'll respect that.  But it's not a position I can agree with.  I think the "right thing" in this case is to not risk turning this into something much bigger and even more deadly than what we're already seeing.  Maybe I'm wrong.  At the end of the day it doesn't really matter.  As much as you used the word "we", "we" are actually quite powerless to do anything more than share opinions online.


----------



## Zoidberg

I’m all for getting rid of Putin (and the sooner the better) but it has to come from the Russians themselves as is tradition. Right now anything else would end up poorly for everyone involved.


----------



## Zoidberg

So I did some googling, and believe it or not, it turns out that bickering on forums and playing armchair geopolitics does little to help people in need. So I did some more googling, and I compiled some links to actually help (they all come from official Ukraine government channels or well established charities).

Unless you live next to the Ukrainian border, one of the best ways to help is by donating cash through trusted charities and aid organisations, rather than donating goods. Cash can be transferred quickly to areas where it is needed and individuals and aid organisations can use it to buy what is most needed. All the charities agree:

_*Unsolicited donations of goods, although well-meant, 
can obstruct supply chains and delay more urgent life-saving assistance from getting through.*_​
_(I've put some stuff in quotes to make it easier to collapse and read):_

*UKRAINE'S OFFICIAL ARMED FORCES FUND:*
This is the link to the actual Bank of Ukraine website, and money donated there will go directly to their fund for the Ukrainian armed forces. _Short of going to Ukraine and grabbing a rifle, this is the best way to help directly in the fight:_








						NBU Opens Special Account to Raise Funds for Ukraine’s Armed Forces (updated)
					

The National Bank of Ukraine has decided to open a special fundraising account to support the Armed Forces of Ukraine.    The central bank’s decision comes after the Ukrainian gove...




					bank.gov.ua
				




The fund also takes cryptocurrencies now, so if you have some laying around, you can put them to good use by sending it here:


> *BTC*
> _357a3So9CbsNfBBgFYACGvxxS6tMaDoa1P_
> *ETH and USDT (ERC-20):*
> _0x165CD37b4C644C2921454429E7F9358d18A45e14_
> *Polkadot:*
> _1x8aa2N2Ar9SQweJv9vsuZn3WYDHu7gMQu1RePjZuBe33Hv_




That said, it's important to note that unless you're a very generous millionaire, Western countries are already helping Ukraine's armed forces with hundreds of millions of dollars, so your contributions might be put to better use if you help other smaller organisations directly:

*Verified charities via the Washington Post:*


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/27/how-to-help-ukraine/
		


*Housing:*
People fleeing Ukraine are at the worst point in their lives having lost everything, so if you can, please sign up to host them here: https://www.ukrainetakeshelter.com/ or even better, by contacting your closest Ukrainian consulate (*not* embassy) who might have a program already set up and offering your help.

*Paramedic assistance:*
This is for the Ukrainian Hospitaller corps, they've been active since 2014. As it often happens these days, their main website is a facebook page, but they have been endorsed by official channels, so if you want your money to go to them, use these links.

For Americans who want to send USD:


> BENEFICIARY
> FEDIANOVYCH HANNA VITALIIVNA
> 13 Zakhidna Str., Pavlohrad, 51400, Pavlohradskyi district, Dnipropetrovsk region, Ukraine.
> IBAN:
> UA973052990262086400928825287
> ACCOUNT
> 4149 4993 9795 0427
> BANK OF BENEFICIARY
> JSC CB PRIVATBANK, 1D HRUSHEVSKOHO STR., KYIV, 01001, UKRAINE
> SWIFT CODE/BIC:
> PBANUA2X
> CORRESPONDENT ACCOUNT
> 0011000080
> INTERMEDIARY BANK
> JP MORGAN CHASE BANK
> SWIFT CODE/BIC: CHASUS33



For Europeans who want to send EURO:


> BENEFICIARY
> FEDIANOVYCH HANNA VITALIIVNA
> 13 Zakhidna Str., Pavlohrad, 51400, Pavlohradskyi district, Dnipropetrovsk region, Ukraine.
> IBAN:
> UA323052990262006400928825801
> ACCOUNT
> 5168 7451 2080 1474
> BANK OF BENEFICIARY
> JSC CB PRIVATBANK, 1D HRUSHEVSKOHO STR., KYIV, 01001, UKRAINE
> SWIFT CODE/BIC:
> PBANUA2X
> CORRESPONDENT ACCOUNT
> 623-160-5145
> INTERMEDIARY BANK
> J.P.MORGAN AG, FRANKFURT AM MAIN, GERMANY
> SWIFT CODE/BIC: CHASDEFX


----------



## chengengaun

Zoidberg said:


> So I did some googling, and believe it or not, it turns out that bickering on forums and playing armchair geopolitics does little to help people in need. So I did some more googling, and I compiled some links to actually help (they all come from official Ukraine government channels or well established charities).



Another thing that can help is to take higher prices resulting from sanctions in its strides - consume less, or maybe do without and donate more.



Zoidberg said:


> Unless you live next to the Ukrainian border, one of the best ways to help is by donating cash through trusted charities and aid organisations, rather than donating goods.



I guess the same logic can be applied to those who tried to go there and fight or help: unless one is well trained and well supplied (the latter is highly doubtful), it is more likely to be do more harm than be helpful.









						More harm than good? The questionable ethics of medical volunteering and international student placements - Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines
					

It has been argued that much of international medical volunteering is done for the wrong reasons, in that local people serve as a means to meet volunteers’ needs, or for the right reasons but ignorance and ill-preparedness harm the intended beneficiaries, often without volunteers’ grasp of the...




					tdtmvjournal.biomedcentral.com
				






> Disaster aid responds to an unexpected and immediate need for medical aid for large numbers of people due to natural disasters and is, therefore, in certain aspects different from mainstream medical volunteering. Numerous ‘lessons learned’ accounts convey not only specialty-related experiences and harmful consequences of aid attempts, such as medical errors, the impossible follow-up of cases and staff distress. They also highlight repeatedly the importance of organisation, cooperation, and logistics, and the difficulties faced by the enormous influx of well-meaning unsolicited help hampering relief efforts. As a consequence, there are frequent calls for a much better preparation and preparedness in terms of global health training and within one’s profession, as well as ongoing support pre, during and post deployment. In a similar way, medical aid in war zones, though often longer term, also deals with large numbers of civilians and combatants in an unsafe environment and under challenging work conditions – probably better organised by selected organisations but staff are faced with similar issues.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Those participating in this thread clearly do not want dissenting opinions, it's also the reason most Republicans won't touch this site with a 10 ft pole. However, if you want to start a new thread on this I'll close this one up and stay out of it going forward. I'll let you guys decide.



Let's hear your reasoning about how this poll supports your statements about people understanding no-fly zones:









source:


			https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/aa58ig9d3b/econTabReport.pdf
		


FYI, third of the responders even stated they've not heard at all or just little about the conflict.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

We are in this awful situation where our countries have to sit and watch Ukraine be attacked and civilians slaughtered by an army/country that has no respect for the Geneva convention. We are already on dangerous ground with sanctions as Putin is declaring any form of interference with the Russian economy as an act of war. If we attempt any form of military involvement, it’s clear Putin is not going to constrain the conflict to the arena of battle but to the civilians of the countries should any country get involved. I don’t think Putin is worried about ending the World to be honest and has as much respect for his own people as he does for any other nations. 

I really have no idea how this ends but am very worried about my children futures.


----------



## User.45

In the meantime:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501071619439087617/

It also appears that Russian Warship got fukt too:




__





						12ft |
					






					12ft.io
				





> The Ukrainian military appears to have severely damaged one of the two warships that attacked Snake Island.
> 
> A video shared by the Ukrainian navy on Monday showed what appears to be a night-time firefight, with rockets flaming across a dark sky. The rocket exchange is followed by the sound of two men trying to work out whether they hit the ship.


----------



## Zoidberg

P_X said:


> In the meantime:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501071619439087617/
> 
> It also appears that Russian Warship got fukt too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12ft |
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12ft.io



Apparently the Russian military has been forced to use regular non-secure communications in some areas because the first thing they did was blow up 3G and 4G towers... which their own encrypted communication system relies on 

Also an unconfirmed report of between 30 (!) and 45 (!!) helicopters destroyed by artillery overnight as they were neatly parked on an airfield.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> The problem is you completely stooped to _ad hominem_ attacks rather than engaging in reasoning.



You need to get off these digs, keep it up and I'll remove you from the thread.


----------



## Arkitect

P_X said:


> In the meantime:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501071619439087617/
> 
> It also appears that Russian Warship got fukt too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12ft |
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12ft.io






Zoidberg said:


> Apparently the Russian military has been forced to use regular non-secure communications in some areas because the first thing they did was blow up 3G and 4G towers... which their own encrypted communication system relies on
> 
> Also an unconfirmed report of between 30 (!) and 45 (!!) helicopters destroyed by artillery overnight as they were neatly parked on an airfield.




Not making light of the situation, but I wonder if this isn't Putin's plan:

1. Crimea
2. Ukraine
3. ????
4. PROFIT!!!

Anyway. I think the dangerous thing is Putin is losing face and "respect" for all to see.

The Russian military are apparently great at doing march pasts in Red Square but not much good at fighting, especially facing a determined population.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> Those participating in this thread clearly do not want dissenting opinions, it's also the reason most Republicans won't touch this site with a 10 ft pole. However, if you want to start a new thread on this I'll close this one up and stay out of it going forward. I'll let you guys decide.



To my mind, there is no reason whatsoever to shut this thread down.

The padlock is an all too easy way out.

However, there are many reasons to treat dissenting opinions with respect, - not least here, given precisely why this platform, or site, was set up in the first place - and there are many reasons, also, not to make the mistake of confusing the argument with the person who is making the argument.

One can challenge the argument without belittling or denigrating the person who has made it.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> Not making light of the situation, but I wonder if this isn't Putin's plan:
> 
> 1. Crimea
> 2. Ukraine
> 3. ????
> 4. PROFIT!!!
> 
> Anyway. I think the dangerous thing is Putin is losing face and "respect" for all to see.
> 
> The Russian military are apparently great at doing march pasts in Red Square but not much good at fighting, especially facing a determined population.



When I was in Georgia, I used to give - deliver - quite a few political briefings; one of the things I looked at was the price of oil.

In summer 2008, - not long before the economic crash, (and entirely coincidentally, not long before Russia's conflict with Georgia, Russia was cocky with confidence, the confidence this cushion gave the country) oil had reached a peak price of $147 per barrel.

The economic crash drove the price (well, drove the demand, hence the price) of oil down, sharply, - it went into freefall - and by the end of the year, oil was trading at around $40 a barrel.

At the time, I recall, from what I had read, that Russia needed oil to be trading at around $80 a barrel to be breaking even.

Bear in mind that in 2008, Russia had the world's second largest reserves of oil (second to Saudi-Arabia) - it has since slipped - and the world's largest reserves of natural gas.

Of course, the irony of this invasion of Ukraine is that Russia's actions have ensured that the west will not just now look elsewhere for energy, - and will seek to find ways to ensure - and guarantee - energy security - but will *permanently* seek alternatives to Russian oil and gas - just as they had sought permanent alternatives to relying on the Middle East after the oil price shocks of 1973.

This will accelerate R&D and government support for green alternatives, and, in the short, medium and long term - cannot but hurt Russia.

For, Russia will be seen as an unreliable trading partner, and there is no worse fate in economic exchanges; even during the worst crises of the Cold War, the oil still flowed, and was never threatened.

The other tragedy - and it is a tragedy, even if a largely self-inflicted one - is that the emerging and growing Russian Middle Class - which took the best part of thirty years to evolve has been more or less destroyed and decimated in not much more than a week.

For anyone who hopes for a stable, vaguely democratic, at least vaguely progressive, Russia, this is also a real tragedy.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> You need to get off these digs, keep it up and I'll remove you from the thread.



Edited my post because I want to see your actual reasoning. It's your turn.


----------



## Cmaier

P_X said:


> Let's hear your reasoning about how this poll supports your statements about people understanding no-fly zones:
> 
> View attachment 12296
> 
> View attachment 12297
> 
> source:
> 
> 
> https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/aa58ig9d3b/econTabReport.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, third of the responders even stated they've not heard at all or just little about the conflict.




What is this showing us? I may have missed the predicate for this, but I’m not seeing how air strikes on russia (i.e. bombing Russian soil) is related to enforcing a no-fly zone over Ukraine.


----------



## User.45

Cmaier said:


> What is this showing us? I may have missed the predicate for this, but I’m not seeing how air strikes on russia (i.e. bombing Russian soil) is related to enforcing a no-fly zone over Ukraine.



The points are the following:
1. A poll was used as reference to indicate widespread support of No-Fly zones
2. To establish a no-fly zone, you have to take out Russian ground-to-air defense systems that threaten the Ukrainian airspace, ergo "Conduct air strikes on Russia". 
3. I made the assumption that most responders are similarly poorly informed about the specifics of a no-fly zone operation as I was, which led to me called certain things, which you can find above.

For reference on no-fly zones, from Admiral Foggo on NPR:


> FOGGO: Well, yes, I think everybody's worried about that. And the biggest concern in the last few days was President Zelenskyy's request for a no-fly zone. Everybody was worried about that because, first of all, Putin said that a no-fly zone would be an act of war. You know, I know a little bit about no-fly zones, having participated in one down in the Libya campaign, and there's two aspects to it.* One, you just can't establish it and say it's in effect. You have to go in and take out any enemy air defenses that could possibly threaten NATO or U.S. or, you know, Ukrainian aircraft. That's one. So you're going to put a missile on top of a Russian launcher and kill Russians. No. 2 is you're going to take out enemy aircraft in the sky. *And again, that could be NATO, U.S. or Ukrainians downing Russian aircraft. That would lead to provocation and altercation between NATO and the United States and Russia that would lead to World War III.











						Russia's military is now encircling several Ukrainian cities
					

NPR's Rachel Martin talks to retired Admiral James Foggo, who commanded U.S. Naval forces for Europe and Africa, about what Russian forces have been doing, and what their next moves might be.




					www.npr.org


----------



## Cmaier

P_X said:


> The points are the following:
> 1. A poll was used as reference to indicate widespread support of No-Fly zones
> 2. To establish a no-fly zone, you have to take out Russian ground-to-air defense systems that threaten the Ukrainian airspace, ergo "Conduct air strikes on Russia".
> 3. I made the assumption that most responders are similarly poorly informed about the specifics of a no-fly zone operation as I was, which led to me called certain things, which you can find above.
> 
> For reference on no-fly zones, from Admiral Foggo on NPR:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia's military is now encircling several Ukrainian cities
> 
> 
> NPR's Rachel Martin talks to retired Admiral James Foggo, who commanded U.S. Naval forces for Europe and Africa, about what Russian forces have been doing, and what their next moves might be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org




I would imagine that most people think “air strikes on russia” does not include “take out SAMs in Ukraine,” so I wouldn’t draw much of a conclusion from that poll question.  Ukraine is not Russia. And Russia is not Russians.  If the question asked “do you think we should attack russian assets in Ukraine to enforce a no-fly zone” you’d have a point, but that’s not what the question asks, and the question, as asked, would not, to most people, include what you’re envisioning.


----------



## User.45

Cmaier said:


> the question, as asked, would not, to most people, include what you’re envisioning.



That's my point. You can't rely on a poll like this when you don't query how much the responders understand crucial details of the question. There's plenty of data to provide some idea about how people feel about a direct confrontation with Russia, like 35F or 35I (specifically only 26% support drone attacks against russian forces 45% consider it a bad idea). You can check out the poll yourself:


			https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/aa58ig9d3b/econTabReport.pdf


----------



## Runs For Fun

Zoidberg said:


> So I did some googling, and believe it or not, it turns out that bickering on forums and playing armchair geopolitics does little to help people in need. So I did some more googling, and I compiled some links to actually help (they all come from official Ukraine government channels or well established charities).
> 
> Unless you live next to the Ukrainian border, one of the best ways to help is by donating cash through trusted charities and aid organisations, rather than donating goods. Cash can be transferred quickly to areas where it is needed and individuals and aid organisations can use it to buy what is most needed. All the charities agree:
> 
> _*Unsolicited donations of goods, although well-meant,
> can obstruct supply chains and delay more urgent life-saving assistance from getting through.*_​
> _(I've put some stuff in quotes to make it easier to collapse and read):_
> 
> *UKRAINE'S OFFICIAL ARMED FORCES FUND:*
> This is the link to the actual Bank of Ukraine website, and money donated there will go directly to their fund for the Ukrainian armed forces. _Short of going to Ukraine and grabbing a rifle, this is the best way to help directly in the fight:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NBU Opens Special Account to Raise Funds for Ukraine’s Armed Forces (updated)
> 
> 
> The National Bank of Ukraine has decided to open a special fundraising account to support the Armed Forces of Ukraine.    The central bank’s decision comes after the Ukrainian gove...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bank.gov.ua
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fund also takes cryptocurrencies now, so if you have some laying around, you can put them to good use by sending it here:
> 
> 
> That said, it's important to note that unless you're a very generous millionaire, Western countries are already helping Ukraine's armed forces with hundreds of millions of dollars, so your contributions might be put to better use if you help other smaller organisations directly:
> 
> *Verified charities via the Washington Post:*
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/27/how-to-help-ukraine/
> 
> 
> 
> *Housing:*
> People fleeing Ukraine are at the worst point in their lives having lost everything, so if you can, please sign up to host them here: https://www.ukrainetakeshelter.com/ or even better, by contacting your closest Ukrainian consulate (*not* embassy) who might have a program already set up and offering your help.
> 
> *Paramedic assistance:*
> This is for the Ukrainian Hospitaller corps, they've been active since 2014. As it often happens these days, their main website is a facebook page, but they have been endorsed by official channels, so if you want your money to go to them, use these links.
> 
> For Americans who want to send USD:
> 
> For Europeans who want to send EURO:



I've been looking for a good place to donate and I just came across the Bank of Ukraine link. I will definitely be making a donation there.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> We allow him to do it because everyone refuses to confront him, he's a corrupt piece of shit dictator who needs to be put down but instead we'll all protect him and let him kill anyone he wants with no consequences.
> 
> The latest...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian soldiers murder volunteers helping starving animals near Kyiv
> 
> 
> At noon on March 4, an SUV drove through the streets of Bucha, formerly a cozy green town near Kyiv, now a hotspot of Russia’s war against Ukraine.Three people were in the car: Serhiy Ustymenko, 25, a co-founder of a
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kyivindependent.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian soldiers murder volunteers helping starving animals near Kyiv​



First principle of combat: if it moves, paint it

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501172186211848199/


----------



## chengengaun

Runs For Fun said:


> I've been looking for a good place to donate and I just came across the Bank of Ukraine link. I will definitely be making a donation there.



There seems to be many initiatives on the ground collecting donations. I donated through the Kyiv School of Economics last week.



			https://kse.ua


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Adding a bit of cynicism to western businesses pulling out of Russia. At least part of it is because with the sanctions they can’t run transactions. So they aren’t able to do business even if they wanted to, but “we stand with Ukraine” is a better cover story.

I predict if sanctions get reduced to the point that they can do business again and well before there is any kind of justice for Ukraine or consensus on Putin’s mental stability, they’ll go right back to doing business in Russia. Not to be US-centric, but remember how corporations said they were going to stop donating to the GOP because of 1/6? Well, that lasted about 5 minutes and they are right back to donating.  You always have to gamble that you might need favors from leadership no matter how insane they might be.


----------



## Thomas Veil

You’re kidding, right?









						Russia calls for return to 'peaceful co-existence' with U.S. like during Cold War -Interfax — Reuters
					

Russia and the United States should return to the principle of \"peaceful co-existence\" like during the Cold War, the Interfax news agency cited the Russian foreign ministry as saying on Tuesday.




					apple.news
				




Yeah, why can’t we just shake hands, pretend nothing happened, and move on?

The idea is as laughable as anything Trump has ever said. There’s no going back from this _unless_ maybe Putin gives himself up to The Hague and the Russians rebuild Ukraine…which would still be cold comfort to the dead.  

You have to wonder what is this guy thinking.


----------



## Runs For Fun

Thomas Veil said:


> You’re kidding, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia calls for return to 'peaceful co-existence' with U.S. like during Cold War -Interfax — Reuters
> 
> 
> Russia and the United States should return to the principle of \"peaceful co-existence\" like during the Cold War, the Interfax news agency cited the Russian foreign ministry as saying on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, why can’t we just shake hands, pretend nothing happened, and move on?
> 
> The idea is as laughable as anything Trump has ever said. There’s no going back from this _unless_ maybe Putin gives himself up to The Hague and the Russians rebuild Ukraine…which would still be cold comfort to the dead.
> 
> You have to wonder what is this guy thinking.



He's not thinking. He's insane.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Thomas Veil said:


> You’re kidding, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia calls for return to 'peaceful co-existence' with U.S. like during Cold War -Interfax — Reuters
> 
> 
> Russia and the United States should return to the principle of \"peaceful co-existence\" like during the Cold War, the Interfax news agency cited the Russian foreign ministry as saying on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, why can’t we just shake hands, pretend nothing happened, and move on?



It probably escaped you that it’s not a peace “proposal”. It’s a threat.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Interesting situation which I am still observing.

The US banned energy import from Russia. It’s a relatively big hit to Russia, however the US doesn’t depend on Russia that much.

However, Europe is in a much different situation:





So most of Europe can’t simply turn off the faucet without expecting a very serious damage to their own economy. This is even more true in some countries, some of which close to Russia geographically.

What if Putin reacts to the US ban on Russian energy with a very severe tariff on energy export to Europe, let’s say 10/15%, while decreasing availability by 10% or so to say “we’ll go back to normal as soon as the US removes the ban.”? That *could* put the US and the EU at serious odds.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Interesting situation which I am still observing.
> 
> The US banned energy import from Russia. It’s a relatively big hit to Russia, however the US doesn’t depend on Russia that much.
> 
> However, Europe is in a much different situation:
> 
> View attachment 12306
> 
> So most of Europe can’t simply turn off the faucet without expecting a very serious damage to their own economy. This is even more true in some countries, some of which close to Russia geographically.
> 
> What if Putin reacts to the US ban on Russian energy with a very severe tariff on energy export to Europe, let’s say 10/15%, while decreasing availability by 10% or so to say “we’ll go back to normal as soon as the US removes the ban.”? That *could* put the US and the EU at serious odds.



I was listening to an interview with Stephen Kotkin yesterday and, yes, part of our (Europe that is) commitment might entail a return to coal and nuclear energy. That is going to be a very bitter pill to swallow… but… what else are we gonna do? 

Of course this is why Germany especially is digging in their heels before throwing all Russian banks from Swift. They need one or two to pay for the gas flow.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Arkitect said:


> I was listening to an interview with Stephen Kotkin yesterday and, yes, part of our (Europe that is) commitment might entail a return to coal and nuclear energy. That is going to be a very bitter pill to swallow… but… what else are we gonna do?



I understand that, but it’s not something that it’s doable in a week, or even a year probably.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> I understand that, but it’s not something that it’s doable in a week, or even a year probably.



Oh, yes, I didn't make that clear.
Of course it is a *long term solution*, never mind that it is a dirty one, but something will have to be done before the next winter rolls around.
Meanwhile Europe will have to sacrifice.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Arkitect said:


> I was listening to an interview with Stephen Kotkin yesterday and, yes, part of our (Europe that is) commitment might entail a return to coal and nuclear energy. That is going to be a very bitter pill to swallow… but… what else are we gonna do?
> 
> Of course this is why Germany especially is digging in their heels before throwing all Russian banks from Swift. They need one or two to pay for the gas flow.



I'd envisage this as a temporary (but, unfortunately, necessary) expedient, and something we will have to persuade Greens (in government and in our electorates) to acquiese in, or tolerate.

It will give us time to diversify, and also time to pour resources into the development of alternative (and Green) sources of energy - I would expect this to be considerably accelerated, viewed as a necessity rather than a luxury - a sort of "dirty umbrella."

Better coal than cold houses.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> I'd envisage this as a temporary (but, unfortunately, necessary) expedient, and something we will have to persuade Greens (in government and in our electorates) to acquiese in, or tolerate.
> 
> It will give us time to diversify, and also time to pour resources into the development of alternative (and Green) sources of energy - I would expect this to be considerably accelerated, viewed as a necessity rather than a luxury - a sort of "dirty umbrella."
> 
> Better coal than cold houses.



In your opinion, what kind of timelines are we talking about ? 5 years to reduce energy dependence from Russia, 7-10yrs to virtually eliminate it?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> In your opinion, what kind of timelines are we talking about ? 5 years to reduce energy dependence from Russia, 7-10yrs to virtually eliminate it?




Such forecasts aren't my forte: I'd imagine that - with almost bottomless (governmental and EU) encouragement, support and resources - research (and testing) of alternative energy sources will be massively accelerated, and - as we saw with vaccines for Covid - may well happen far faster than some forecasts had envisage. 

I would further imagine that such research may well take place on several simultaneous fronts, (wind, solar, tidal, etc) and some may yield unexpected dividends.

Five years?

To be honest, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an enormous reduction within a year, or 18 months, or certainly, two years.

The thing is, by (so openly) threatening Europe's energy supply, the Russians have absolutely guaranteed that Europe will do almost anything to ensure that they are not in thrall to it, and not reliant on it; nothing could have achieved this more rapidly than such overt threats, which - in the long term - will hurt Russia enormously.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Scepticalscribe said:


> Such forecasts aren't my forte: I'd imagine that - with almost bottomless (governmental and EU) encouragement, support and resources - research (and testing) of alternative energy sources will be massively accelerated, and - as we saw with vaccines for Covid - may well happen far faster than some forecasts had envisage.
> 
> I would further imagine that such research may well take place on several simultaneous fronts, (wind, solar, tidal, etc) and some may yield unexpected dividends.
> 
> Five years?
> 
> To be honest, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an enormous reduction within a year, or 18 months, or certainly, two years.



Thanks. 
It’s going to be fascinating to observe what happens in the next few years.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Thanks.
> It’s going to be fascinating to observe what happens in the next few years.




Well, you know the old saying about how war serves to accelerate scientific and technological change - mainly because states need for it to do so?

That is what we will see here in the field of energy; while the Greens will have to accept a reversion to coal (and possibly nuclear energy), they will also have received a boost such as they could never have imagined in terms of official support for reseach into alternative sources of energy.

We are also seeing German postwar defence and military doctrine transformed, the EU strengthened, NATO given the sort of shot in the arm considered unimaginable since the 1990s seemed to have done away with the immediate need for NATO, and - yes - the (hopes, dreams, physical existence of) an emerging Russian middle class decimated, destroyed, and devastated by this invasion.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> Such forecasts aren't my forte: I'd imagine that - with almost bottomless (governmental and EU) encouragement, support and resources - research (and testing) of alternative energy sources will be massively accelerated, and - as we saw with vaccines for Covid - may well happen far faster than some forecasts had envisage.
> 
> I would further imagine that such research may well take place on several simultaneous fronts, (wind, solar, tidal, etc) and some may yield unexpected dividends.
> 
> Five years?
> 
> To be honest, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an enormous reduction within a year, or 18 months, or certainly, two years.
> 
> The thing is, by (so openly) threatening Europe's energy supply, the Russians have absolutely guaranteed that Europe will do almost anything to ensure that they are not in thrall to it, and not reliant on it; nothing could have achieved this more rapidly than such overt threats, which - in the long term - will hurt Russia enormously.



Don't some Northern European countries get all their natural gas from Russia? Seems like that would be very difficult to change quickly.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Don't some Northern European countries get all their natural gas from Russia? Seems like that would be very difficult to change quickly.



I would expect that markets in countries with interesting habits of extraction (fracking, anyone?) may be explored; possible alliances with regimes currently deemed somewhat less unsavoury than Russia (Libya? Iraq? Iran?) may also be viewed with greater equanimity than has been the case until now.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

The other thing to note, is that while Europe's skies are shut to Russian airlines, and Russian aircraft, those of Africa and Asia are not.

Nevertheless, Belarus is the only "foreign" (i.e. international) route currently flown - or operated - by Aeroflot.  

I would have expected that flights would have continued to the countries that abstained on the extraordinary UN vote - India? China? - what used to be considered to be Soviet Central Asia?

It seems to me to be significant that Russian airlines no longer fly *anywhere* in the world (for Belarus hardly counts).


----------



## Arkitect

SuperMatt said:


> Don't some Northern European countries get all their natural gas from Russia? Seems like that would be very difficult to change quickly.



The highest is Hungary with 25%…

See this graph that @yaxomoxay posted here.


----------



## MarkusL

Scepticalscribe said:


> The other thing to note, is that while Europe's skies are shut to Russian airlines, and Russian aircraft, those of Africa and Asia are not.
> 
> Nevertheless, Belarus is the only "foreign" (i.e. international) route currently flown - or operated - by Aeroflot.
> 
> I would have expected that flights would have continued to the countries that abstained on the extraordinary UN vote - India? China? - what used to be considered to be Soviet Central Asia?
> 
> It seems to me to be significant that Russian airlines no longer fly *anywhere* in the world (for Belarus hardly counts).



Russian airlines are leasing a large part of their fleets, just like most airlines around the world. The Russian government has ordered the airlines to keep the leased planes within their borders where they can be held hostage, safe from repossession. They are also rushing through new regulation to allow unaccredited companies to perform maintenance on the planes using homemade or otherwise improperly sourced parts.

If this is implemented those planes will no longer have a continuous maintenance history, and they will become forever illegal to fly and impossible to insure throughout the civilized world. The planes would then be worthless to their owners even if they would be able to repossess them in the future.

The total value of the planes they are preparing to steal is somewhere on the order of $100 billion.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

MarkusL said:


> Russian airlines are leasing a large part of their fleets, just like most airlines around the world. The Russian government has ordered the airlines to keep the leased planes within their borders where they can be held hostage, safe from repossession. They are also rushing through new regulation to allow unaccredited companies to perform maintenance on the planes using homemade or otherwise improperly sourced parts.
> 
> If this is implemented those planes will no longer have a continuous maintenance history, and they will become forever illegal to fly and impossible to insure throughout the civilized world. The planes would then be worthless to their owners even if they would be able to repossess them in the future.
> 
> The total value of the planes they are preparing to steal is somewhere on the order of $100 billion.




Ah: Now, that does make sense.

Thank you.


----------



## SuperMatt

Biden has announced that America will not import any Russian oil or natural gas.

Also, you will not be able to get a Big Mac, Fries, and a Coke in Russia anymore.. nor a coffee from Starbucks.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Saw an article saying gas prices could go up to $8/gallon in California as a result (I can see why Biden did not want to do this).

Gas prices can only go so high before the riots start...


----------



## Cmaier

TBL said:


> Saw an article saying gas prices could go up to $8/gallon in California as a result (I can see why Biden did not want to do this).
> 
> Gas prices can only go so high before the riots start...




What’s “gas?”  Is that like electricity, but for old people? ;-)


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> Saw an article saying gas prices could go up to $8/gallon in California as a result (I can see why Biden did not want to do this).
> 
> Gas prices can only go so high before the riots start...



We're all paying for it one way or the other, with human lives, or goods, either way there's a cost. The shame of it is that the Russian Government doesn't seem to care and those who are getting hurt the most are the citizens of both countries. Maybe it'll piss off the wrong Oligarch enough to slip him a fatal  mickey though.


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> Saw an article saying gas prices could go up to $8/gallon in California as a result (I can see why Biden did not want to do this).
> 
> Gas prices can only go so high before the riots start...



Republicans (and Joe Manchin) vehemently opposed the ”Green New Deal” and any renewable energy initiatives in Build Back Better.

Maybe this will open their eyes a bit. Relying on fossil fuels is not only bad for the environment, but also for national security.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Adding a bit of cynicism to western businesses pulling out of Russia. At least part of it is because with the sanctions they can’t run transactions. So they aren’t able to do business even if they wanted to, but “we stand with Ukraine” is a better cover story.
> 
> I predict if sanctions get reduced to the point that they can do business again and well before there is any kind of justice for Ukraine or consensus on Putin’s mental stability, they’ll go right back to doing business in Russia. Not to be US-centric, but remember how corporations said they were going to stop donating to the GOP because of 1/6? Well, that lasted about 5 minutes and they are right back to donating.  You always have to gamble that you might need favors from leadership no matter how insane they might be.



The other gamble is that people will remember stuff for about five minutes too.   Sometimes true and other times not so much.


----------



## lizkat

SuperMatt said:


> Republicans (and Joe Manchin) vehemently opposed the ”Green New Deal” and any renewable energy initiatives in Build Back Better.
> 
> Maybe this will open their eyes a bit. Relying on fossil fuels is not only bad for the environment, but also for national security.




Yeah but unfortunately the GOP talking point there is likely to be "see we told ya that all those blue states putting a moratorium on fracking (and/or pipeline extensions) were all wrong".

So sick of the refusal to leave even one barrel of oil in the damn ground...  even with all we know now, and even with all the alternatives to a lot of petrol-based items that we do have now but which so many corporations and consumers have declined to adopt.

We need better pitches for the alternatives, since clearly it's not sinking in that we can't afford to dig up and use all the remaining dead dinosaurs or we'll hasten the day the planet calls Game Over for life on earth.


----------



## Yoused

Early on, a Russian ship approaches Snake Island and tells them to surrender, Ukrainian soldiers reply "_Russian ship, GFY!_" the ship promptly lobs some shells killing the Ukrainians.









						A Russian warship that attacked Snake Island, where Ukrainian soldiers cursed out invaders, has reportedly been destroyed
					

A military-intelligence group told The Times that the Vasily Bykov was one of two ships that attacked Ukraine's Snake Island last month.




					www.businessinsider.com
				




It appears that desserts have been served, justly.


----------



## MEJHarrison

SuperMatt said:


> Republicans (and Joe Manchin) vehemently opposed the ”Green New Deal” and any renewable energy initiatives in Build Back Better.
> 
> Maybe this will open their eyes a bit. Relying on fossil fuels is not only bad for the environment, but also for national security.




They won't care.  It's my understand the Department of Defense said as much several years back.  Rather than try to recall what I heard weeks ago, let me find that video...

This is from 2019 (and it's an upside-down Curious George video as well which is a clue that he's being satirical or there's a big twist coming).  The Army figured out the national security bit years ago.


----------



## Skunk

Yoused said:


> Early on, a Russian ship approaches Snake Island and tells them to surrender, Ukrainian soldiers reply "_Russian ship, GFY!_" the ship promptly lobs some shells killing the Ukrainians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Russian warship that attacked Snake Island, where Ukrainian soldiers cursed out invaders, has reportedly been destroyed
> 
> 
> A military-intelligence group told The Times that the Vasily Bykov was one of two ships that attacked Ukraine's Snake Island last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It appears that desserts have been served, justly.



Except that the dead Ukrainians appear to have magically reappeared.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> Yeah but unfortunately the GOP talking point there is likely to be "see we told ya that all those blue states putting a moratorium on fracking (and/or pipeline extensions) were all wrong".
> 
> So sick of the refusal to leave even one barrel of oil in the damn ground...  even with all we know now, and even with all the alternatives to a lot of petrol-based items that we do have now but which so many corporations and consumers have declined to adopt.
> 
> We need better pitches for the alternatives, since clearly it's not sinking in that we can't afford to dig up and use all the remaining dead dinosaurs or we'll hasten the day the planet calls Game Over for life on earth.



$5 a gallon gas is a great advertisement for an electric car. Hopefully the greed of the oil companies, which is leading them to keep production low in hopes of a windfall profit, will be their downfall.


----------



## Thomas Veil

yaxomoxay said:


> It probably escaped you that it’s not a peace “proposal”. It’s a threat.



Perhaps. It's hard to infer the intent of such a brief statement. I took it as more propaganda trying to make themselves sound like the reasonable ones. If it's a threat, it indicates they don't know us very well.



TBL said:


> Saw an article saying gas prices could go up to $8/gallon in California as a result (I can see why Biden did not want to do this).
> 
> Gas prices can only go so high before the riots start...



I was extremely surprised to see this earlier today.









						7 in 10 Americans polled support ban on Russian oil even if higher prices result
					

More than 70 percent of Americans surveyed in a new poll say the Biden administration should ban Russian oil over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, even if it leads to higher gas p…




					thehill.com
				






> More than 70 percent of Americans surveyed in a new poll say the Biden administration should ban Russian oil over Moscow's invasion of Ukraine, even if it leads to higher gas prices in the U.S.
> 
> The Quinnipiac poll found that 71 percent of respondents supported a ban on Russian oil, including 66 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of Democrats.



And yes, you'd be right to say that we'll see how long that righteous attitude lasts. I've no illusions about Americans' ability to hold the moral high ground for more than, oh, fifteen minutes.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Thomas Veil said:


> ......
> 
> And yes, you'd be right to say that we'll see how long that righteous attitude lasts. I've no illusions about Americans' ability to hold the moral high ground for more than, oh, fifteen minutes.




I suspect the oil companies are hoping it'll hold a bit longer than you suggest.........there are extra profits to be made while the public tolerates higher prices cuz of those Russians!


----------



## Yoused

Skunk said:


> Except that the dead Ukrainians appear to have magically reappeared.



Huh. Does the "Z" on the Russian vehicles mean that they think they are going up against зомбие?


----------



## Yoused

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1501288850055995396/


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Huh. Does the "Z" on the Russian vehicles mean that they think they are going up against зомбие?




Whatever they thought it meant, it's not working well enough to resolve their logistics problems.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Plus they dont have to pay taxes on their gains.


----------



## chengengaun

TBL said:


> Saw an article saying gas prices could go up to $8/gallon in California as a result



Gas (petrol) prices are usually around US$7-8 per gallon here in Singapore - it's expensive, but bearable. I hope higher prices will accelerate transition to cleaner energy and may indirectly bring prices down in other areas (e.g. less air pollution leading to lower healthcare spending).

p/s: I have not considered the importance of private transportation in the US - where cars are much more essential to commuting.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> I would expect that markets in countries with interesting habits of extraction (fracking, anyone?) may be explored; possible alliances with regimes currently deemed somewhat less unsavoury than Russia (Libya? Iraq? Iran?) may also be viewed with greater equanimity than has been the case until now.



you can add the US and Canada to your list of countries where fracking will expand....they might qualify as places where current regimes may be currently deemed somewhat less unsavory than Russia  

my recollection is that in the US, fracking shale becomes profitable with prices around $50 to $60 per barrel. Production had been below capacity fairly recently, so the oil companies should be able to easily increase their production......and sell it at highly profitable prices


----------



## Zoidberg

A few days ago a letter from a whistleblower in the FSB was published. I haven't seen it posted here, so it's worth sharing. Bellingcat has given it a high reliability and being Bellingcat, that's saying something (they are the ones who identified the Salisbury Russian assassins, traced the BUK that downed MH17, and so on).

Edit: I replaced the text with a better translation



> I have hardly slept at all these days, at work at almost all times, I have brain-fog. Maybe from overworking, but I feel like I am in a surreal world.
> 
> The Pandora’s Box is open – a real global horror will begin by the summer – global famine is inevitable. Russia and Ukraine were the main suppliers of grain to the world. This year’s harvest will be smaller and logistical problems will result in a catastrophe. (MY COMMENTARY: I disagree that this will result in global famine.)
> I can’t say what guided those in charge to decide to proceed with the execution of this operation, but now they are methodically blaming us (FSB). We are being scolded for our analysis. Recently, we have been increasingly pressured to prepare more reports. All of these political consultants and politicians and that powers-that-be are causing chaos. Most importantly, no one knew that there will be such a war – it was concealed from everyone. For example – you are being asked to analyze various outcomes and consequences of a meteorite attack (MY COMMENTARY: Here he most likely means the West’s sanctions) – you research the mode of attack, and you are being told that it’s just a hypothetical and not to stress on the details, so you understand the report is only intended as a checkbox, and the conclusions of the analysis must be positive for Russia, otherwise you basically get interrogated for not doing good work. So, you have to write that we have all necessary measures available to nullify the effects of a given type of attack. We are completely overworked. But then it turns out that the hypothetical has turned into reality, and the analysis we’ve done on that hypothetical is total trash.
> 
> We have no answer to the sanctions because of this.
> 
> No one knew there’d be such a war, so no one prepared for these sanctions.
> It’s the flipside of the secrecy – since everyone was kept in the dark, how could we prepare for it?
> Kadyrov has gone nuts. We were very close to a conflict with him because the Ukrainians through their disinformation about having received intel from the FSB on his squad in Kyiv. His squad was absolutely demolished before they even began to fight and they got blown to pieces. I do not have any info that it was an FSB leak to Ukraine, so I’d give it a 1-2% chance – but can’t exclude this possibility completely.
> Our Blitzkrieg has totally collapsed. It is impossible to complete the task: If Zelensky and his deputies were captured in the first 3 days, all key buildings also captured, and they were forced to read an address of their surrender to the country, then Ukraine’s resistance would have likely dissolved to a minimal level. Theoretically. But then what? Even in this IDEAL outcome, there remained an unsolvable problem: Who is the counterparty to our negotiations? If we remove Zelensky – fine – who is going to sign the agreement? If with Zelensky, then that agreement is worthless after we remove him.
> 
> ОПЗЖ (The Opposition Party in Ukraine collaborating with Russia) has refused to cooperate. Medvechuk, the coward, ran away. There is another leader – Boyko, but he refused too, even his own people won’t understand him. Wanted to bring back Tsaryova, but even our guys are against him here in Russia. Bring back Yanukovich? But how? If we are saying we can’t occupy, then the newly formed government will be overthrown in 10 minutes as soon as we leave.
> To occupy? Where would we find that many people? Commandant’s office, military police, counter-intelligence, security – even at minimum resistance from the Ukrainians, we’d need over 500,000 people, not including supply & logistics. There’s a rule, if you try to cover for bad quality leadership with quantity, you’ll make everything worse. And I repeat this would be the problem in the IDEAL SCENARIO, which does not exist.
> And what now? We cannot announce general mobilization for two reasons: 1) Mobilization will implode the situation inside Russia: political, economic, and social.
> 2) Our logistics are already over-extended today. We can send a much large contingent into Ukraine, and what would we get? Ukraine – a territorially enormous country, and their hate towards us is astronomical. Our roads simply cannot accommodate the resupply of such convoys, and everything will come to a halt. And we can’t pull it off from the management side because of the current chaos.
> These two reasons exist concurrently, although just one of them is enough to break everything.
> With regards to Russian military losses: I don’t know the reality – no one does. There was some information the first 2 days, but now no one knows what is happening in Ukraine. We’ve lost contact with major divisions (!!) They may re-establish contact, or may dissipate under an attack, and even the commanders don’t know how many are dead, injured, or captured. Total dead is definitely in the thousands, maybe 10,000, maybe 5,000, or maybe just 2,000. But even at our command no one knows. But probably closer to 10,000. And we are not counting losses at DNR & LNR.
> 
> Now even we kill Zelensky or take him prisoner, nothing will change. The level of hate toward us is similar to Chechnya. And now, even those loyal to us in Ukraine are publicly against us.
> Because all of this was planned at the top (in Russia), because we were told that such a scenario will not happen except only if we were to be attacked first. Because we were told that we need to maximize our threats in order to negotiate an outcome through peace. Because we were already preparing protests against Zelensky without ever considering invading Ukraine.
> Now, civilian losses in Ukraine will follow a geometric pattern progression, and resistance against us will only get stronger. Infantries already tried to enter cities – out of 20 paratrooper groups, only one had “provisional” success. Recall the invasion of Mosul – it’s a rule – happens with every country, nothing new.
> To hold a siege? Over the last decades in Europe – Serbia being the best example, cities can remain functional under siege for years.
> Humanitarian convoys from Europe to Ukraine is only a matter of time.
> Our conditional deadline is June. Conditional because in June there will be no economy left in Russia – there will be nothing left. By and large, next week there will be a collapse (in Russia) to either of the two sides, simply because the situation cannot remain under current conditions.
> We have no analyses, we can’t make any forecasts in this chaos, no one will be able to say anything with any certainty (in Russia).
> 
> To act through intuition, especially with high emotions, this is no poker game. But our bets will have to grow in size with hope that some option will succeed.
> The tragedy is that we can easily miscalculate, and as a result lose everything.
> By and large, Russia does not have an out. There are no options for a possible victory, only of losses – this is it.
> 100% we’ve repeated our mistake from last century, when we decided to kick the “weak” Japan in order to achieve a quick victory, and it turned our army was in a state of total calamity. Then, we started a war till the victorious end, then we started conscripting the Bolsheviks for re-education in the army. Then these barely-known Bolsheviks picked up their anti-war slogans.
> From the pluses: We did everything to ensure there wasn’t even a hint that we sent penal military units to the front. If you conscript political prisoners and the socially undesirables, the moral spirit of the army will be in the negative.
> The enemy is motivated. Monstrously motivated. Knows how to fight, plenty of capable commanders. They have weapons and support. We will simply establish a precedent of human catastrophe in the world.
> What we are afraid of the most: The top is trying to mask old problems with new problems. Largely for this reason Donbass happened in 2014 – We needed to distract the West from the Russian Spring in Crimea, so Donbass’ so-called crisis had to pull in all of the attention and become a bargaining chip. But even bigger problems started there. Then we decided to pressure Erdogan to get 4 pipes for the Southern Stream (gas) and entered Syria. This is after Suleimani (Islamic Revolutionary Guard) knowingly provided false info to us to solve his own problems.
> As a result, we couldn’t resolve the problem with Crimea, and Donbass’ problems didn’t go away. Southern Stream was reduced to 2 pipes (gas), and Syria is hanging – we leave and Assad will be toppled and we will look like idiots, and staying there is hard and pointless.
> I don’t know who come up with the “Blitzkrieg of Ukraine.” Had received all the real inputs, we would have at minimum pointed out that the initial plan is arguable, and that much has to be reassessed. A lot had to be reassessed.
> Now we are in crap (PG language mine) up to our necks, and we don’t know what to do. “Denazification” and “demilitarization” are not analytical categories because they don’t have concretely formulated parameters by which meeting of the objectives can be evaluated.
> 
> Now we are stuck waiting until some mentally screwed up advisor convinces the top to start a conflict with Europe, with demands to reduce the sanctions – they either loosen the sanctions or war. What if the West refuses? In that instance I won’t exclude that we will be pulled into a real international conflict, just like Hitler in 1939. Our “Z” will be equated to the Swastika.
> Is there a possibility of a localized nuclear strike? Yes. Not for any military objectives. Such a weapon won’t help with the breach of the defenses. But with a goal of scaring everyone else (The West).
> We are plowing to create a scenario in which to blame everything on Ukraine. Naryshkin (Director of Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia) and his SVR is digging the ground to prove that Ukraine was secretly building nuclear weapons. F*&K. They are hammering at what we’ve already analyzed and closed the book on: We can’t just make up any evidence or proof and existence of specialists and Uranium. Ukraine has a ton of depleted isotope 238 – this is nothing. The production cycle is such that you can’t do it in secret.
> A dirty bomb can’t be created in secret. Ukraine’s old nuclear power plants can only produce the material as a by-product in minimal amounts. The Americans have such monitoring at these plants with MAGATE that even talking about this is stupid.
> Do you know what will start in a week? Let’s let it be even in 2 weeks. We are going to be so screwed we will start reminiscing about the good ol’ hungry days of the 90s. As the markets are being closed, Nabiullina appears to be taking the right steps, but it’s like plugging holes on a ship with your fingers. The situation will break through anyway and even stronger. Nothing will be solved in 3 or 5 or 7 days any longer.
> Kadyrov is kicking his hoofs not without reason. They have their own adventures. He created a name for himself as the invincible – and if he falls down once his own people will remove him.
> Next. Syria. “Guys – hold on, everything will end in Ukraine and then we will fortify our positions in Syria.” And now at any moment our contingent stationed there may run out of resources, and then ridiculous heat will come…. Turkey is closing the strait, and sending supplies to Syria by air is the same as heating an oven with cash. Please notice – this is all happening at the same time, and we don’t even have time to throw it all in one pile for analysis.
> 
> Our current position is like Germany in 1943-1944 – but that’s our STARTING position in Ukraine.
> Sometimes I get lost in this overwork, sometimes feels as if this is just a dream and all is as it was before.
> With regards to prisons – it will be worse. The nuts will start to get tightened till blood. Everywhere. To be frank, purely technically, this is the only way to maintain any control of the situation. We are already in total mobilization mode. But we can’t remain in this mode for long, but our timetables are unknown, and it will only get worse. Governance always goes astray from mobilization. And just imagine: You can sprint 100m – but try that in a marathon.
> And so, with the Ukrainian question we lunged as if going for a 100m sprint, but turned out we’d signed up for a marathon.
> And this is a rather brief overview of the current events.
> To offer further cynicism, I don’t believe that Putin will press the red button to destroy the entire world.
> First, it’s not one person that decides, and someone will refuse. There are lots of people there and there is no single “red” button.
> Second, there are certain doubts that it actually functions properly. Experience shows that the more transparent the control procedures, the easier it is to identify problems. And where it’s mirky as to who controls what and how, but always reports full of bravado, is where there are always problems.
> I am not sure that the “red button” system functions according to the declared data. Besides, plutonium fuel must be changed every 10 years.
> Third, and this is the most disgusting and sad, I personally do not believe in Putin’s will to sacrifice himself when he does not even allow his closest ministers and advisors to be in his vicinity. Whether it’s due to his fear of COVID or a possible assassination is irrelevant. If you are scared for the most trusted people to be near you, then how could you possibly choose to destroy yourself and those dearest to you.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> So a few days ago Bellingcat published a letter from a whistleblower in the FSB. I haven't seen it here, so it's worth sharing. Belling Cat has given it a high reliability and being Belling Cat, that's saying something (they are the ones who identified the Salisbury Russian assassins, traced the BUK that downed MH17, and so on).
> 
> (Note that the translation into English, however, is not the best)
> 
> _“I’ll be honest right away: I have hardly slept all these days, almost all the time at work, my head is a little floating, like in a fog. And from overwork, sometimes I already catch states, as if all this is not real.
> To be honest, the Pandora's box is open - a real global horror will begin by the summer - global famine is inevitable (Russia and Ukraine were the main suppliers of grain in the world, this year's harvest will be smaller, and logistical problems will bring the catastrophe to a peak point).
> I can't tell you what guided those at the top when deciding on the operation, but now they are methodically lowering all the dogs on us (the Service). We are scolded for analytics - this is very in my profile, so I will explain what is wrong.
> Recently, we have been increasingly pressed to customize reports to the requirements of management - I once touched on this topic. All these political consultants, politicians and their retinue, influence teams - all this created chaos. Strong.
> Most importantly, no one knew that there would be such a war, they hid it from everyone. And here's an example for you: you are asked (conditionally) to calculate the possibility of human rights protection in different conditions, including the attack of prisons by meteorites. You specify about meteorites, they tell you - this is so, reinsurance for calculations, nothing like this will happen. You understand that the report will be just for show, but you need to write in a victorious style so that there are no questions, they say, why do you have so many problems, did you really work badly. In general, a report is being written that when a meteorite falls, we have everything to eliminate the consequences, we are great, everything is fine. And you concentrate on tasks that are real - we don’t have enough strength anyway. And then suddenly they really throw meteorites and expect that everything will be according to your analytics, which was written from the bulldozer.
> That is why we have a total piz_ets - I don’t even want to pick another word. There is no protection from sanctions for the same reason: well, it’s quite possible that Nabiullina will be sewn up with negligence (rather, the switchmen from her team), but what are they to blame for? No one knew that there would be such a war, so no one prepared for such sanctions. This is the reverse side of secrecy: since no one was told, then who could calculate what no one told about?
> 
> Kadyrov is going crazy. And the conflict almost started with us: perhaps even the Ukrainians threw in misinformation that it was we who handed over the routes of Kadyrov's special forces in the first days of the operation. They were covered there on the march in a terrible way, they had not yet begun to fight, but they were simply torn to pieces in some places. And off we go: it was the FSB that leaked the routes to the Ukrainians. I do not have such information, I will leave 1-2% for reliability (it cannot be completely ruled out either).
> Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values. In theory. But what's next? Even with this ideal variant, there was an unsolvable problem: with whom to negotiate? If we demolish Zelensky, well, with whom should we sign agreements? If with Zelensky, then after we demolish it, these papers are worth nothing. Opposition Platform for Life refused to cooperate: Medvedchuk is a coward, he fled. There is a second leader there - Boyko, but he refuses to work with us - even his own people will not understand him. They wanted to return Tsarev, so even our pro-Russians turned against him. Return Yanukovych? But as? If we say that it is impossible to occupy, then any of our authorities will be killed there in 10 minutes, as we leave. Occupy? Where are we going to get so many people? Commandant's offices, military police, counterintelligence, security - even with minimal resistance from the locals, we need 500 thousand or more people. Not counting the supply system. And there is a rule that by covering the poor quality of management with quantity, you only spoil everything. And this, I repeat, would be with the ideal option, which does not exist.
> What now? We cannot announce mobilization for two reasons:
> 1) Large-scale mobilization will undermine the situation inside the country: political, economic, social.
> 2) Our logistics are already overstretched today. We will drive a many times larger contingent, and what will we get? Ukraine is a hefty country in terms of territory. And now the level of hatred towards us is going through the roof. Our roads simply won't be able to handle such supply caravans - everything will come to a standstill. And we won't manage to pull it out - because it's chaos.
> And these two reasons fall out at the same time, although even one is enough to break everything off.
> 
> Losses: I don't know how many there are. Nobody knows. For the first two days there was still control, now no one knows what is going on there. You can lose large units in communication. They can be found, or they can dissolve due to being attacked. And there, even the commanders may not know how many of them are running around somewhere nearby, how many died, how many are in captivity. The number of deaths is definitely in the thousands. Maybe 10 thousand, maybe 5, or maybe only 2. Even at the headquarters they don’t know for sure. But it should be closer to 10. And now we don’t count the LDNR corps - they have their own accounting.
> Now, even if Zelensky is killed, taken prisoner, nothing will change. There is Chechnya in terms of hatred towards us. And now even those who were loyal to us are against it. Because it was planned from above, because we were told that there would be no such option, unless we were attacked. Because they explained that it was necessary to create the most credible threat in order to peacefully agree on the right conditions. Because we were initially preparing protests within Ukraine against Zelensky. Excluding our direct entry. Intrusions, to put it simply.
> Further civilian losses will go exponentially - and resistance to us will also only increase. They already tried to enter the cities with infantry - out of twenty landing groups, only one had a conditional success. Remember the assault on Mosul - after all, this is the rule, so it was in all countries, nothing new.
> Keep under siege? According to the experience of military conflicts in the same Europe in recent decades (Serbia is the largest testing ground here), cities can be under siege for years, and even function. Humanitarian convoys from Europe there are a matter of time.
> We have a conditional deadline of June. Conditional - because in June we have no economy left, nothing remains. By and large, next week there will be a turning point in one of the sides, simply because the situation cannot be in such an overstrain. There are no analytics - it is impossible to calculate the chaos, here no one can say anything for sure. Act intuitively, and even on emotions - but this is not poker for you. Rates will rise, in the hope that suddenly some option will shoot through. The trouble is that we, too, can now miscalculate and lose everything in one move.
> By and large, the country has no way out. It’s just that there is no option for a possible victory, and defeat is everything, sailed at all. They 100% repeated the beginning of the last century, when they decided to kick weak Japan and get a quick victory, then it turned out that the army was in trouble. then they started the war to the bitter end, then they began to take the Bolsheviks for "re-education" into the army - after all, they were outcasts, uninteresting to anyone in the masses. And then, the Bolsheviks, who were not really known to anyone, picked up anti-war slogans and it started like this ...
> 
> From the pros: we did everything so that even a hint of the mass sending of "penalty boxes" to the front line did not pass. Send convicts and "socially unreliable" political prisoners there (so that they don't mess with the water inside the country) - the morale of the army will simply go into the negative. And the enemy is motivated, terribly motivated. He knows how to fight, there are enough middle-level commanders there. There are weapons. They have support. We will simply set a precedent for human loss in the world. And that's it.
> What we are most afraid of: at the top, they act according to the rule of overlapping the old problem with a new problem. Largely for this reason, the Donbass of 2014 began - it was necessary to divert the attention of Westerners from the topic of the Russian spring in Crimea, so the Donbass crisis, it seems, should have drawn all the attention to itself and become the subject of bargaining. But there were even bigger problems. Then they decided to push Erdogan into 4 pipes of the South Stream and entered Syria - this is after Soleimani gave deliberately false inputs in order to solve his problems. As a result, it was not possible to close the issue with Crimea, there are also problems with the Donbass, the South Stream has shrunk to 2 pipes, and Syria has hung with another headache (if we go out, they will demolish Assad, which will make us look like idiots, but it’s also difficult and useless to sit).
> I don't know who came up with the "Ukrainian Blitzkrieg". If we were given real introductory information, we would at least indicate that the original plan is controversial, that we need to double-check a lot. A lot of things. Now we got into the shit somewhere up to the neck. And it is not clear what to do. "Denazification" and "demilitarization" are not analytical categories, because they do not have clearly defined parameters by which one can determine the level of accomplishment or non-completion of the task.
> Now it remains to be seen that some fucking adviser will convince the top to start a conflict with Europe demanding to reduce some sanctions. Or reduce, or war. What if they refuse? Now I do not rule out that then we will be drawn into a real international conflict, like Hitler in 1939. And then our Z will be compared to us with a swastika.
> Is there a possibility of a local nuclear strike? Yes. Not for military purposes (it will not give anything - this is a defense breakthrough weapon), but with the aim of intimidating others. At the same time, the soil is being prepared to turn everything to Ukraine - Naryshkin and his SVR are now digging the earth to prove that they secretly created nuclear weapons there. Damn, they are now hammering on what we have long studied and dismantled: you can’t draw evidence here on your knee, and the presence of specialists and uranium (Ukraine has a lot of depleted isotope 238) is nothing. There the production cycle is such that you can’t do it imperceptibly. You can’t even make a “dirty” bomb imperceptibly, but the fact that their old nuclear power plants can produce weapons-grade plutonium (plants like REB-1000 produce it in minimal quantities as a “by-product” of the reaction) - so the Americans introduced such control there with the involvement of the IAEA, that sucking on the topic is stupid.
> Do you know what will happen next week? Well, even after two. Now it will cover us so much that we will start to miss the hungry 90s. While the auction was closed, Nabiullina seemed to be taking normal steps - but this is all like plugging a hole in a dam with a finger. It will still break through, and even stronger. Nothing will be decided in 3, 5, or 10 days.
> Kadyrov beats his hoof for a reason - they have their own adventures there. He created for himself the image of the most influential and invincible. And if it falls once, it will be taken down by its own people. He will no longer be the owner of the winning teip.
> We go further. Syria. "The guys will hold out, everything will be over in Ukraine - and there in Syria we will again strengthen everything in positions." And now, at any moment, they can wait there for the contingent to run out of resources - and such a heat will set in ... Turkey blocks the straits - to transport supplies there by planes, it's like heating an oven with money.
> Notice that all this is happening at the same time, we don’t even have time to bring everything into one heap. We have a situation, like in Germany in the 43-44th. At the start right away. Sometimes I am already lost from this overwork, sometimes it seems that everything was a dream and it was a dream, that everything is as before.
> 
> In prisons, by the way, it will be worse. Now the nuts will begin to tighten so that to the bloody ichor. Everywhere. To be honest, purely technically, this remains the only chance to keep the situation - we are already in the mode of total mobilization. But you can’t stay in such a regime for a long time, and we have ambiguity with the timing and it will only get worse for now. From mobilization, management always goes astray. Yes, and imagine: you can run a hundred meters in a snatch, but it’s bad to go to a marathon distance and give a jerk with all your might. Here we rushed with the Ukrainian question, as if we were running a hundred meters, and fit into a cross-country marathon.
> And that's what I'm talking about very, very briefly.
> From the cynical, I will only add that I do not believe that VV Putin will press the red button to destroy the whole world.
> Firstly, there is more than one person making a decision, at least someone will jump off. And there are a lot of people there - there is no "one-man red button".
> Secondly, there are some doubts that everything is functioning successfully there. Experience shows that the greater the transparency and control, the easier it is to identify shortcomings. And where it is not clear who controls and how, but always bravura reports - everything is always wrong there. I'm not sure if the red button system works as advertised. In addition, the plutonium charge must be changed every 10 years.
> Thirdly, and this is the most vile and sad thing, I personally do not believe in the readiness to sacrifice oneself of a person who does not let the members of the Federation Council, but his closest representatives and ministers, come close to him. For fear of the coronavirus or an attack, it doesn't matter. If you are afraid to let the most trusted people near you, then how will you dare to destroy yourself and your loved ones, inclusive?
> If anything - ask, but I can not answer for several days. We are in rush mode, and there are more and more tasks.
> In general, our reports are peppy, but everything flies in the pi_du.
> Never before has this Gulagu.net source swearing, writing short and to the point. But even now he..."_



Thanks! 
Very interesting if authentic.

The formatting is a nightmare (never mind the translation) but I cut and pasted it into a text document just to give my aging eyes relief. 

BTW, do you have a link for this? I looked on Bellingcat but couldn't come up with anything.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> Whatever they thought it meant, it's not working well enough to resolve their logistics problems.



The video I posted earlier pointed out how reliant Russia’s military is on their rail infrastructure. It’s very efficient and fast within the borders of Russia. It’s how they amassed so many troops and materiel near the border so quickly.

But when they got to Ukraine and had to use the roads, their supply chain broke down very quickly.


----------



## Zoidberg

Arkitect said:


> Thanks!
> Very interesting if authentic.
> 
> The formatting is a nightmare (never mind the translation) but I cut and pasted it into a text document just to give my aging eyes relief.
> 
> BTW, do you have a link for this? I looked on Bellingcat but couldn't come up with anything.



It was posted by gulagu (everything is in Russian, hence why I didn't post the direct link) and then the head of Bellingcat said it was probably authentic (based on what others in the FSB had told them).

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500196510054637569/

Sorry about the formatting, I copy-pasted it as-is.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> It was posted by gulagu (everything is in Russian, hence why I didn't post the direct link) and then the head of Bellingcat said it was probably authentic (based on what others in the FSB had told them).
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1500196510054637569/
> 
> Sorry about the formatting, I copy-pasted it as-is.



Thank you very much. No worries about the formatting.


----------



## Edd

Zoidberg said:


> So a few days ago Bellingcat published a letter from a whistleblower in the FSB. I haven't seen it here, so it's worth sharing. Belling Cat has given it a high reliability and being Belling Cat, that's saying something (they are the ones who identified the Salisbury Russian assassins, traced the BUK that downed MH17, and so on).
> 
> (Note that the translation into English, however, is not the best)
> 
> _“I’ll be honest right away: I have hardly slept all these days, almost all the time at work, my head is a little floating, like in a fog. And from overwork, sometimes I already catch states, as if all this is not real.
> To be honest, the Pandora's box is open - a real global horror will begin by the summer - global famine is inevitable (Russia and Ukraine were the main suppliers of grain in the world, this year's harvest will be smaller, and logistical problems will bring the catastrophe to a peak point).
> I can't tell you what guided those at the top when deciding on the operation, but now they are methodically lowering all the dogs on us (the Service). We are scolded for analytics - this is very in my profile, so I will explain what is wrong.
> Recently, we have been increasingly pressed to customize reports to the requirements of management - I once touched on this topic. All these political consultants, politicians and their retinue, influence teams - all this created chaos. Strong.
> Most importantly, no one knew that there would be such a war, they hid it from everyone. And here's an example for you: you are asked (conditionally) to calculate the possibility of human rights protection in different conditions, including the attack of prisons by meteorites. You specify about meteorites, they tell you - this is so, reinsurance for calculations, nothing like this will happen. You understand that the report will be just for show, but you need to write in a victorious style so that there are no questions, they say, why do you have so many problems, did you really work badly. In general, a report is being written that when a meteorite falls, we have everything to eliminate the consequences, we are great, everything is fine. And you concentrate on tasks that are real - we don’t have enough strength anyway. And then suddenly they really throw meteorites and expect that everything will be according to your analytics, which was written from the bulldozer.
> That is why we have a total piz_ets - I don’t even want to pick another word. There is no protection from sanctions for the same reason: well, it’s quite possible that Nabiullina will be sewn up with negligence (rather, the switchmen from her team), but what are they to blame for? No one knew that there would be such a war, so no one prepared for such sanctions. This is the reverse side of secrecy: since no one was told, then who could calculate what no one told about?
> 
> Kadyrov is going crazy. And the conflict almost started with us: perhaps even the Ukrainians threw in misinformation that it was we who handed over the routes of Kadyrov's special forces in the first days of the operation. They were covered there on the march in a terrible way, they had not yet begun to fight, but they were simply torn to pieces in some places. And off we go: it was the FSB that leaked the routes to the Ukrainians. I do not have such information, I will leave 1-2% for reliability (it cannot be completely ruled out either).
> Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values. In theory. But what's next? Even with this ideal variant, there was an unsolvable problem: with whom to negotiate? If we demolish Zelensky, well, with whom should we sign agreements? If with Zelensky, then after we demolish it, these papers are worth nothing. Opposition Platform for Life refused to cooperate: Medvedchuk is a coward, he fled. There is a second leader there - Boyko, but he refuses to work with us - even his own people will not understand him. They wanted to return Tsarev, so even our pro-Russians turned against him. Return Yanukovych? But as? If we say that it is impossible to occupy, then any of our authorities will be killed there in 10 minutes, as we leave. Occupy? Where are we going to get so many people? Commandant's offices, military police, counterintelligence, security - even with minimal resistance from the locals, we need 500 thousand or more people. Not counting the supply system. And there is a rule that by covering the poor quality of management with quantity, you only spoil everything. And this, I repeat, would be with the ideal option, which does not exist.
> What now? We cannot announce mobilization for two reasons:
> 1) Large-scale mobilization will undermine the situation inside the country: political, economic, social.
> 2) Our logistics are already overstretched today. We will drive a many times larger contingent, and what will we get? Ukraine is a hefty country in terms of territory. And now the level of hatred towards us is going through the roof. Our roads simply won't be able to handle such supply caravans - everything will come to a standstill. And we won't manage to pull it out - because it's chaos.
> And these two reasons fall out at the same time, although even one is enough to break everything off.
> 
> Losses: I don't know how many there are. Nobody knows. For the first two days there was still control, now no one knows what is going on there. You can lose large units in communication. They can be found, or they can dissolve due to being attacked. And there, even the commanders may not know how many of them are running around somewhere nearby, how many died, how many are in captivity. The number of deaths is definitely in the thousands. Maybe 10 thousand, maybe 5, or maybe only 2. Even at the headquarters they don’t know for sure. But it should be closer to 10. And now we don’t count the LDNR corps - they have their own accounting.
> Now, even if Zelensky is killed, taken prisoner, nothing will change. There is Chechnya in terms of hatred towards us. And now even those who were loyal to us are against it. Because it was planned from above, because we were told that there would be no such option, unless we were attacked. Because they explained that it was necessary to create the most credible threat in order to peacefully agree on the right conditions. Because we were initially preparing protests within Ukraine against Zelensky. Excluding our direct entry. Intrusions, to put it simply.
> Further civilian losses will go exponentially - and resistance to us will also only increase. They already tried to enter the cities with infantry - out of twenty landing groups, only one had a conditional success. Remember the assault on Mosul - after all, this is the rule, so it was in all countries, nothing new.
> Keep under siege? According to the experience of military conflicts in the same Europe in recent decades (Serbia is the largest testing ground here), cities can be under siege for years, and even function. Humanitarian convoys from Europe there are a matter of time.
> We have a conditional deadline of June. Conditional - because in June we have no economy left, nothing remains. By and large, next week there will be a turning point in one of the sides, simply because the situation cannot be in such an overstrain. There are no analytics - it is impossible to calculate the chaos, here no one can say anything for sure. Act intuitively, and even on emotions - but this is not poker for you. Rates will rise, in the hope that suddenly some option will shoot through. The trouble is that we, too, can now miscalculate and lose everything in one move.
> By and large, the country has no way out. It’s just that there is no option for a possible victory, and defeat is everything, sailed at all. They 100% repeated the beginning of the last century, when they decided to kick weak Japan and get a quick victory, then it turned out that the army was in trouble. then they started the war to the bitter end, then they began to take the Bolsheviks for "re-education" into the army - after all, they were outcasts, uninteresting to anyone in the masses. And then, the Bolsheviks, who were not really known to anyone, picked up anti-war slogans and it started like this ...
> 
> From the pros: we did everything so that even a hint of the mass sending of "penalty boxes" to the front line did not pass. Send convicts and "socially unreliable" political prisoners there (so that they don't mess with the water inside the country) - the morale of the army will simply go into the negative. And the enemy is motivated, terribly motivated. He knows how to fight, there are enough middle-level commanders there. There are weapons. They have support. We will simply set a precedent for human loss in the world. And that's it.
> What we are most afraid of: at the top, they act according to the rule of overlapping the old problem with a new problem. Largely for this reason, the Donbass of 2014 began - it was necessary to divert the attention of Westerners from the topic of the Russian spring in Crimea, so the Donbass crisis, it seems, should have drawn all the attention to itself and become the subject of bargaining. But there were even bigger problems. Then they decided to push Erdogan into 4 pipes of the South Stream and entered Syria - this is after Soleimani gave deliberately false inputs in order to solve his problems. As a result, it was not possible to close the issue with Crimea, there are also problems with the Donbass, the South Stream has shrunk to 2 pipes, and Syria has hung with another headache (if we go out, they will demolish Assad, which will make us look like idiots, but it’s also difficult and useless to sit).
> I don't know who came up with the "Ukrainian Blitzkrieg". If we were given real introductory information, we would at least indicate that the original plan is controversial, that we need to double-check a lot. A lot of things. Now we got into the shit somewhere up to the neck. And it is not clear what to do. "Denazification" and "demilitarization" are not analytical categories, because they do not have clearly defined parameters by which one can determine the level of accomplishment or non-completion of the task.
> Now it remains to be seen that some fucking adviser will convince the top to start a conflict with Europe demanding to reduce some sanctions. Or reduce, or war. What if they refuse? Now I do not rule out that then we will be drawn into a real international conflict, like Hitler in 1939. And then our Z will be compared to us with a swastika.
> Is there a possibility of a local nuclear strike? Yes. Not for military purposes (it will not give anything - this is a defense breakthrough weapon), but with the aim of intimidating others. At the same time, the soil is being prepared to turn everything to Ukraine - Naryshkin and his SVR are now digging the earth to prove that they secretly created nuclear weapons there. Damn, they are now hammering on what we have long studied and dismantled: you can’t draw evidence here on your knee, and the presence of specialists and uranium (Ukraine has a lot of depleted isotope 238) is nothing. There the production cycle is such that you can’t do it imperceptibly. You can’t even make a “dirty” bomb imperceptibly, but the fact that their old nuclear power plants can produce weapons-grade plutonium (plants like REB-1000 produce it in minimal quantities as a “by-product” of the reaction) - so the Americans introduced such control there with the involvement of the IAEA, that sucking on the topic is stupid.
> Do you know what will happen next week? Well, even after two. Now it will cover us so much that we will start to miss the hungry 90s. While the auction was closed, Nabiullina seemed to be taking normal steps - but this is all like plugging a hole in a dam with a finger. It will still break through, and even stronger. Nothing will be decided in 3, 5, or 10 days.
> Kadyrov beats his hoof for a reason - they have their own adventures there. He created for himself the image of the most influential and invincible. And if it falls once, it will be taken down by its own people. He will no longer be the owner of the winning teip.
> We go further. Syria. "The guys will hold out, everything will be over in Ukraine - and there in Syria we will again strengthen everything in positions." And now, at any moment, they can wait there for the contingent to run out of resources - and such a heat will set in ... Turkey blocks the straits - to transport supplies there by planes, it's like heating an oven with money.
> Notice that all this is happening at the same time, we don’t even have time to bring everything into one heap. We have a situation, like in Germany in the 43-44th. At the start right away. Sometimes I am already lost from this overwork, sometimes it seems that everything was a dream and it was a dream, that everything is as before.
> 
> In prisons, by the way, it will be worse. Now the nuts will begin to tighten so that to the bloody ichor. Everywhere. To be honest, purely technically, this remains the only chance to keep the situation - we are already in the mode of total mobilization. But you can’t stay in such a regime for a long time, and we have ambiguity with the timing and it will only get worse for now. From mobilization, management always goes astray. Yes, and imagine: you can run a hundred meters in a snatch, but it’s bad to go to a marathon distance and give a jerk with all your might. Here we rushed with the Ukrainian question, as if we were running a hundred meters, and fit into a cross-country marathon.
> And that's what I'm talking about very, very briefly.
> From the cynical, I will only add that I do not believe that VV Putin will press the red button to destroy the whole world.
> Firstly, there is more than one person making a decision, at least someone will jump off. And there are a lot of people there - there is no "one-man red button".
> Secondly, there are some doubts that everything is functioning successfully there. Experience shows that the greater the transparency and control, the easier it is to identify shortcomings. And where it is not clear who controls and how, but always bravura reports - everything is always wrong there. I'm not sure if the red button system works as advertised. In addition, the plutonium charge must be changed every 10 years.
> Thirdly, and this is the most vile and sad thing, I personally do not believe in the readiness to sacrifice oneself of a person who does not let the members of the Federation Council, but his closest representatives and ministers, come close to him. For fear of the coronavirus or an attack, it doesn't matter. If you are afraid to let the most trusted people near you, then how will you dare to destroy yourself and your loved ones, inclusive?
> If anything - ask, but I can not answer for several days. We are in rush mode, and there are more and more tasks.
> In general, our reports are peppy, but everything flies in the pi_du.
> Never before has this Gulagu.net source swearing, writing short and to the point. But even now he..."_



He kinda blew through the bit about the grain, which seems important if true.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Interesting:









						China blames NATO for pushing Russia-Ukraine tension to 'breaking point'
					

Moves by U.S.-led NATO have pushed tension between Russia and Ukraine to a "breaking point", Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said on Wednesday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> So a few days ago Bellingcat published a letter from a whistleblower in the FSB. I haven't seen it here, so it's worth sharing. Belling Cat has given it a high reliability and being Belling Cat, that's saying something (they are the ones who identified the Salisbury Russian assassins, traced the BUK that downed MH17, and so on).
> 
> (Note that the translation into English, however, is not the best)
> 
> _“I’ll be honest right away: I have hardly slept all these days, almost all the time at work, my head is a little floating, like in a fog. And from overwork, sometimes I already catch states, as if all this is not real.
> To be honest, the Pandora's box is open - a real global horror will begin by the summer - global famine is inevitable (Russia and Ukraine were the main suppliers of grain in the world, this year's harvest will be smaller, and logistical problems will bring the catastrophe to a peak point).
> I can't tell you what guided those at the top when deciding on the operation, but now they are methodically lowering all the dogs on us (the Service). We are scolded for analytics - this is very in my profile, so I will explain what is wrong.
> Recently, we have been increasingly pressed to customize reports to the requirements of management - I once touched on this topic. All these political consultants, politicians and their retinue, influence teams - all this created chaos. Strong.
> Most importantly, no one knew that there would be such a war, they hid it from everyone. And here's an example for you: you are asked (conditionally) to calculate the possibility of human rights protection in different conditions, including the attack of prisons by meteorites. You specify about meteorites, they tell you - this is so, reinsurance for calculations, nothing like this will happen. You understand that the report will be just for show, but you need to write in a victorious style so that there are no questions, they say, why do you have so many problems, did you really work badly. In general, a report is being written that when a meteorite falls, we have everything to eliminate the consequences, we are great, everything is fine. And you concentrate on tasks that are real - we don’t have enough strength anyway. And then suddenly they really throw meteorites and expect that everything will be according to your analytics, which was written from the bulldozer.
> That is why we have a total piz_ets - I don’t even want to pick another word. There is no protection from sanctions for the same reason: well, it’s quite possible that Nabiullina will be sewn up with negligence (rather, the switchmen from her team), but what are they to blame for? No one knew that there would be such a war, so no one prepared for such sanctions. This is the reverse side of secrecy: since no one was told, then who could calculate what no one told about?
> 
> Kadyrov is going crazy. And the conflict almost started with us: perhaps even the Ukrainians threw in misinformation that it was we who handed over the routes of Kadyrov's special forces in the first days of the operation. They were covered there on the march in a terrible way, they had not yet begun to fight, but they were simply torn to pieces in some places. And off we go: it was the FSB that leaked the routes to the Ukrainians. I do not have such information, I will leave 1-2% for reliability (it cannot be completely ruled out either).
> Blitzkrieg failed. It is simply impossible to complete the task now: if Zelensky and the authorities were captured in the first 1-3 days, they seized all the key buildings in Kyiv, they gave them the order to surrender - yes, the resistance would subside to the minimum values. In theory. But what's next? Even with this ideal variant, there was an unsolvable problem: with whom to negotiate? If we demolish Zelensky, well, with whom should we sign agreements? If with Zelensky, then after we demolish it, these papers are worth nothing. Opposition Platform for Life refused to cooperate: Medvedchuk is a coward, he fled. There is a second leader there - Boyko, but he refuses to work with us - even his own people will not understand him. They wanted to return Tsarev, so even our pro-Russians turned against him. Return Yanukovych? But as? If we say that it is impossible to occupy, then any of our authorities will be killed there in 10 minutes, as we leave. Occupy? Where are we going to get so many people? Commandant's offices, military police, counterintelligence, security - even with minimal resistance from the locals, we need 500 thousand or more people. Not counting the supply system. And there is a rule that by covering the poor quality of management with quantity, you only spoil everything. And this, I repeat, would be with the ideal option, which does not exist.
> What now? We cannot announce mobilization for two reasons:
> 1) Large-scale mobilization will undermine the situation inside the country: political, economic, social.
> 2) Our logistics are already overstretched today. We will drive a many times larger contingent, and what will we get? Ukraine is a hefty country in terms of territory. And now the level of hatred towards us is going through the roof. Our roads simply won't be able to handle such supply caravans - everything will come to a standstill. And we won't manage to pull it out - because it's chaos.
> And these two reasons fall out at the same time, although even one is enough to break everything off.
> 
> Losses: I don't know how many there are. Nobody knows. For the first two days there was still control, now no one knows what is going on there. You can lose large units in communication. They can be found, or they can dissolve due to being attacked. And there, even the commanders may not know how many of them are running around somewhere nearby, how many died, how many are in captivity. The number of deaths is definitely in the thousands. Maybe 10 thousand, maybe 5, or maybe only 2. Even at the headquarters they don’t know for sure. But it should be closer to 10. And now we don’t count the LDNR corps - they have their own accounting.
> Now, even if Zelensky is killed, taken prisoner, nothing will change. There is Chechnya in terms of hatred towards us. And now even those who were loyal to us are against it. Because it was planned from above, because we were told that there would be no such option, unless we were attacked. Because they explained that it was necessary to create the most credible threat in order to peacefully agree on the right conditions. Because we were initially preparing protests within Ukraine against Zelensky. Excluding our direct entry. Intrusions, to put it simply.
> Further civilian losses will go exponentially - and resistance to us will also only increase. They already tried to enter the cities with infantry - out of twenty landing groups, only one had a conditional success. Remember the assault on Mosul - after all, this is the rule, so it was in all countries, nothing new.
> Keep under siege? According to the experience of military conflicts in the same Europe in recent decades (Serbia is the largest testing ground here), cities can be under siege for years, and even function. Humanitarian convoys from Europe there are a matter of time.
> We have a conditional deadline of June. Conditional - because in June we have no economy left, nothing remains. By and large, next week there will be a turning point in one of the sides, simply because the situation cannot be in such an overstrain. There are no analytics - it is impossible to calculate the chaos, here no one can say anything for sure. Act intuitively, and even on emotions - but this is not poker for you. Rates will rise, in the hope that suddenly some option will shoot through. The trouble is that we, too, can now miscalculate and lose everything in one move.
> By and large, the country has no way out. It’s just that there is no option for a possible victory, and defeat is everything, sailed at all. They 100% repeated the beginning of the last century, when they decided to kick weak Japan and get a quick victory, then it turned out that the army was in trouble. then they started the war to the bitter end, then they began to take the Bolsheviks for "re-education" into the army - after all, they were outcasts, uninteresting to anyone in the masses. And then, the Bolsheviks, who were not really known to anyone, picked up anti-war slogans and it started like this ...
> 
> From the pros: we did everything so that even a hint of the mass sending of "penalty boxes" to the front line did not pass. Send convicts and "socially unreliable" political prisoners there (so that they don't mess with the water inside the country) - the morale of the army will simply go into the negative. And the enemy is motivated, terribly motivated. He knows how to fight, there are enough middle-level commanders there. There are weapons. They have support. We will simply set a precedent for human loss in the world. And that's it.
> What we are most afraid of: at the top, they act according to the rule of overlapping the old problem with a new problem. Largely for this reason, the Donbass of 2014 began - it was necessary to divert the attention of Westerners from the topic of the Russian spring in Crimea, so the Donbass crisis, it seems, should have drawn all the attention to itself and become the subject of bargaining. But there were even bigger problems. Then they decided to push Erdogan into 4 pipes of the South Stream and entered Syria - this is after Soleimani gave deliberately false inputs in order to solve his problems. As a result, it was not possible to close the issue with Crimea, there are also problems with the Donbass, the South Stream has shrunk to 2 pipes, and Syria has hung with another headache (if we go out, they will demolish Assad, which will make us look like idiots, but it’s also difficult and useless to sit).
> I don't know who came up with the "Ukrainian Blitzkrieg". If we were given real introductory information, we would at least indicate that the original plan is controversial, that we need to double-check a lot. A lot of things. Now we got into the shit somewhere up to the neck. And it is not clear what to do. "Denazification" and "demilitarization" are not analytical categories, because they do not have clearly defined parameters by which one can determine the level of accomplishment or non-completion of the task.
> Now it remains to be seen that some fucking adviser will convince the top to start a conflict with Europe demanding to reduce some sanctions. Or reduce, or war. What if they refuse? Now I do not rule out that then we will be drawn into a real international conflict, like Hitler in 1939. And then our Z will be compared to us with a swastika.
> Is there a possibility of a local nuclear strike? Yes. Not for military purposes (it will not give anything - this is a defense breakthrough weapon), but with the aim of intimidating others. At the same time, the soil is being prepared to turn everything to Ukraine - Naryshkin and his SVR are now digging the earth to prove that they secretly created nuclear weapons there. Damn, they are now hammering on what we have long studied and dismantled: you can’t draw evidence here on your knee, and the presence of specialists and uranium (Ukraine has a lot of depleted isotope 238) is nothing. There the production cycle is such that you can’t do it imperceptibly. You can’t even make a “dirty” bomb imperceptibly, but the fact that their old nuclear power plants can produce weapons-grade plutonium (plants like REB-1000 produce it in minimal quantities as a “by-product” of the reaction) - so the Americans introduced such control there with the involvement of the IAEA, that sucking on the topic is stupid.
> Do you know what will happen next week? Well, even after two. Now it will cover us so much that we will start to miss the hungry 90s. While the auction was closed, Nabiullina seemed to be taking normal steps - but this is all like plugging a hole in a dam with a finger. It will still break through, and even stronger. Nothing will be decided in 3, 5, or 10 days.
> Kadyrov beats his hoof for a reason - they have their own adventures there. He created for himself the image of the most influential and invincible. And if it falls once, it will be taken down by its own people. He will no longer be the owner of the winning teip.
> We go further. Syria. "The guys will hold out, everything will be over in Ukraine - and there in Syria we will again strengthen everything in positions." And now, at any moment, they can wait there for the contingent to run out of resources - and such a heat will set in ... Turkey blocks the straits - to transport supplies there by planes, it's like heating an oven with money.
> Notice that all this is happening at the same time, we don’t even have time to bring everything into one heap. We have a situation, like in Germany in the 43-44th. At the start right away. Sometimes I am already lost from this overwork, sometimes it seems that everything was a dream and it was a dream, that everything is as before.
> 
> In prisons, by the way, it will be worse. Now the nuts will begin to tighten so that to the bloody ichor. Everywhere. To be honest, purely technically, this remains the only chance to keep the situation - we are already in the mode of total mobilization. But you can’t stay in such a regime for a long time, and we have ambiguity with the timing and it will only get worse for now. From mobilization, management always goes astray. Yes, and imagine: you can run a hundred meters in a snatch, but it’s bad to go to a marathon distance and give a jerk with all your might. Here we rushed with the Ukrainian question, as if we were running a hundred meters, and fit into a cross-country marathon.
> And that's what I'm talking about very, very briefly.
> From the cynical, I will only add that I do not believe that VV Putin will press the red button to destroy the whole world.
> Firstly, there is more than one person making a decision, at least someone will jump off. And there are a lot of people there - there is no "one-man red button".
> Secondly, there are some doubts that everything is functioning successfully there. Experience shows that the greater the transparency and control, the easier it is to identify shortcomings. And where it is not clear who controls and how, but always bravura reports - everything is always wrong there. I'm not sure if the red button system works as advertised. In addition, the plutonium charge must be changed every 10 years.
> Thirdly, and this is the most vile and sad thing, I personally do not believe in the readiness to sacrifice oneself of a person who does not let the members of the Federation Council, but his closest representatives and ministers, come close to him. For fear of the coronavirus or an attack, it doesn't matter. If you are afraid to let the most trusted people near you, then how will you dare to destroy yourself and your loved ones, inclusive?
> If anything - ask, but I can not answer for several days. We are in rush mode, and there are more and more tasks.
> In general, our reports are peppy, but everything flies in the pi_du.
> Never before has this Gulagu.net source swearing, writing short and to the point. But even now he..."_



Thank you for sharing this; ominous and unsettling, if true.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China blames NATO for pushing Russia-Ukraine tension to 'breaking point'
> 
> 
> Moves by U.S.-led NATO have pushed tension between Russia and Ukraine to a "breaking point", Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



Yes, indeed.

While the Chinese may welcome the idea of a weakened Russia, - if only one that becomes a sort of client state, dependant on the (ever-growing) Chinese market as a source of natural resources, I doubt that they will welcome a destroyed, devastated, and collapsed Russia.


----------



## Arkitect

yaxomoxay said:


> Interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China blames NATO for pushing Russia-Ukraine tension to 'breaking point'
> 
> 
> Moves by U.S.-led NATO have pushed tension between Russia and Ukraine to a "breaking point", Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



That has been their official line from the start.

Neutral, but with a hefty side helping of "Blame Nato/USA".


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Top lawmakers reach deal on Ukraine aid, $1.5T spending
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional leaders reached a bipartisan deal early Wednesday providing $13.6 billion to help Ukraine and European allies plus billions more to battle the pandemic as part of an overdue $1.5 trillion measure financing federal agencies for the rest of this year.




					apnews.com
				




Um.  No words, except don’t tell me "But this is different.  We can afford this no problem."


----------



## Thomas Veil

Yoused said:


> Huh. Does the "Z" on the Russian vehicles mean that they think they are going up against зомбие?



It means Putin thinks of himself as




while he’s actually proving himself to be




​


----------



## lizkat

Edd said:


> He kinda blew through the bit about the grain, which seems important if true.



Ukraine has had around 10% of global wheat market.  And what is certainly true is that this is EXACTLY the normal time in Ukraine of preparing and sowing the grain fields.  These few weeks, that's it for best prospects of a good harvest.     Also, neither Russia nor Ukraine is likely to follow normal pattern for their substantial exports of fertilizer, due to Putin's invasion and the ensuing sanctions and manpower issues.    This will affect costs of farmers around the world.   While the American and other farmers may have better markets for their own grain harvests this year, first they have to spend (and borrow) to plant and nourish those crops.


----------



## lizkat

Arkitect said:


> That has been their official line from the start.
> 
> Neutral, but with a hefty side helping of "Blame Nato/USA".




I think China is trying to split the baby...   blaming "US-led NATO" will morph into blaming "NATO" because China can't afford to see Russian economy collapse AND risk further deterioration of Chinese-USA  supply chain and other commercial relationships.   Words matter.  Emphasis matters.

Biden might want to build everything in America, but that will never happen with magic-wand effect because the USA is still a nation full of price-driven consumers and only a recent hat tip to the idea of paying workers a decent wage.

Yeah, sure,  we like cushy bath towels like the ones used to be made in New England and then in South Carolina, but we gave those up 30 years ago for cheaper everything including groceries (and then,  duh, lower wages) at Walmart.​​Yesterday i paid 99c a can for two cans of beets at a supermarket because not sure could get my next Walmart staples bulk order delivery (55c a can for those beets) before next snowdump.  But Walmart is about to have pricing issues on a raft of things, the same as other grocers.​​Bottom line all the supply chains are up in the air, this time over more than just covid-related logistics.  Right now consumers are mainly focused on gas prices because oil is the leading edge of reaction to sanctions.  But we ain't seen nothin' yet on price jacks thanks to Putin-related sanctions.  It's not just cheap toys and pricey electronics get made or processed for the west in China.​
And as for China's outlook,  it was certainly never counting on Putin going for full regime change in Ukraine.    Crimea one thing,  Donetsk-Luhansk maybe another couple things (maybe they all look like Taiwan to China),  but western Ukraine a bridge too far. This war instantly threatens the Chinese-Russian economic partnerships AND the supply-chain and other commercial interests China has enjoyed with the USA.  OK "enjoyed" is too strong a word there:  so,   "engaged in and to mutual profit"...

I mean it had to be brutal for Xi to wake up two weeks ago and realize that the Russian end of the Sino-Russian economic arrangements had just became thoroughly unreliable,   AND days later to realize that way past human rights issues in China, the USA was furious that China would even be trying to walk the fence on Putin's behavior versus Ukraine.

See China was trying to bake a nice cake for itself with the separate help of two countries now totally distracted and making a proxy war with each other in Ukraine while so far not using nukes.  And "short" means only short of whatever Russia would like to do with Chernobyl, where it could decide to enrich uranium instead of just minding the radioactive waste levels there.   China and the US may both wonder about that right along with Europe.

China still needs the USA and we still need China.   It's nice to talk about making everything in America.   That's not going to happen by next week, by end of quarter or end of 2022 or 2024 either.   Xi knows that, the Biden WH knows that, but Putin's in a tunnel looking at his private and expanding map of Russia.  Easy for him to glance up for a minute and say _yeah the US sucks big time but see we have them over a barrel in Europe now. _

China's trying to say to Vladimir _uh, you got a mouse in your pocket?  Who is "we"??_

But all Putin hears is "US-NATO are to blame" and that sounds to him like justification to keep trying to subdue Ukraine, even as he loses hardware and personnel to Ukrainian resistance and thus thrashes his own country's economy even before considering the bite of western sanctions.

So China is waking up and will count the dollars it's putting on the line by fence-walking.   The ruble is already worthless.  China has a quintessentially mercantile mindset.  I would expect it to take a more vigorous approach to getting Putin to back off his world domination demo in Ukraine pretty soon.   The world could use all the help it can round up to that end.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I can’t get into the average Russian’s head, but they weren’t exactly cut off from information like, say, North Korea. If our military setup an “operation” in another country and most of the globe turned on us and crushed our economy as a result I think I would at least entertain the possibility that our government is the bad guys in this scenario and I wouldn’t buy some narrative that they all decided to act on some hatred of us for no good reason.

And maybe this is also a result of having a free (but often biased) press, but if the same happened to the US when we invaded Iraq I would probably assume we are the bad guys in that one too. Even without that cause and effect, a lot of Americans already felt it was an unjust invasion.

But I guess it’s up for debate what exactly the population is willing/supposed to do when they have a government that likes to run around and slaughter people outside your borders. You shouldn’t exactly look at Americans for a good example of changing government actions on military operations.


----------



## Eric

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I can’t get into the average Russian’s head, but they weren’t exactly cut off from information like, say, North Korea. If our military setup an “operation” in another country and most of the globe turned on us and crushed our economy as a result I think I would at least entertain the possibility that our government is the bad guys in this scenario and I wouldn’t buy some narrative that they all decided to act on some hatred of us for no good reason.
> 
> And maybe this is also a result of having a free (but often biased) press, but if the same happened to the US when we invaded Iraq I would probably assume we are the bad guys in that one too. Even without that cause and effect, a lot of Americans already felt it was an unjust invasion.
> 
> But I guess it’s up for debate what exactly the population is willing/supposed to do when they have a government that likes to run around and slaughter people outside your borders. You shouldn’t exactly look at Americans for a good example of changing government actions on military operations.



From the sounds of it, at least with what we know, the Russian people don't seem to support this war. Having a free press is essential, we can argue about MSNBC vs Fox News all day long but in the end we have the option to choose our source and that's what it's all about and the reason we were all informed about the Iraq war.

It sounds like Russians did have access as you say, but has since been cut off and now only gets state sponsored news. My guess is that change alone makes their people even more uneasy about it. I don't blame their people at all, they're just victims themselves. As long as we placate that maniac Putin he will sacrifice them all, both at home and Ukraine and then whatever nation he wants to invade next. If you want it to end you have to cut the head off of the snake.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> From the sounds of it, at least with what we know, the Russian don't seem to support this war. Having a free press is essential, we can argue about MSNBC vs Fox News all day long but in the end we have the option to choose our source and that's what it's all about and the reason we were all informed about the Iraq war.
> 
> It sounds like Russians did have access as you say, but has since been cut off and now only gets state sponsored news. My guess is that change alone makes their people even more uneasy about it. I don't blame their people at all, they're just victims themselves. As long as we placate that maniac Putin he will sacrifice them all, both at home and Ukraine and then whatever nation he wants to invade next. If you want it to end you have to cut the head off of the snake.




That's another thing I was going to mention, if all news got banned for going against the government narrative I would be highly suspect of our righteousness.  

And this may not be a popular view, but I also feel bad for a lot of cannon fodder level members of the Russian military, aside from murderous knuckledraggers that always make up some percentage of any military.   Most of them didn't sign up for this situation.


----------



## Arkitect

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> And this may not be a popular view, but I also feel bad for a lot of cannon fodder level members of the Russian military, aside from murderous knuckledraggers that always make up some percentage of any military.   Most of them didn't sign up for this situation.



And some of them are conscripted… despite denials by Putin.



> Russia has admitted that conscript soldiers have been sent into Ukraine and that some have been captured by Ukrainian troops.
> 
> The admission comes after President Vladimir Putin vowed that conscripts would not be deployed and that Russian forces would rely on professional troops.
> 
> Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said that “unfortunately there have been detected several instances of the presence of conscript-service military personnel” with units in Ukraine but that “almost all” of them had been recalled to Russia.
> 
> He added that some conscripts were taken prisoner by Ukrainian forces while serving in a logistics unit and efforts are under way to free them. Konashenkov didn’t specify how many conscripts had served in Ukraine or how many were captured.



Link


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Arkitect said:


> And some of them are conscripted… despite denials by Putin.
> 
> 
> Link




I saw some article about a Siberian politician getting a tongue lashing for sending members of their police to Ukraine.  He had to come up with some diplomatic way to basically say “take it up with Putin”.  

As Russian deaths start piling up no amount of threats of being thrown in jail is going to keep their loved ones from protesting.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Rumor is that the whole Z thing in Russia is an attempt to create the equivalent of the MAGA hat or Swastika before the Nazi’s aspiration became apparent. It gives the intellectually lazy a sense that they belong to a group and want to advertise it. Sort of “My false flag attempt failed and all I got was this Z t-shirt”.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Rumor is that the whole Z thing in Russia is an attempt to create the equivalent of the MAGA hat or Swastika before the Nazi’s aspiration became apparent. It gives the intellectually lazy a sense that they belong to a group and want to advertise it. Sort of “My false flag attempt failed and all I got was this Z t-shirt”.



That’s kind of normal, tbh. There are countless symbols and such aimed at creating a team, including hammer and sickle.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Rumor is that the whole Z thing in Russia is an attempt to create the equivalent of the MAGA hat or Swastika before the Nazi’s aspiration became apparent. It gives the intellectually lazy a sense that they belong to a group and want to advertise it. Sort of “My false flag attempt failed and all I got was this Z t-shirt”.




Yeah and per that updating AP News link from @Arkitect, all that Putin's getting at the moment-- despite his obsession with an imagined spectre of NATO missiles parked aggressively on the eastern edges of Ukraine-- is the actuality of a couple of US Patriot air defense batteries that have been moved from Germany into Poland, at Poland's request.

_*Wait, what?*_  I can see Putin asking some generals.

 Yeah.   So there's that.   He's stirred up the neighbors, who don't plan to become again or ever the satellites of Putin's fondly remembered USSR or its apparent wannabe successor-oppressor, the New Russian Empire that lives in his head. 

Z might stand for zap, depending on how randy ol' Putin gets while fondling his new map of Russia before someone manages to sit him down at a table to make a mark on some paperwork that includes a map of his route back home.


----------



## Deleted member 215

yaxomoxay said:


> That’s kind of normal, tbh. There are countless symbols and such aimed at creating a team, including hammer and sickle.




Or an Apple with a bite out of it.


----------



## yaxomoxay

TBL said:


> Or an Apple with a bite out of it.



I have no idea what you’re referring to. No idea. Zero. Nada. I deny any implied allegation that I am addicted to products with the logo of a bitten apple on them. What a silly concept. You will hear from my lawyers.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

lizkat said:


> Yeah and per that updating AP News link from @Arkitect, all that Putin's getting at the moment-- despite his obsession with an imagined spectre of NATO missiles parked aggressively on the eastern edges of Ukraine-- is the actuality of a couple of US Patriot air defense batteries that have been moved from Germany into Poland, at Poland's request.
> 
> _*Wait, what?*_  I can see Putin asking some generals.
> 
> Yeah.   So there's that.   He's stirred up the neighbors, who don't plan to become again or ever the satellites of Putin's fondly remembered USSR or its apparent wannabe successor-oppressor, the New Russian Empire that lives in his head.
> 
> Z might stand for zap, depending on how randy ol' Putin gets while fondling his new map of Russia before someone manages to sit him down at a table to make a mark on some paperwork that includes a map of his route back home.





This brings me to a question for which I will use an analogy.

Let’s say on the sidewalk in front of my house there is a paper bag, pile of dog shit, and a book of matches. This is there as a deterrent in the ongoing dispute with these damn kids going on my lawn. At some point I hire a contractor to expand my house all the way up to the sidewalk. Do I then get to yell about the deterrent stockpile being right at my front door despite the fact that it never actually moved?


----------



## yaxomoxay

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This brings me to a question for which I will use an analogy.
> 
> Let’s say on the sidewalk in front of my house there is a paper bag, pile of dog shit, and a book of matches. This is there as a deterrent in the ongoing dispute with these damn kids going on my lawn. At some point I hire a contractor to expand my house all the way up to the sidewalk. Do I then get to yell about the deterrent stockpile being right at my front door despite the fact that it never actually moved?



Ultimately, whoever has the best lawyers will be defined as “right”.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Russian Agent Maria Butina Claims Ukrainians Are Bombing Themselves
					

“We have tons of evidence that the Russia army does not touch, does not bomb civilian populations,” Butina said in explaining the absurd bit of Putin propaganda




					www.rollingstone.com
				




Hey, Putin found his My Pillow guy/woman!  Complete with “tons of evidence”.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> Ultimately, whoever has the best lawyers will be defined as “right”.




Ah the rule of law again.  Such a pesky notion.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> Ah the rule of law again.  Such a pesky notion.




Agreed.  Completely.

For what it is worth, I've met (and worked with) senior Romanians who have told me (privately) that they deeply regret what happened to Nicolae Ceausescu following the Romanian revolution of 1989, for, they (now) believe that he should have been tried (and sentenced) in a properly constituted court of law, rather than face the form of summary justice that occurred at the time.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Another interesting news item









						WSJ News Exclusive | Saudi, Emirati Leaders Decline Calls With Biden During Ukraine Crisis
					

The Persian Gulf monarchies have signaled they won’t help ease surging oil prices unless Washington supports them in Yemen, elsewhere.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Another interesting news item
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WSJ News Exclusive | Saudi, Emirati Leaders Decline Calls With Biden During Ukraine Crisis
> 
> 
> The Persian Gulf monarchies have signaled they won’t help ease surging oil prices unless Washington supports them in Yemen, elsewhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com



Yes, I read that yesterday.

Rather short-sighted on the part of both KSA and UAE.

Snubbing Mr Biden is foolish, (especially given the way they had cosied up to his predecessor), and will prove to be counter-productive.

Besides, if you make your living (and fund your state) through the export of natural resources such as oil and gas, now is the time to drop - reduce - slash - prices, in order to ensure continued dependence on this source of energy, for that would slow - inertia, especially if it is the easier option - will usually be chosen over change, which can be painful at worst, and unsettling and rather disconcerting at best, - western velocity re seeking out secure, stable, sustainable energy alternatives.

Or, rather, if you make the status quo too painful, then, western states will be influenced by considerations of energy security, energy prices, and environmental considerations to spur them into supporting and financing research and development into viable change.


----------



## Zoidberg

Scepticalscribe said:


> The other thing to note, is that while Europe's skies are shut to Russian airlines, and Russian aircraft, those of Africa and Asia are not.
> 
> Nevertheless, Belarus is the only "foreign" (i.e. international) route currently flown - or operated - by Aeroflot.
> 
> I would have expected that flights would have continued to the countries that abstained on the extraordinary UN vote - India? China? - what used to be considered to be Soviet Central Asia?
> 
> It seems to me to be significant that Russian airlines no longer fly *anywhere* in the world (for Belarus hardly counts).



The thing is, with the sanctions, the rubble (pun intended) being what it is, and not being able to pay outside of the country easily, I can't imagine there's many Russians going abroad... Conversely, investment in Russia is going to be annihilated for the next decade at least (no stock market, nationalisation of companies, brain drain, possible sanctions for those who trade with them) so business trips into Russia are probably not very common as of late. If Putin stays and the war rages, no one will want to invest. If he's replaced, there will be some serious turmoil for years to come. What industry they have (even mining) is reliant on exports from modern countries (even China won't cut it for some things). One example from the past is the embargo the Western bloc imposed on high end machinery such as CNC milling machines. They will have to do with what they have for the foreseeable future, and when things start breaking, it will be very expensive and complicated for them to get new machines or replacement parts.

And it's not like Russia is the best tourism destination in early March right before possible civil unrest when people stop getting paid.

A quick search shows that Aeroflot's fleet is composed almost entirely of Airbus and Boeing jets (no idea whether they are leased or owned). If there is serious doubts about their maintenance, ownership, contracts and so on, it would make sense that they try to limit the flights, especially abroad. If the aircraft are leased, Aeroflot won't want them seized or delayed.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> Agreed.
> 
> For what it is worth, I've met senior Romanians who have told me (privately) that they deeply regret what happened to Nicolae Ceausescu following the Romanian revolution of 1989, for that they (now) believe that he should have been tried (and sentenced) in a properly constituted court of law, rather than face the form of summary justice that occurred at the time



Yes.  It would have set a precedent for and useful example of "all due process" instead of reinforcing the notion that things can be settled quickly via impulsive or mob-driven bringing of "justice".

It's not just that revenge is a dish best served cold, it's that letting things cool off may actually produce justice, yet still be seen to intersect with a form of "revenge" when a legal punishment is administered to someone who is tried and found guilty.

Of course there are always going to be people who cannot seem to tolerate the risk that the guilty may escape justice in the interests of protecting the innocent.   It's hard to want for a perceived enemy what one would want for oneself, but that's how rule of law is supposed to work.


----------



## SuperMatt

So, NATO will not be delivering fighter jets to Ukraine yet, if at all…









						Pentagon rejects Poland’s offer to transfer fighter fleet for Ukraine
					

The Pentagon rejected Poland's offer to transfer its MiG-29 fighter jets to the U.S., who would have then given them to Ukraine.




					www.armytimes.com


----------



## Zoidberg

Now that the nazi excuse is getting old, Russian online propaganda has changed their rhetoric to say that the US had covert labs producing bioweapons in Ukraine.

That means Russia is planning on using bioweapons.

Cunning stunts.


----------



## Eric

Zoidberg said:


> Now that the nazi excuse is getting old, Russian online propaganda has changed their rhetoric to say that the US had covert labs producing bioweapons in Ukraine.
> 
> That means Russia is planning on using bioweapons.
> 
> *Cunning stunts.*



More like Stunning cunts


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> More like Stunning cunts




Christ.

Puerile wit?

Please.


----------



## Eric

They just bombed a hospital full of people and are now sniping and using tanks to shoot down civilians just trying to leave the country. Wondering how long we'll continue defending putin from calls of assassination. If the argument is "it could be worse if he's removed" I'm just not seeing how this is possible.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> They just bombed a hospital full of people and are now sniping and using tanks to shoot down civilians just trying to leave the country. *Wondering how long we'll continue defending putin from calls of assassination. *If the argument is "it could be worse if he's removed" I'm just not seeing how this is possible.




Forever.

We must adhere to the rule of law, or we are no better than those we condemn.

We must model this, and be seen to abide by these principles, and that we, also, abide by, adhere to, and live by them.  We cannot - credibly - preach them, otherwise.

More to the point, there must be an objective standard to which we abide by, to which we adhere, which we recognise, and which we are also prepared to be judged by.

The rule of law applies to - or, ought to apply to - all of us, irrespective of what we think, feel, or how convenient - or inconvenient - we think it is, or might be.

Otherwise - if we do not accept that it rules, governs, guides - us - how can we expect that others will accept this principle?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> They just bombed a hospital full of people and are now sniping and using tanks to shoot down civilians just trying to leave the country. Wondering how long we'll continue defending putin from calls of assassination. If the argument is "it could be worse if he's removed" I'm just not seeing how this is possible.




I‘m sure the Russian propaganda machine is saying all the atrocities are false flag operations by Ukrainians and the west.  The main way to detect if an authoritarian leader is lying during a crisis is if they opened their mouth and said it.


----------



## Yoused

Just so you know, if Individual-ONE were still in office, there would have been no talk of sanctions, and this war would have been over in 4 days. So much better. When asked for his thoughts on the Ukraine situation on the Nelk Boys podcast, his sage response was "_windmills kill birds_".


----------



## chengengaun

Eric said:


> it could be worse if he's removed



I think there is no viable choice other than removing him from power. However, this can be done by other means e.g. his subordinates standing up against him, and have a public, transparent resolution to the issue e.g. trial - with some sort of continuity to the operation of the government - though these options are about choosing among the least worst.


----------



## Zoidberg

@Scepticalscribe here's your answer regarding the cancellation of international flights

_"Like a deadbeat who hides his car when the repo man comes calling, Russian airlines appear to have absconded with more than US$10 billion worth of rented airplanes rather than let them be repossessed.

After the newest wave of EU sanctions banned not only the sale of aircraft and parts to Russian companies but also access over EU airspace for Russian planes, the country’s airlines responded by absconding with more than 500 planes valued at over $10 billion before they could be repossessed by their lessors. After the newest wave of EU sanctions banned not only the sale of aircraft and parts to Russian companies but also access over EU airspace for Russian planes, the country’s airlines responded by absconding with more than 500 planes valued at over $10 billion before they could be repossessed by their lessors, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday.

Cut off from international markets, supply lines, and aviation insurance providers, Russia’s wings are essentially clipped, which may be why its airlines resorted to withholding more than 500 planes leased to them by foreign firms in order to mitigate their losses.

The news comes after Russia’s aviation regulator recommended on March 5 that *all Russian airlines with planes leased from foreign carriers, and not registered in Russia, avoid flying overseas where the aircraft risked being detained upon arrival*, according to TASS.

And so Aeroflot, Russia’s flag carrier, as well as the country’s other airlines, *halted their international flights after ensuring that their leased aircraft were safely back and tucked away in Russian hangars

In further defiance of the EU sanctions, the Kremlin also advised its airlines to re-register their foreign-owned aircraft, in what is seen as an effort to thwart the revocation of the planes’ certifications*, Bloomberg reported."_









						Russia Absconds with $10bn in Aircraft in Response to EU Sanctions
					

Like a deadbeat who hides his car when the repo man comes calling, Russian airlines appear to have absconded with more than US$10 billion worth of rented airplanes rather than let them be repossessed.




					www.occrp.org
				




It's a rogue state doubling down.


----------



## Eric

chengengaun said:


> I think there is no viable choice other than removing him from power. However, this can be done by other means e.g. his subordinates standing up against him, and have a public, transparent resolution to the issue e.g. trial - with some sort of continuity to the operation of the government - though these options are about choosing among the least worst.



I think no matter who you are or what position you hold, killing a bunch of innocent human beings warrants a death sentence and a price on your head. In no other society in the world are such atrocities allowed to happen by a single individual like this without consequences, where you'll put a known mass murderer out on the street and say "let's let the system take care of this properly when they see fit".


----------



## chengengaun

Quite an informative video on what will happen to leased Russian airliners.






Direct link


----------



## Edd

I mean, McDonald’s alone closing 800 or 900 stores? That’s 10s of thousands of jobs and it only scratches the surface. It’s going to get real interesting real fast for Putin.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Good editorial piece on today’s WSJ:









						Opinion | Russia’s Failure Is China’s Gain
					

This isn’t another cold war. Due to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the world has become more dangerous than it’s been since World War II.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> I think no matter who you are or what position you hold, killing a bunch of innocent human beings warrants a death sentence and a price on your head.



Morally I don’t entirely disagree, but yours is a very hard line on the sand.









						Newly Declassified Video Shows U.S. Killing of 10 Civilians in Drone Strike
					

The New York Times obtained footage of the botched strike in Kabul, whose victims included seven children, through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Edd said:


> I mean, McDonald’s alone closing 800 or 900 stores? That’s 10s of thousands of jobs and it only scratches the surface. It’s going to get real interesting real fast for Putin.



Not to be the cynic here, but while it certainly creates some issue, let’s not forget that other countries, including North Korea and Cuba, survive without McDonald’s and with a plethora of western sanctions. If China is truly fueling Russian treasury, I don’t expect riots or such, just some adaptation period. Russia might become the next North Korea, but a much more powerful one.


----------



## Zoidberg

yaxomoxay said:


> Morally I don’t entirely disagree, but yours is a very hard line on the sand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newly Declassified Video Shows U.S. Killing of 10 Civilians in Drone Strike
> 
> 
> The New York Times obtained footage of the botched strike in Kabul, whose victims included seven children, through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



That's messed up, but it's not comparable.
One is a monumental fuckup (that should be punished, but won't be), the other is intentional and the backbone of their strategy, and they will keep doing it every day until something happens.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Zoidberg said:


> That's messed up, but it's not comparable.
> One is a monumental fuckup (that should be punished, but won't be), the other is intentional and the backbone of their strategy, and they will keep doing it every day until something happens.



I know. That’s why I said that the way it was expressed was a very hard line. Mine was more a “side comment” on the black and white of the statement.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

yaxomoxay said:


> Morally I don’t entirely disagree, but yours is a very hard line on the sand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newly Declassified Video Shows U.S. Killing of 10 Civilians in Drone Strike
> 
> 
> The New York Times obtained footage of the botched strike in Kabul, whose victims included seven children, through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com




Similarly, I still haven’t stopped cringing every time I hear a US politician or news personality say “invasion of a sovereign country” without pause, reflection, or irony. I understand there are some key differences here but that hardly matters when you are a dead civilian or loved one of a dead civilian as a result of the invasion.


----------



## chengengaun

Kuril Islands, Sakhalin, Kamchatka Peninsula, hmm...









						After Ukraine, Japan reverts to old line on Russian-controlled islands
					

Shinzo Abe's nuanced language gone as outlook for negotiations dims




					asia.nikkei.com
				




p/s: That is definitely strategic distraction - Kaliningrad and the Far East (link direct to the timestamp).


----------



## Edd

chengengaun said:


> Kuril Islands, Sakhalin, Kamchatka Peninsula, hmm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Ukraine, Japan reverts to old line on Russian-controlled islands
> 
> 
> Shinzo Abe's nuanced language gone as outlook for negotiations dims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> asia.nikkei.com



Very interesting, thanks for posting.


----------



## yaxomoxay

I’ll just drop it here. From WSJ.


----------



## chengengaun

Edd said:


> Very interesting, thanks for posting.



A lot of sensitivity, old wounds and unfinished business in the area. Russian sub bases; China, Russia and the Koreas; animosity between Japan and South Korea; territorial disputes; oil-and-gas fields. Hope there is no sudden move in this area.


----------



## Eric

Zoidberg said:


> That's messed up, but it's not comparable.
> One is a monumental fuckup (that should be punished, but won't be), the other is intentional and the backbone of their strategy, and they will keep doing it every day until something happens.



Yep, very different than sniping civilians just trying to escape and deliberately bombing hospitals just to murder innocent people.


----------



## yaxomoxay

chengengaun said:


> Kuril Islands, Sakhalin, Kamchatka Peninsula, hmm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Ukraine, Japan reverts to old line on Russian-controlled islands
> 
> 
> Shinzo Abe's nuanced language gone as outlook for negotiations dims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> asia.nikkei.com



Getting ready for arms race I guess


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> @Scepticalscribe here's your answer regarding the cancellation of international flights
> 
> _"Like a deadbeat who hides his car when the repo man comes calling, Russian airlines appear to have absconded with more than US$10 billion worth of rented airplanes rather than let them be repossessed.
> 
> After the newest wave of EU sanctions banned not only the sale of aircraft and parts to Russian companies but also access over EU airspace for Russian planes, the country’s airlines responded by absconding with more than 500 planes valued at over $10 billion before they could be repossessed by their lessors. After the newest wave of EU sanctions banned not only the sale of aircraft and parts to Russian companies but also access over EU airspace for Russian planes, the country’s airlines responded by absconding with more than 500 planes valued at over $10 billion before they could be repossessed by their lessors, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday.
> 
> Cut off from international markets, supply lines, and aviation insurance providers, Russia’s wings are essentially clipped, which may be why its airlines resorted to withholding more than 500 planes leased to them by foreign firms in order to mitigate their losses.
> 
> The news comes after Russia’s aviation regulator recommended on March 5 that *all Russian airlines with planes leased from foreign carriers, and not registered in Russia, avoid flying overseas where the aircraft risked being detained upon arrival*, according to TASS.
> 
> And so Aeroflot, Russia’s flag carrier, as well as the country’s other airlines, *halted their international flights after ensuring that their leased aircraft were safely back and tucked away in Russian hangars
> 
> In further defiance of the EU sanctions, the Kremlin also advised its airlines to re-register their foreign-owned aircraft, in what is seen as an effort to thwart the revocation of the planes’ certifications*, Bloomberg reported."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia Absconds with $10bn in Aircraft in Response to EU Sanctions
> 
> 
> Like a deadbeat who hides his car when the repo man comes calling, Russian airlines appear to have absconded with more than US$10 billion worth of rented airplanes rather than let them be repossessed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.occrp.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a rogue state doubling down.



Gosh.

Thanks for that; much appreciated.

I had wondered why Aeroflot flights to states deemed neutral had come to a halt.  This is depressing, informative and instructive.


----------



## yaxomoxay

@Scepticalscribe since you’re interested to this type of issues:









						The Kirill Question
					

How should Pope Francis and the Holy See deal with the head of the Russian Orthodox Church?




					www.ncregister.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Even Russian State TV Is Pleading With Putin to Stop the War
					

State propagandists called for Putin to end the “special military operation” before “frightening” sanctions destabilize his regime and risk civil war in Russia.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Macky-Mac

While Aeroflot is not flying to neutral countries, there are still commercial airlines that continue to fly in and out of Russia. While it's still a developing situation, Chinese airlines are continuing service, flights to and from India still fly although flights are still limited by India's COVID restrictions. Others still flying include airlines from Qatar, UAE, Turkey, Serbia and Israel, so it's still possible to travel.....if you have the money.


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> Interesting situation which I am still observing.
> 
> The US banned energy import from Russia. It’s a relatively big hit to Russia, however the US doesn’t depend on Russia that much.
> 
> However, Europe is in a much different situation:
> 
> View attachment 12306
> 
> So most of Europe can’t simply turn off the faucet without expecting a very serious damage to their own economy. This is even more true in some countries, some of which close to Russia geographically.
> 
> What if Putin reacts to the US ban on Russian energy with a very severe tariff on energy export to Europe, let’s say 10/15%, while decreasing availability by 10% or so to say “we’ll go back to normal as soon as the US removes the ban.”? That *could* put the US and the EU at serious odds.





the following chart shows "Russian oil" as opposed to "Russian gas".....clearly some NATO countries rely heavily on Russian crude oil.....it's not clear if these numbers include refined products


----------



## Thomas Veil

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Even Russian State TV Is Pleading With Putin to Stop the War
> 
> 
> State propagandists called for Putin to end the “special military operation” before “frightening” sanctions destabilize his regime and risk civil war in Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



They are being very careful about what they say. Even as they try to claim Russia should stop this action, they adhere to the state line that there are lots of Nazis in Ukraine that need to be rooted out. 

Of course, how could they say otherwise? To suggest that this was an idiotic idea from the beginning would earn them 15 years in a Russian slammer.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Interesting article about a type of anti-tank defense the Ukrainians are using.









						Ukraine's answer to Russian tanks involves a classic tactic: metal 'hedgehogs' — Popular Science
					

These tank traps are also known as Czech Hedgehogs, and their use dates back to the 1930s. Here's how they work.




					apple.news
				




You, like I, may have seen these things in WWII movies but never known what they’re called, much less how much damage such a simple thing can cause.

Of course, as the article states, they do have their drawbacks. But it’s an interesting throwback to the past nevertheless.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> @Scepticalscribe since you’re interested to this type of issues:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Kirill Question
> 
> 
> How should Pope Francis and the Holy See deal with the head of the Russian Orthodox Church?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ncregister.com




Very interesting.

Worth noting is the fact that Stalin himself had been a seminarian, but had quit the priesthood before he could be ordained.

In Georgia, the Catholicos-Patriarch, Ilia II, is genuinely respected; in fact, I would go so far as to say that he is revered.

Actually, I have attended concerts (classical music, or ballet, or opera) at which he appeared - simply attending as a member of the audience, - and I have observed the exceptionally warm reception (genuine standing ovations, enthusiastic, spontaneous, and very warm - I've been present at enough of the other kind to know the difference) he received.

Kirill's position is different, and his proximity to Mr Putin, and tendency to supply theological justifications for what are indefensible actions may yet cost him dearly within the wider Orthodox communion.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Macky-Mac said:


> While Aeroflot is not flying to neutral countries, there are still commercial airlines that continue to fly in and out of Russia. While it's still a developing situation, Chinese airlines are continuing service, flights to and from India still fly although flights are still limited by India's COVID restrictions. Others still flying include airlines from Qatar, UAE, Turkey, Serbia and Israel, so it's still possible to travel.....if you have the money.



Fascinating.

I had wondered about that, too.

Turkish Airlines have a very wide reach, and are prepared to fly regular routes to places many other airlines wouldn't touch.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Thomas Veil said:


> They are being very careful about what they say. Even as they try to claim Russia should stop this action, they adhere to the state line that there are lots of Nazis in Ukraine that need to be rooted out.
> 
> Of course, how could they say otherwise? To suggest that this was an idiotic idea from the beginning would earn them 15 years in a Russian slammer.





Maybe they can contact their colleagues at Fox for tips on how to astroturf insanity and incompetence.


----------



## lizkat

Piece in  the WSJ today about the London Metal Exchange having had to shut down for a few days while it sorts itself out from extreme volatility in the nickel market. The price rose 66% on Monday and had briefly doubled on Tuesday.  Russia is a major source of nickel, which of course is in huge demand globally since used in production of batteries, stainless steel, etc. 

  What I found interesting is that it was a Chinese holding company (and major nickel producer, with plants in Africa and Asia) that had managed to make enough forward sales of nickel  that it ended up short to the tune of an $8 billion paper loss,  after nickel pricing surged as Russia invaded Ukraine.    The holding company claims now it has rounded up enough nickel to settle  short positions in its accounts.   Nickel has traded since in Shanghai and prices have dropped enough to suspend trading a couple times, so looks like the crunch may be over except for firms still trying to round up enough cash for their margin calls while the LME shutdown persists.









						Nickel Market Freeze Extended to Sort Out Big Trading Loss Amid Ukraine War
					

The pause until next week gives the London Metal Exchange more time to resolve a crisis caused by a trade that originated in China, a high-profile example of how the conflict has hit financial markets.




					www.wsj.com
				




The short squeeze had affected other producers as well and the market practically seized up...









						Chinese Nickel Giant Tsingshan Faces $8 Billion Trading Loss as Ukraine War Upends Market
					

Nickel prices soared, part of a self-reinforcing dynamic known as a short squeeze, prompting the London Metal Exchange to suspend trading in the metal.




					www.wsj.com
				






> The advance in nickel prices, beginning with the invasion, inflicted losses on companies, including Tsingshan, that had sold nickel contracts to lock in prices for their metallic products. Those companies, their banks and their brokers struggled to meet margin calls from exchanges, traders said. They rushed to close out losing positions by buying back nickel contracts.
> 
> Hardly anyone would sell to them, the traders said, so the purchases led to a huge rise in prices in a self-reinforcing dynamic known as a short squeeze. The crescendo arrived early Tuesday, when the price of nickel on the London Metal Exchange hit a record high of over $100,000 a metric ton before pulling back somewhat.




What Putin thinks of a supposed best bud harboring a (privately held) Chinese firm that routinely shorts Russian nickel to hedge its operations, well...  who knows.   He and Xi can hash that one out over lunch sometime, assuming they stay friends and assuming Xi doesn't find anything untoward when he looks into the Chinese holding company's operations in recent times, which look-see is bound to occur.  There was mention of "foreign investors" and no revelation of what nations they hailed from.

Meanwhile the holding company stated to Chinese state media that its finances are in good order, no problem, no worrries.   What else would they say, all things considered.

Can't make this stuff up, and this is just tip of iceberg as far as demos of the  global blowback from both Putin's war on Russia and the  rest of the world's sanctions on Russia.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Fascinating.

But Xi Jinping is not - and never was - Mr Putin's "best bud"; over the years, they have had a number of interests in common, and they have been allies on occasion.

A friendship, it is not; in fact, it would be stretching things (to my mind) to even see their relationship as a marriage of convenience.

In my experience, the Chinese value stability (political, societal, economic), value trade, and value (unhindered) access to natural resources, and are extraordinarily risk averse, when "risk" threatens stability and means war.

This doesn't surprise me, at all; in fact, it is exactly what I would expect to see from the Chinese in these circumstances.

Elsewhere, Goldman Sachs is exiting Moscow, and - according to Al Jazeera - so is JP Morgan, which is interesting.

Meanwhile, the Russians are busy dreaming up - rather, they are drawing up plans, - which will find legal expression when passed into law - which will allow them to seize the assets of departing western businesses, according to an article in the Guardian.

And they have announced that they intend to ban (or prohibit) the export of certain commodities - such as wheat, rye, barley, corn, sugar and timber - to Eurasian Economic Union states (basically, former Soviet states) such as Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan, states with whom they would still have economic - and cultural (and some sort of political) ties.


----------



## lizkat

Yah, "best bud" belongs in quotes for sure regarding how Xi views Putin.

Xi has clearly figured alliance w/ Russia convenient on a number of fronts, particularly with the pipelines development partnership, meant by China to help offset ballooning costs of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Also, partnering up with Russia is a hedge against things going farther south with the USA as those two countries struggle to find a way back to competitive partnership.  That reset is not simple because of the USA's focus on Xinjiang and Hong Kong human rights issues and on China's aggressive behavior in East Asian waters.. and because the USA does want to manufacture more goods at home. 

But a US reset with China will be easier now than it would have been with Trump at the helm.   Sure, Biden's not Nixon in terms of interests in developing deeper ties with China,  and even Nixon wouldn't be Nixon now,  looking at Chinese behavior in recent years.  However, Biden is nearly as much of a pragmatist as Xi is, and both countries need each other to grow their own economies.  How they dress that up for their respective domestic audiences is up to each of them and they both know that.

Meanwhile whenever the relationship with Putin  proves to be more costly than profitable to China or to Xi's reputation in his own power circles --and certainly Xi's eyes have been opened on that score now--  Xi will be looking to separate support of Chinese-Russian construction projects and other commercial arrangements from his public support for Putin's moves.  Putin is pretty isolated now and I don't see Xi stepping out there to shore the guy up.

Right now Xi is looking to see how tenable some of these sanctions are in the wake of reaction to Putin's miscalculated attack.  But then so is everyone else looking at that.  We all know the fallout is going to hit innocent parties but we can't predict  who and where those parties are and how much power they may summon to resist or overturn the sanctions.   It's a huge risk to global finance but then the alternative might have been to heighten the risk of  nuclear warfare.

The biggest risk,  and one that can't be calculated at all since we can't read Putin's mind,  is that sanctions don't keep Putin from pressing on as if there's no stopping him, which I think he may believe.  But by now he's realizing the logistics are difficult and the opposition quite determined.   The western interests can say we don't wish to engage militarily in a direct manner, e.g. in Ukrainian airspace,  but if he calls us on that by attacking a NATO country then all bets are off.

One could only hope then that the Russian generals manage to be realistic and self-serving enough to try to save the state itself for another day,  and either talk sense into Putin or "just depose him"  -- in whatever possibly messy manner that might occur--  and then rapidly withdraw from Ukraine and try to keep order at home while they sort things out politically.  Could be another pretty chaotic era  in Russia like that under Yeltsin, but without as much opportunity for looting...  the looting has already occurred, the kleptocracy established,  and the only question is where's all the dough and what would the Russian generals have in the way of money to try to run the country with for awhile.   Then the overhanging issues of how to make the sanctions go away without anointing one of the oligarchs to step into Putin's shoes.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

@Zoidberg: Apparently, - from a few pieces that I have been reading this evening - China, (and India and Turkey) are refusing to service, repair - or supply spare parts for - the Russian aviation industry (including the impounded planes leased by Russian airline companies).

That will certainly have an impact on what reains of the Russian aviation industry.

Elsewhere, I have read about Russian threats to lift trademark restrictions in the country, a move, which, if true, would have enormous (mainly negative) ramfications for any sort of economic recovery whenever this conflict does end.

And I am reading reports that quite a number of the Russian casualties (thus far) are of soldiers who are from ethnicities other than Russian, though the effects of what are clearly unexpectedly heavy casualties (both Russian, and those from other ethnicities in Russia serving with Russian forces) may not be felt for some time in Russia itself.

The situation in Kaliningrad - a very strange place, I was fortunate in that I was able to visit it, in 2004, on an EU funded trip - is also exceedingly interesting.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> The situation in Kaliningrad - a very strange place, I was fortunate in that I was able to visit it, in 2004, on an EU funded trip - is also exceedingly interesting




Let's hope we don't have World War III erupting over a NATO defense of the Sulwaki gap...  the thing is, that corridor between Kalingrad and Belarus affords the only ground routes from Poland to the little Baltic states, which are also NATO members.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> Let's hope we don't have World War III erupting over a NATO defense of the Sulwaki gap...  the thing is, that corridor between Kalingrad and Belarus affords the only ground routes from Poland to the little Baltic states, which are also NATO members.
> 
> View attachment 12360



Agreed.

I've been to many strange and some downright peculiar places, but I have to say that Kaliningrad (once known as Königsberg), was deeply weird.

And the amber museum I visited while there was just bizarre.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> I've been to many strange and some downright peculiar places, but I have to say that Kaliningrad (once known as Königsberg), was deeply weird.
> 
> And the amber museum I visited while there was just bizarre.




Amber as in amber-entombed insects and grains and so forth?  Do tell...  (maybe in anther thread).

I swear you should be writing a book about your adventures in all the delightful, scary or downright weird places you've been posted to while on your OSCE and other assignments.


----------



## Arkitect

Putin's view of things…






Ben Jennings in The Grauniad.


----------



## Zoidberg

Much better translation of the letter from the FSB whistleblower I posted earlier:



> "I have hardly slept at all these days, at work at almost all times, I have brain-fog. Maybe from overworking, but I feel like I am in a surreal world.
> 
> The Pandora’s Box is open – a real global horror will begin by the summer – global famine is inevitable. Russia and Ukraine were the main suppliers of grain to the world. This year’s harvest will be smaller and logistical problems will result in a catastrophe. (MY COMMENTARY: I disagree that this will result in global famine.)
> I can’t say what guided those in charge to decide to proceed with the execution of this operation, but now they are methodically blaming us (FSB). We are being scolded for our analysis. Recently, we have been increasingly pressured to prepare more reports. All of these political consultants and politicians and that powers-that-be are causing chaos. Most importantly, no one knew that there will be such a war – it was concealed from everyone. For example – you are being asked to analyze various outcomes and consequences of a meteorite attack (MY COMMENTARY: Here he most likely means the West’s sanctions) – you research the mode of attack, and you are being told that it’s just a hypothetical and not to stress on the details, so you understand the report is only intended as a checkbox, and the conclusions of the analysis must be positive for Russia, otherwise you basically get interrogated for not doing good work. So, you have to write that we have all necessary measures available to nullify the effects of a given type of attack. We are completely overworked. But then it turns out that the hypothetical has turned into reality, and the analysis we’ve done on that hypothetical is total trash.
> 
> We have no answer to the sanctions because of this.
> 
> No one knew there’d be such a war, so no one prepared for these sanctions.
> It’s the flipside of the secrecy – since everyone was kept in the dark, how could we prepare for it?
> Kadyrov has gone nuts. We were very close to a conflict with him because the Ukrainians through their disinformation about having received intel from the FSB on his squad in Kyiv. His squad was absolutely demolished before they even began to fight and they got blown to pieces. I do not have any info that it was an FSB leak to Ukraine, so I’d give it a 1-2% chance – but can’t exclude this possibility completely.
> Our Blitzkrieg has totally collapsed. It is impossible to complete the task: If Zelensky and his deputies were captured in the first 3 days, all key buildings also captured, and they were forced to read an address of their surrender to the country, then Ukraine’s resistance would have likely dissolved to a minimal level. Theoretically. But then what? Even in this IDEAL outcome, there remained an unsolvable problem: Who is the counterparty to our negotiations? If we remove Zelensky – fine – who is going to sign the agreement? If with Zelensky, then that agreement is worthless after we remove him.
> 
> ОПЗЖ (The Opposition Party in Ukraine collaborating with Russia) has refused to cooperate. Medvechuk, the coward, ran away. There is another leader – Boyko, but he refused too, even his own people won’t understand him. Wanted to bring back Tsaryova, but even our guys are against him here in Russia. Bring back Yanukovich? But how? If we are saying we can’t occupy, then the newly formed government will be overthrown in 10 minutes as soon as we leave.
> To occupy? Where would we find that many people? Commandant’s office, military police, counter-intelligence, security – even at minimum resistance from the Ukrainians, we’d need over 500,000 people, not including supply & logistics. There’s a rule, if you try to cover for bad quality leadership with quantity, you’ll make everything worse. And I repeat this would be the problem in the IDEAL SCENARIO, which does not exist.
> And what now? We cannot announce general mobilization for two reasons: 1) Mobilization will implode the situation inside Russia: political, economic, and social.
> 2) Our logistics are already over-extended today. We can send a much large contingent into Ukraine, and what would we get? Ukraine – a territorially enormous country, and their hate towards us is astronomical. Our roads simply cannot accommodate the resupply of such convoys, and everything will come to a halt. And we can’t pull it off from the management side because of the current chaos.
> These two reasons exist concurrently, although just one of them is enough to break everything.
> With regards to Russian military losses: I don’t know the reality – no one does. There was some information the first 2 days, but now no one knows what is happening in Ukraine. We’ve lost contact with major divisions (!!) They may re-establish contact, or may dissipate under an attack, and even the commanders don’t know how many are dead, injured, or captured. Total dead is definitely in the thousands, maybe 10,000, maybe 5,000, or maybe just 2,000. But even at our command no one knows. But probably closer to 10,000. And we are not counting losses at DNR & LNR.
> 
> Now even we kill Zelensky or take him prisoner, nothing will change. The level of hate toward us is similar to Chechnya. And now, even those loyal to us in Ukraine are publicly against us.
> Because all of this was planned at the top (in Russia), because we were told that such a scenario will not happen except only if we were to be attacked first. Because we were told that we need to maximize our threats in order to negotiate an outcome through peace. Because we were already preparing protests against Zelensky without ever considering invading Ukraine.
> Now, civilian losses in Ukraine will follow a geometric pattern progression, and resistance against us will only get stronger. Infantries already tried to enter cities – out of 20 paratrooper groups, only one had “provisional” success. Recall the invasion of Mosul – it’s a rule – happens with every country, nothing new.
> To hold a siege? Over the last decades in Europe – Serbia being the best example, cities can remain functional under siege for years.
> Humanitarian convoys from Europe to Ukraine is only a matter of time.
> Our conditional deadline is June. Conditional because in June there will be no economy left in Russia – there will be nothing left. By and large, next week there will be a collapse (in Russia) to either of the two sides, simply because the situation cannot remain under current conditions.
> We have no analyses, we can’t make any forecasts in this chaos, no one will be able to say anything with any certainty (in Russia).
> 
> To act through intuition, especially with high emotions, this is no poker game. But our bets will have to grow in size with hope that some option will succeed.
> The tragedy is that we can easily miscalculate, and as a result lose everything.
> By and large, Russia does not have an out. There are no options for a possible victory, only of losses – this is it.
> 100% we’ve repeated our mistake from last century, when we decided to kick the “weak” Japan in order to achieve a quick victory, and it turned our army was in a state of total calamity. Then, we started a war till the victorious end, then we started conscripting the Bolsheviks for re-education in the army. Then these barely-known Bolsheviks picked up their anti-war slogans.
> From the pluses: We did everything to ensure there wasn’t even a hint that we sent penal military units to the front. If you conscript political prisoners and the socially undesirables, the moral spirit of the army will be in the negative.
> The enemy is motivated. Monstrously motivated. Knows how to fight, plenty of capable commanders. They have weapons and support. We will simply establish a precedent of human catastrophe in the world.
> What we are afraid of the most: The top is trying to mask old problems with new problems. Largely for this reason Donbass happened in 2014 – We needed to distract the West from the Russian Spring in Crimea, so Donbass’ so-called crisis had to pull in all of the attention and become a bargaining chip. But even bigger problems started there. Then we decided to pressure Erdogan to get 4 pipes for the Southern Stream (gas) and entered Syria. This is after Suleimani (Islamic Revolutionary Guard) knowingly provided false info to us to solve his own problems.
> As a result, we couldn’t resolve the problem with Crimea, and Donbass’ problems didn’t go away. Southern Stream was reduced to 2 pipes (gas), and Syria is hanging – we leave and Assad will be toppled and we will look like idiots, and staying there is hard and pointless.
> I don’t know who come up with the “Blitzkrieg of Ukraine.” Had received all the real inputs, we would have at minimum pointed out that the initial plan is arguable, and that much has to be reassessed. A lot had to be reassessed.
> Now we are in crap (PG language mine) up to our necks, and we don’t know what to do. “Denazification” and “demilitarization” are not analytical categories because they don’t have concretely formulated parameters by which meeting of the objectives can be evaluated.
> 
> Now we are stuck waiting until some mentally screwed up advisor convinces the top to start a conflict with Europe, with demands to reduce the sanctions – they either loosen the sanctions or war. What if the West refuses? In that instance I won’t exclude that we will be pulled into a real international conflict, just like Hitler in 1939. Our “Z” will be equated to the Swastika.
> Is there a possibility of a localized nuclear strike? Yes. Not for any military objectives. Such a weapon won’t help with the breach of the defenses. But with a goal of scaring everyone else (The West).
> We are plowing to create a scenario in which to blame everything on Ukraine. Naryshkin (Director of Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia) and his SVR is digging the ground to prove that Ukraine was secretly building nuclear weapons. F*&K. They are hammering at what we’ve already analyzed and closed the book on: We can’t just make up any evidence or proof and existence of specialists and Uranium. Ukraine has a ton of depleted isotope 238 – this is nothing. The production cycle is such that you can’t do it in secret.
> A dirty bomb can’t be created in secret. Ukraine’s old nuclear power plants can only produce the material as a by-product in minimal amounts. The Americans have such monitoring at these plants with MAGATE that even talking about this is stupid.
> Do you know what will start in a week? Let’s let it be even in 2 weeks. We are going to be so screwed we will start reminiscing about the good ol’ hungry days of the 90s. As the markets are being closed, Nabiullina appears to be taking the right steps, but it’s like plugging holes on a ship with your fingers. The situation will break through anyway and even stronger. Nothing will be solved in 3 or 5 or 7 days any longer.
> Kadyrov is kicking his hoofs not without reason. They have their own adventures. He created a name for himself as the invincible – and if he falls down once his own people will remove him.
> Next. Syria. “Guys – hold on, everything will end in Ukraine and then we will fortify our positions in Syria.” And now at any moment our contingent stationed there may run out of resources, and then ridiculous heat will come…. Turkey is closing the strait, and sending supplies to Syria by air is the same as heating an oven with cash. Please notice – this is all happening at the same time, and we don’t even have time to throw it all in one pile for analysis.
> 
> Our current position is like Germany in 1943-1944 – but that’s our STARTING position in Ukraine.
> Sometimes I get lost in this overwork, sometimes feels as if this is just a dream and all is as it was before.
> With regards to prisons – it will be worse. The nuts will start to get tightened till blood. Everywhere. To be frank, purely technically, this is the only way to maintain any control of the situation. We are already in total mobilization mode. But we can’t remain in this mode for long, but our timetables are unknown, and it will only get worse. Governance always goes astray from mobilization. And just imagine: You can sprint 100m – but try that in a marathon.
> And so, with the Ukrainian question we lunged as if going for a 100m sprint, but turned out we’d signed up for a marathon.
> And this is a rather brief overview of the current events.
> 
> To offer further cynicism, I don’t believe that Putin will press the red button to destroy the entire world.
> First, it’s not one person that decides, and someone will refuse. There are lots of people there and there is no single “red” button.
> Second, there are certain doubts that it actually functions properly. Experience shows that the more transparent the control procedures, the easier it is to identify problems. And where it’s mirky as to who controls what and how, but always reports full of bravado, is where there are always problems.
> I am not sure that the “red button” system functions according to the declared data. Besides, plutonium fuel must be changed every 10 years.
> Third, and this is the most disgusting and sad, I personally do not believe in Putin’s will to sacrifice himself when he does not even allow his closest ministers and advisors to be in his vicinity. Whether it’s due to his fear of COVID or a possible assassination is irrelevant. If you are scared for the most trusted people to be near you, then how could you possibly choose to destroy yourself and those dearest to you."


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Zoidberg said:


> Much better translation of the letter from the FSB whistleblower I posted earlier:




Thanks for sharing this.

There are further letters from the same source, equally disturbing to read.


----------



## Zoidberg

After killing the mayor of one town, the Russians booby-trapped his body. They only took the mine out when they realised a priest was attempting to bury it himself (I guess bombing children hospitals is fine, but the clergy is off-limits? You don't want that kind of bad karma)









						Після вбивства росіяни замінували тіло мера Гостомеля
					

Тіло вбитого голови Гостомельської селищної ради Юрія Прилипка після розстрілу замінували російські військові




					www.slidstvo.info
				








__





						Google Translate
					

Google's free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 100 other languages.




					translate.google.co.uk


----------



## shadow puppet

Due to the fact I'm short on time and heading out soon for an appointment, I'm dropping this here.  It most likely has to do with our sanctions.  But you have got to be kidding me....

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1502252499679522816/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

shadow puppet said:


> Due to the fact I'm short on time and heading out soon for an appointment, I'm dropping this here.  It most likely has to do with our sanctions.  But you have got to be kidding me....
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1502252499679522816/





And Tweet from Elon Musk in 3...2...


----------



## Zoidberg

shadow puppet said:


> Due to the fact I'm short on time and heading out soon for an appointment, I'm dropping this here.  It most likely has to do with our sanctions.  But you have got to be kidding me....
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1502252499679522816/



I've been following Roscosmos fairly closely for some time, so I can confidently say that anything coming from Rogozin is pure trolling for the amusement of Putin and it's better to just ignore it... Mainstream media still report on his tweets because of the outrageous things he says, but the general attitude of the experts in the Space industry is just to shrug, ignore him and wait until an adult who actually knows what they are talking about provides some information.


----------



## Edd

Gut feeling tells me the cosmonauts would never leave a peer stranded like that. Seems like that’s not how those folks roll. But, I’m no expert on space programs.


----------



## Zoidberg

Edd said:


> Gut feeling tells me the cosmonauts would never leave a peer stranded like that. Seems like that’s not how those folks roll. But, I’m no expert on space programs.



He won't get stranded. Now the US has SpaceX's Dragon capsule to take humans to and from the ISS and the Russians are enraged that the US are not dependent on them anymore. Worst case, it changes the upcoming schedule, and someone stays longer, to free up a seat for this astronaut, or something like that. He doesn't have the right suit for Dragon, but they can make one and take it onboard the next flight up.


----------



## chengengaun

The "blame war" may have started:









						Putin Places Spies Under House Arrest | CEPA
					

After two weeks of halting war against Ukraine, Vladimir Putin just suddenly launched an attack in a surprising direction — his beloved agency, the FSB.




					cepa.org


----------



## Eric

chengengaun said:


> The "blame war" may have started:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin Places Spies Under House Arrest | CEPA
> 
> 
> After two weeks of halting war against Ukraine, Vladimir Putin just suddenly launched an attack in a surprising direction — his beloved agency, the FSB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cepa.org



The most Trump move Putin's made yet.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Russia Is Now Claiming the US Trained Birds to Deliver Ukrainian Bioweapons
					

The Kremlin’s efforts to convince its citizens that Ukraine is the real aggressor are becoming increasingly desperate.




					www.vice.com


----------



## Citysnaps

Ms. Baez and her painting. She's talented in many ways.


----------



## GermanSuplex

How do we unite our own country when millions of average Americans think the war is predicated around Hunter Biden?


----------



## Eric

Russian Chemical Suits being supplied to Russian troops



> A senior administration official told ABC News Friday that the U.S. is getting reports the Russians are starting to bring in biochemical weapon suits into Ukraine.
> 
> The reports comes as the Russians accuse Ukraine and the U.S. of developing biochemical weapons, which the U.S. has denied.
> 
> "We believe it is an ominous sign they are possibly doing it for cover," the official said.
> 
> According to the official, as much as one-fifth of the Russian force is currently "inoperable," meaning they are either dead, wounded or do not have the support or equipment needed to continue.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Russian Chemical Suits being supplied to Russian troops



Putin has exposed how weak his military truly is.


----------



## Citysnaps

GermanSuplex said:


> How do we unite our own country when millions of average Americans think the war is predicated around Hunter Biden?




Fully investigate trump and his connections with Putin, exposing every single detail.  

As an aside, I believe Ukraine is in this mess because of trump. When he was president, trump  weakened NATO (and in the process emboldening Putin) by criticizing the organization and telling the world the United States should withdraw from the alliance.

That, and coupled with trump’s withholding of military aid to Ukraine (Zelensky refused to accede to trump’s repeated demands to find dirt on Biden’s son, for the upcoming 2020 election) was all that Putin needed to develop a plan to go forward. It was a golden opportunity for Putin to start fulfilling his goal.

Fortunately, Putin’s meddling in the 2020 presidential election to keep trump in power didn’t work out, but still left the dictator a great opportunity to takeover Ukraine with all the “Biden stole the election” internal discord that’s  *still* going on in the US, along with supporting sympathetic legislators perpetuating the lie and discord.  The RNC and legislators embracing the chaos/trashing and insurrection of the United States Capitol, and then characterizing it as “legitimate political discourse,” sealed the deal and made it a ripe opportunity for Putin.

trump’s recent cheerleading calling Putin a smart and savvy genius, and NATO “not so smart” with his criticism, is bewildering. As is the continuing failure by many legislators and citizens to call out trump for his actions and resulting consequences.  

Because of that, there’s no doubt in my mind Putin and Russia will again interfere in the 2024 presidential election in an attempt to put his boy trump back in power, and, likely in the 2022 midterms in an effort to install supporting legislators.   

Putin’s goal (in case anyone doesn’t know) is to reconstitute what was once the Soviet Union, by taking control over what were the previous 15 Soviet republics (including Russia); something he’s been wanting to do for a long time. Conquering Ukraine is just the first step.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Putin has exposed how weak his military truly is.



Well, they started out behind. Russia failed to put forth a substantive _causus belli_, which means that the soldiers lack the strong motivation the need to drive the war effort. Some of them are _rawrrr-I-wanna-kill_ types, such as are found in any given army, but it looks like most of them seem to be there to do their hitch. Meanwhile, the Ukes are defending their homes, which carries with it the strongest natural impetus.

In other words, Vlad's army may indeed be custard-in-camo, but I would not take that as an article of faith. If they were tasked with actually defending Mother Russia, they might be doing a much better job.


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> Fully investigate trump and his connections with Putin, exposing every single detail.
> 
> As an aside, I believe Ukraine is in this mess because of trump. When he was president, trump  weakened NATO (and in the process emboldening Putin) by criticizing the organization and telling the world the United States should withdraw from the alliance.
> 
> That, and coupled with trump’s withholding of military aid to Ukraine (Zelensky refused to accede to trump’s repeated demands to find dirt on Biden’s son, for the upcoming 2020 election) was all that Putin needed to develop a plan to go forward. It was a golden opportunity for Putin to start fulfilling his goal.
> 
> Fortunately, Putin’s meddling in the 2020 presidential election to keep trump in power didn’t work out, but still left the dictator a great opportunity to takeover Ukraine with all the “Biden stole the election” internal discord that’s  *still* going on in the US, along with supporting sympathetic legislators perpetuating the lie and discord.  The RNC and legislators embracing the chaos/trashing and insurrection of the United States Capitol, and then characterizing it as “legitimate political discourse,” sealed the deal and made it a ripe opportunity for Putin.
> 
> trump’s recent cheerleading calling Putin a smart and savvy genius, and NATO “not so smart” with his criticism, is bewildering. As is the continuing failure by many legislators and citizens to call out trump for his actions and resulting consequences.
> 
> Because of that, there’s no doubt in my mind Putin and Russia will again interfere in the 2024 presidential election in an attempt to put his boy trump back in power, and, likely in the 2022 midterms in an effort to install supporting legislators.
> 
> Putin’s goal (in case anyone doesn’t know) is to reconstitute what was once the Soviet Union, by taking control over what were the previous 15 Soviet republics (including Russia); something he’s been wanting to do for a long time. Conquering Ukraine is just the first step.



I agree; Trump’s transactional and immoral approach to foreign policy weakened America’s alliances and strengthened rogue states like Russia.

Instead of going after Russia for its PROVEN interference in the 2016 election, we had a man-child with a bruised ego that took it as a personal insult that he won thanks to help from anybody, let alone Putin.

I do believe this invasion could NOT have happened without 4 years of Trump’s calamitous foreign policy.


----------



## lizkat

SuperMatt said:


> I agree; Trump’s transactional and immoral approach to foreign policy weakened America’s alliances and strengthened rogue states like Russia.
> 
> Instead of going after Russia for its PROVEN interference in the 2016 election, we had a man-child with a bruised ego that took it as a personal insult that he won thanks to help from anybody, let alone Putin.
> 
> I do believe this invasion could NOT have happened without 4 years of Trump’s calamitous foreign policy.





I'd just like to know if and how Trump is actually beholden to Putin.  Trump's behavior towards him continues to baffle me.  And the US government, the institution, the archives, need to know exactly got said in Helsinki between Trump and Putin privately without witnesses past translators.


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> I agree; Trump’s transactional and immoral approach to foreign policy weakened America’s alliances and strengthened rogue states like Russia.
> 
> Instead of going after Russia for its PROVEN interference in the 2016 election, we had a man-child with a bruised ego that took it as a personal insult that he won thanks to help from anybody, let alone Putin.
> 
> I do believe this invasion could NOT have happened without 4 years of Trump’s calamitous foreign policy.




Totally agree.  With trump in office as president, it was a perfect storm for Putin.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> I'd just like to know if and how Trump is actually beholden to Putin.  Trump's behavior towards him continues to baffle me.  And the US government, the institution, the archives, need to know exactly got said in Helsinki between Trump and Putin privately without witnesses past translators.



This invasion is looking like it took well over a year to plan and prepare for. It makes one wonder if Putin expected to have a friendly face in the White House when it started.


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> This invasion is looking like it took well over a year to plan and prepare for. It makes one wonder if Putin expected to have a friendly face in the White House when it started.




Bingo - that's it!

And with the continuing discord in the US, with sympathetic members of Congress, Putin will likely meddle to try and get him elected in 2024. And supporting legislators in 2022.  Watch out!


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> This invasion is looking like it took well over a year to plan and prepare for. It makes one wonder if Putin expected to have a friendly face in the White House when it started.



Yes, I expect that he did.

And I also suspect that the advent of Covid may have delayed his plans by a year or so.


----------



## Yoused

citypix said:


> Putin will likely meddle to try and get him elected in 2024.



However, we now know about the meddling and will be working to minimize it – nevermind the problems Vlad will have to cope with at home. Hopefully this whole enterprise is a huge пизец for him.


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> Putin has exposed how weak his military truly is.




One of my families friends is a Polish immigrant. He was conscripted into the Soviet Navy on a submarine in the early/mid 80’s. He’s always said “I don’t know why you guys were so afraid of the soviets in the Cold War”. Basically everything was always broken- never really mission ready, moral was low, corruption was rampant, and the crews would basically be teetering on the edge of mutiny at any given time. 

Chemical/biological weapons are a terrifying prospect, both for the people of Ukraine but also the world. If such weapons are used I’m not sure the world will stand by and watch weapons of mass destruction be used… meaning WWIII would be the likely outcome.

Chemical weapons has been my biggest concern since it was apparent the Russians blitzkrieg campaign had failed the Ukrainians were not going to give up their country without a fight.


----------



## Zoidberg

AG_PhamD said:


> One of my families friends is a Polish immigrant. He was conscripted into the Soviet Navy on a submarine in the early/mid 80’s. He’s always said “I don’t know why you guys were so afraid of the soviets in the Cold War”. Basically everything was always broken- never really mission ready, moral was low, corruption was rampant, and the crews would basically be teetering on the edge of mutiny at any given time.
> 
> Chemical/biological weapons are a terrifying prospect, both for the people of Ukraine but also the world. If such weapons are used I’m not sure the world will stand by and watch weapons of mass destruction be used… meaning WWIII would be the likely outcome.
> 
> Chemical weapons has been my biggest concern since it was apparent the Russians blitzkrieg campaign had failed the Ukrainians were not going to give up their country without a fight.



Speaking of that, a couple of anecdotes I believe I read in the excellent book Blind Man's Bluff:

Soviet submariners used to joke that if the US ever captured one of their submarines to study their technology, it would set them back 20 years.

And when they designed their first submarine-launched missile it didn't work, so for the demonstration to show it off in front of the brass they had a surface ship in the same position as the submarine and they launched the missile from the ship, to trick Khrushchev (IIRC) into believing it had been launched from the sub.


----------



## fooferdoggie

maybe no be a tourist in Ukraine 
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1502370136128434181/


----------



## Arkitect

Scepticalscribe said:


> Yes, I expect that he did.
> 
> And I also suspect that the advent of Covid may have delayed his plans by a year or so.



Definitely. On paper it must have seemed to all be in place for a smash and grab invasion.

1. Covid, the world's attention is off the ball, exhausted and financial resources stretched;
2. Biden perceived as a weak US President;
3. New unproven German Chancellor Olaf Scholz;
4. Pfeffel Johnson, a Clown for a UK PM;
5. Xi Jinping assured as a sleeping ally;
6. Russian military, obviously glossing over their own parlous state of affairs.

Extra card?
Trump's dealings with Putin.

What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## sgtaylor5

SuperMatt said:


> Putin has exposed how weak his military truly is.



https://seapowermagazine.org/russia...l-when-operated-by-ukrainians-acc-chief-says/

Slam!


----------



## Macky-Mac

Russia is recruiting foreign mercenaries  to fight in Ukraine......it seems they may have underestimated the number of troops they'd need in Ukraine. 

report from Forbes

report from The Guardian


----------



## lizkat

Arkitect said:


> Definitely. On paper it must have seemed to all be in place for a smash and grab invasion.
> 
> 1. Covid, the world's attention is off the ball, exhausted and financial resources stretched;
> 2. Biden perceived as a weak US President;
> 3. New unproven German Chancellor Olaf Scholz;
> 4. Pfeffel Johnson, a Clown for a UK PM;
> 5. Xi Jinping assured as a sleeping ally;
> 6. Russian military, obviously glossing over their own parlous state of affairs.
> 
> Extra card?
> Trump's dealings with Putin.
> 
> What could possibly go wrong?




Right.   Well aside from Murphy's Law, of course.   But Putin has forgotten that living in a bubble full of sycophants is a recipe for inflation of perceived power coupled with erosion of real capability to lead effectively.    Too bad for Ukraine, Europe, Russia itself and the rest of the planet that it's taking so long for the cocoon he's ended up in to come apart and reveal not a butterfly but a shriveled larva. 

That said, bubbles don't usually manage to keep autocrats free of concerns about loyalty of associates and subordinates.  I don't think Putin assumes he's invulnerable;  he's clearly paranoid about even his inner circle.   The media are casting his very recent purges in the FSB as the tip of his blame-game, but there's more to it than pointing at perceived intel failures, surely.  He likely regards some of his lack of good informaton as a treasonous personal betrayal, and may be angry that he exercised his power to gloss over some of the FSB scandals of recent years as well.

None of it bodes well for Putin's ability to view his miscalculations rationally, so to construct an exit that can be described as a victory to his countrymen.  He needs a way to save face and go home already.  His lackeys haven't the imagination for it.   Maybe Xi can help him find a way to frame a retreat as appropriate after, say, "having rid Ukraine of the troublemakers" or whatever. 

It's all so messed up --for the planet!--  and in combination with the aftereffects of covid and the sanctions,  will remain so for decades no matter what happens now.   It's callous but true to suggest (as some media pieces are already doing) that Ukrainian cities, airports, bridges and roads can be rebuilt, even as each death is now and will be forever mourned by family, friends, Ukrainian political leaders.  But rebuilding and mourning alone do not heal the past, they paper it over so whoever is left behind after war can summon the will to go on living.  

The thing is, the infuriating thing is, that this did not have to happen.  Or did it?  Anyway here we are and it's history in the making again and for historians to say later whatever historians say when it's time to revisit history made yet again.  Commentary, always commentary, but no answers because those best qualifed to ask the questions are dead.   I am reminded of Randall Jarrell's poem "Losses"... closing lines of which are below:
​We read our mail and counted up our missions—​In bombers named for girls, we burned​The cities we had learned about in school—​Till our lives wore out; our bodies lay among​The people we had killed and never seen.​When we lasted long enough they gave us medals;​When we died they said, “Our casualties were low.”​They said, “Here are the maps”; we burned the cities.​​It was not dying —no, not ever dying;​But the night I died I dreamed that I was dead,​And the cities said to me: “Why are you dying?​We are satisfied, if you are; but why did I die?”​


----------



## SuperMatt

Putin is threatening that he would consider anybody bringing weapons to Ukrainians a legitimate target.

If Russian troops attack a shipment from NATO, would that trigger article 5? Are we then in a NATO vs Russia war?


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> Russia is recruiting foreign mercenaries  to fight in Ukraine......it seems they may have underestimated the number of troops they'd need in Ukraine.
> 
> report from Forbes
> 
> report from The Guardian




from the Forbes link:



> Whether Russia’s superior military technology and greater size will allow it to succeed anyway. “The odds are always going to be on Russia’s side,” given that it’s the “larger, richer and more powerful country with a much bigger military,” Kagan told _Forbes_. That being said, should Russia take Ukraine but then Ukrainians wage an insurgency, Kagan noted “Russians just do not have the manpower to conduct an effective counterinsurgency on a country the size of Ukraine and sustain it over years.” Ultimately, Kagan said, “*I’m pretty comfortable saying, along with a growing number of analysts and experts, that there's going to be an independent and free Ukraine at the end of this,” though it’s unclear whether that will happen “in a month, in six months, in a year, five years, or 10 years*.”




Small consolation that western analyses are "comfortable" --with a forecast of Ukraine's eventual emergence from the horrors of this war into "independent and free" status again--  for those cradling the body of a mortally wounded family member or neighbor this afternoon.      And small consolation for everyone around the world whose ways of living will long be disrupted by sanctions meant to cripple Putin's ability to sustain his war and his constituents at home.

Sure it will be  a quagmire if Russia elects to try to stay and occupy Ukraine to support puppet government(s) there.  And an even more unholy mess if it ends up being pitched battles amongst mercenaries and recruited or voluntary militia on both sides.  Ukrainians have already done all possible to confuse the incoming Russians.

Imagine the confusion of Syrians, Chechens, green Russian conscripts or Ukranian expats arriving in terrain often already intentionally stripped of road signs and place names:   a quagmire saps the strength of all who try to navigate for advantage.

But the enemy is the war itself.  Add in absurdities like the Russians having to rely on personal mobile phones for unencrypted combat communications.  Their comms are broadcast on Twitter by casual eavesdroppers!  And speaking of communication,  do we think the imported Syrian experts in urban warfare speak Ukranian?  Maybe by now, some know a little Russian from their battlefield hookups with defenders of Assad.   But Ukraine is not Syria.  And who knows where the loyalties of recruits from Chechnya actually lie.   Whoever is bought can be purchased anew...

 It's sickening that Putin won't abandon his fantasies of omnipotence in a battle against projected "western aggressors."  And bizarre  --tragic, even--  that he meanwhile tears down everything Russia and Europe had managed to cobble together over 30 years of reaching commercial if not political understandings.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Weekly


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Putin is threatening that he would consider anybody bringing weapons to Ukrainians a legitimate target.
> 
> If Russian troops attack a shipment from NATO, would that trigger article 5? Are we then in a NATO vs Russia war?



Putin can suck it with all of his threats, he will continue to make them no matter what anyone says or does. All of this placating him just buys more time for him to kill more innocent people. He's already committing war crimes, is likely about to start using chemical weapons on civilians and will push the boundaries with any country offering assistance.

Like it or not we're all already in this war, we just don't have boots on the ground yet but it's only a matter of time before that happens. Putin's army is weakened and cannot afford to take us all on and I know his nuclear threats are what puts everyone on edge but at some point he'll have to be taken out to end this thing.


----------



## Macky-Mac

SuperMatt said:


> Putin is threatening that he would consider anybody bringing weapons to Ukrainians a legitimate target.
> 
> If Russian troops attack a shipment from NATO, would that trigger article 5? Are we then in a NATO vs Russia war?




There's an awful lot of "it depends" about any such event.

If it's an attack on a shipment inside one of the neighboring NATO countries.......then that might well lead to an escalation of what NATO is doing. Would Putin really want the war to spread far beyond the borders of Ukraine?

edit; From what I've read, supplies are being delivered outside of Ukraine and then transported across the border into Ukraine by their own forces. I think it would be a(another) serious miscalculation by Putin for him to think he could stage an attack on a NATO supply depot inside a NATO country and not have it result in NATO escalating its involvement.


----------



## Eric

Macky-Mac said:


> There's an awful lot of "it depends" about any such event.
> 
> If it's an attack on a shipment inside one of the neighboring NATO countries.......then that might well lead to an escalation of what NATO is doing. Would Putin really want the war to spread far beyond the borders of Ukraine?



He can't even handle what he currently has in Ukraine...









						Putin offers battle-hardened fighters from the Middle East up to $3,000 a month to reinforce Russia's invasion of Ukraine, say reports
					

Putin has approved 16,000 volunteers from the Middle East to be deployed alongside the Russian military after strong Ukrainian resistance.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## yaxomoxay

Looks like this 2014 article by Kissinger on the WaPo is back in fashion. @Scepticalscribe might like it. 



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html
		


Then don’t say that I am crazy since I study this man’s controversial brain


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> Looks like this 2014 article by Kissinger on the WaPo is back in fashion. @Scepticalscribe might like it.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html
> 
> 
> 
> Then don’t say that I am crazy since I study this man’s controversial brain



An intelligent, nuanced, thoughtful piece, (and not just because I am largely in agreement with it, and have made a number of the same points over the course of this very thread) and thank you for sharing it.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> He can't even handle what he currently has in Ukraine...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin offers battle-hardened fighters from the Middle East up to $3,000 a month to reinforce Russia's invasion of Ukraine, say reports
> 
> 
> Putin has approved 16,000 volunteers from the Middle East to be deployed alongside the Russian military after strong Ukrainian resistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com



This is the weakness of an oligarchy run by a tyrant. The aides, lackeys and subordinates are scared of making Цар Putin angry at them, so they tell him what he wants to hear. "_We have great and powerful army!_" Making decisions based on bawdlerized information is a recipe for disaster, or at least bad happenings.

Meanwhile, the oligarchs are raking in the profits, and one of the keen ways to do that is to skim and juggle. Russia has a vast army equipped with a huge arsenal of the best weapons – _*on paper*_ – but those rich guys did not get rich by actually making all that stuff, they just reported it and took the money. Hence, the Russian military looks a great deal stronger than it is.

Whether Putin can push past all his problems and finally bring Ukraine to heel remains to be seen, but the longer he flounders around with his Little Big Horn, the worse it gets for him. Which could be a good thing for the people of Russia, if it leads to his downfall.


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> Putin is threatening that he would consider anybody bringing weapons to Ukrainians a legitimate target.
> 
> If Russian troops attack a shipment from NATO, would that trigger article 5? Are we then in a NATO vs Russia war?




I would think if Putin were to attack a convoy on NATO territory, article 5 would be within bounds. 

I don’t believe Putin is a mad man, he has just made some terrible miscalculations. I suppose this is what happens when you live in an echo chamber, especially one of your own making, at which you sit at the top. 

With that in mind, I think Putin is smart enough not to go head to head with NATO (and subsequently much of the rest of the world… you know you’re in trouble when Sweden is supplying arms, Switzerland is enacting Sanctions, etc). If Putin has learned anything in the past couple weeks it’s that his military is far less prepared than he expected. If his military can’t even handle Ukraine how would they handle taking on the west? And I would think China has a lot more to gain from staying out of the conflict than explicitly taking sides with Russia. 

That’s why I think why NATO is being a bit over cautious about sending aid (ie fighter jets). I really don’t see the difference between sending MANPADs, Anti-tank weapons, drones, etc versus planes. I think it’s likely the former are far more consequential at this point versus 40 year old jets. But planes would be a moral boost for the Ukrainians and a signal of solidarity even if they’re not that useful. That said, I don’t think the decision making on the planes should have ever played out in public. 

I would love to see Ukraine get legitimate air defence systems (ie S-400 from Turkey or Phalanx/CRAM and Patriot from the US, Iron Dome for the Israelis, etc. 

As the Russians close in on Kyiv I suspect their losses will become even more embarrassing and consequently their war crimes even more heinous. They don’t have the man power, the logistics, the equipment, the tactics, and likely the troop morale to quickly take the city. A long, drawn out effort only makes these problems worse. 

If we are to believe the Ukrainian information, which at least appears reasonably accurate, the Russians have already lost a tremendous amount of hardware with very little to show for it. And this is just the beginning once they get into urban warfare.


----------



## yaxomoxay

AG_PhamD said:


> I would think if Putin were to attack a convoy on NATO territory, article 5 would be within bounds.



Agreed. He’d also lose China’s alliance in a second.


----------



## Eric

Going after the press now.









						Russian troops kill New York Times journalist in Irpen, another journalist wounded
					

In Irpen, Russian troops killed a New York Times journalist, and another journalist was wounded, Chief of the police in Kyiv region Andriy Nebitov has said.




					ua.interfax.com.ua
				






> In Irpen, Russian troops killed a New York Times journalist, and another journalist was wounded, Chief of the police in Kyiv region Andriy Nebitov has said.
> 
> "The invaders cynically kill even international media journalists who are trying to show the truth about the atrocities of Russian troops in Ukraine.* Today, a 51-year-old correspondent of the world-famous New York Times media was shot dead in Irpen.* Another journalist was wounded. Currently, they are trying to take the victim out of the combat zone," Nebitov wrote on Facebook.
> 
> He also published an editorial journalistic ID and passport, according to which this is a video journalist, U.S. citizen Brent Renaud.


----------



## AG_PhamD

yaxomoxay said:


> Agreed. He’d also lose China’s alliance in a second.



China is more than happy to buy up Russian assets at bargain basement prices during these sanctions. All of their statements in agreement with Russia (legitimacy of war, US bio weapons propaganda) really only seems to occur for their own agenda. 



Eric said:


> Going after the press now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian troops kill New York Times journalist in Irpen, another journalist wounded
> 
> 
> In Irpen, Russian troops killed a New York Times journalist, and another journalist was wounded, Chief of the police in Kyiv region Andriy Nebitov has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ua.interfax.com.ua




Very sad. I’ve gotta give credit to the journalists for being on the ground in such dangerous conditions, especially when the Russians have clearly demonstrated zero regard for civilian life.


----------



## Eric

AG_PhamD said:


> China is more than happy to buy up Russian assets at bargain basement prices during these sanctions. All of their statements in agreement with Russia (legitimacy of war, US bio weapons propaganda) really only seems to occur for their own agenda.
> 
> 
> 
> Very sad. I’ve gotta give credit to the journalists for being on the ground in such dangerous conditions, especially when the Russians have clearly demonstrated zero regard for civilian life.



It's one thing if they get caught in collateral damage but this sounds targeted. I remain of the opinion that Putin will not stop until he is put down, he's very close to dropping a bomb with an inch on the wrong side of the border.


----------



## Zoidberg

I really don't get how the Syrian mercenaries thing is supposed to work. Is it just infantry cannon fodder to get the Ukrainians to spend their ammunition against? Are they going to be given tanks? Training? Modern equipment that the Russians themselves don't have?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> Going after the press now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian troops kill New York Times journalist in Irpen, another journalist wounded
> 
> 
> In Irpen, Russian troops killed a New York Times journalist, and another journalist was wounded, Chief of the police in Kyiv region Andriy Nebitov has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ua.interfax.com.ua



This is nothing new - over a week ago, journalists from Sky News (in the UK) were attacked - I watched the (quite shocking) video they posted.

Unfortunately, this is the sort of thing that only makes the news (in the US) when journalists from the US are attacked (and killed).


----------



## JayMysteri0

Scepticalscribe said:


> This is nothing new - over a week ago, journalists from Sky News (in the UK) were attacked - I watched the (quite shocking) video they posted.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is the sort of thing that only makes the news (in the US) when journalists from the US are attacked (and killed).



Isn't that possibly dependent on which news sources one frequents?

One can't possibly cover them all, and it's possible it did make the news here.  It's just killed Vs wounded tends to grab more headlines sadly.



> Sky News journalists hide as they come under fire by Russian forces



_Dated March 5th._

It isn't always geographical indifference that decides what gets more attention, just what gets more eyeballs unfortunately.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> This is nothing new - over a week ago, journalists from Sky News (in the UK) were attacked - I watched the (quite shocking) video they posted.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is the sort of thing that only makes the news (in the US) when journalists from the US are attacked (and killed).



Did anyone die in that incident?


----------



## Yoused

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1503113473819041796/

What? No! What did she say?



Spoiler: oh



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1502960938147729413/



color me shocked


----------



## Deleted member 215

I don't know whether this biolab thing is true or not, but it's not "treasonous" to post about it.


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> I don't know whether this biolab thing is true or not, but it's not "treasonous" to post about it.



At the very least it's misinformation to sow distrust, Twitter should be dealing with people like this but they refuse to. Same thing with COVID, which it took them forever to finally address and likely cost the lives of tens of thousands of people. This shit matters man.


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> I don't know whether this biolab thing is true or not, but it's not "treasonous" to post about it.



Accusing the US government of working with Ukraine to create biological weapons? Not sure if it’s treason, but it’s a VERY serious accusation.


----------



## Cmaier

SuperMatt said:


> Accusing the US government of working with Ukraine to create biological weapons? Not sure if it’s treason, but it’s a VERY serious accusation.




What;s funny is that we would need 25 labs in Ukraine to make biological weapons.


----------



## SuperMatt

Cmaier said:


> What;s funny is that we would need 25 labs in Ukraine to make biological weapons.



Yes, I guess “serious” isn’t exactly the best term...


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1503113473819041796/
> 
> What? No! What did she say?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: oh
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1502960938147729413/
> 
> 
> 
> color me shocked



Just want to say that Romney has shown himself to be a pretty standup guy in the party of nutjobs, he also marched with BLM over George Floyd and that went a long way with a lot of people. While I may not agree with him on all the issues I can see voting for him under the right circumstances.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> It's one thing if they get caught in collateral damage but this sounds targeted. I remain of the opinion that Putin will not stop until he is put down, he's very close to dropping a bomb with an inch on the wrong side of the border.




Agreed. I don’t think we know the true circumstances of how this journalist died. But the BBC has demonstrated the Russians (presumably) firing upon them. 

I’m afraid Putin won’t stop either until he achieves his goals and I’m not so sure he will accept a peace deal that’s actually tenable to the Ukrainians. I’m not particularly convinced these alleged peace talks with Putin are as serious as he makes them out to be. 

With the Russians dropping bombs miles from the Polish boarder, the chances of a mishap of missile going off target into NATO territory is a frightening prospect. Or even a high ranking military member intentionally disobeying commands and targeting NATO assets for whatever reason. 

I fear either by accident or by use of WMD’s due to desperation it’s entirely possible the West gets dragged into this conflict. I think and hope Putin is sensible enough to know getting involved with NATO would be extremely bad for him.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Zoidberg said:


> I really don't get how the Syrian mercenaries thing is supposed to work. Is it just infantry cannon fodder to get the Ukrainians to spend their ammunition against? Are they going to be given tanks? Training? Modern equipment that the Russians themselves don't have?




Maybe because they're willing mercenaries who have experience fighting against irregular forces in urban settings? Which is something Russia's conscripts don't have.

And maybe because they have propaganda value for Putin to show Russians they have allies in the world in fighting against those "neo-nazis" in Ukraine?

And they're not Russians, so when they die fighting their caskets won't be going home to upset Russian families?

edit; and I'll add that since they're apparently being recruited and organized under the Wagner Group, they can be conveniently left in place to help whatever puppet regime(s) Putin leaves behind when he announces "mission accomplished" and claims that Russia's troops are "leaving"


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> Accusing the US government of working with Ukraine to create biological weapons? Not sure if it’s treason, but it’s a VERY serious accusation.




I don’t think it’s “treasonous” but if people believe this story then they’re likely misinformed. These locations are not bioweapons labs, they’re bio research labs. These labs exist in practically every country. It’s also not surprising the US has provided funding. Funding bio safety public health programs benefits the world. Ukraine is not a particularly wealthy country. I imagine funding for post soviet countries, who by the way had an extensive bioweapons program, is to secure existing research and prevent brain drain to potentially dangerous regimes.


----------



## Pumbaa

AG_PhamD said:


> I don’t think it’s “treasonous” but if people believe this story then they’re likely misinformed. These locations are not bioweapons labs, they’re bio research labs. These labs exist in practically every country. It’s also not surprising the US has provided funding. Funding bio safety public health programs benefits the world. Ukraine is not a particularly wealthy country. I imagine funding for post soviet countries, who by the way had an extensive bioweapons program, is to secure existing research and prevent brain drain to potentially dangerous regimes.



I think she (Tulsi Gabbard, called out by Mitt Romney for “treasonous lies” parroting false Russian propaganda) knows exactly what she is doing. She intentionally makes the normal bio research labs sound like the bio weapons labs from the Russian propaganda. She wouldn’t have brought this up unless Russia had already seeded the idea in the minds of the public, and now she is helping it grow. It might not meet the legal definition of treason, but she is clearly aiding Russia.

Then she, of course, throws in “covid”, “gain-of-function” and “the lab in Wuhan” to really appeal to the gullible.


----------



## SuperMatt

Pumbaa said:


> I think she knows exactly what she is doing. She intentionally makes the normal bio research labs sound like the bio weapons labs from the Russian propaganda. She wouldn’t have brought this up unless Russia had already seeded the idea in the minds of the public, and now she is helping it grow. It might not meet the legal definition of treason, but she is clearly aiding Russia.
> 
> Then she, of course, throws in “covid”, “gain-of-function” and “the lab in Wuhan” to really appeal to the gullible.



I know many people bought that Wuhan lab story. Ted Cruz recently repeated it, right after a major study was released showing the origin to almost certainly being a live animal market in the region. So if they bought that and the “‘Biden stole the election with millions of illegal immigrant votes” stories… they will believe pretty much anything.

In America, we have one major propaganda source - Fox News… and then the way Facebook is structured, that is a propaganda source for many others. And despite the fact that there are many legitimate sources of news, millions of people believe whatever they see there without question. So it’s difficult for me to be too judgmental of Russians whose ONLY source of news is state propaganda.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Pumbaa said:


> I think she knows exactly what she is doing. She intentionally makes the normal bio research labs sound like the bio weapons labs from the Russian propaganda. She wouldn’t have brought this up unless Russia had already seeded the idea in the minds of the public, and now she is helping it grow. It might not meet the legal definition of treason, but she is clearly aiding Russia.
> 
> Then she, of course, throws in “covid”, “gain-of-function” and “the lab in Wuhan” to really appeal to the gullible.




I assume you mean Xi? But yes, I absolutely agree- the whole weapons lab is retribution for the Wuhan lab theory. 

I see China as a very opportunistic nation beyond the usual self interest a nation inherently has. They don’t help anyone unless it helps themselves. I suspect they will straddle the line of rhetorically supporting or acting indifferent to Russia. When it comes to material support, I think it’s a bridge too far. While the West is completely dependent on China, I would think China would not want to entangle themselves with negative attention, boycotts, and potentially sanctions. 

That is unless Xi wants to take a giant gamble and use this opportunity to invade Taiwan. I suspect given the Ukrainian resistance and global response they will not be planning on that anytime soon. China has demonstrated an ability and willingness to play the long game. Ideally they have a ways to go in building up their military, so I suspect Taiwan will be on the back burner. 

There is this new headline that Russia has asked China for material support. Given the sanctions and hardware losses in Ukraine, I would not be surprised if this was true. At the same time, I would not be surprised if this is just the US looking to humiliate Russia or proactively remind China not to get involved.


----------



## lizkat

yaxomoxay said:


> Agreed. He’d also lose China’s alliance in a second.




yah, this from a (paywalled) FT opinion piece today is not far off the mark


----------



## Pumbaa

AG_PhamD said:


> I assume you mean Xi?



Why would you assume that?

Tulsi Gabbard.


----------



## lizkat

Pumbaa said:


> Why would you assume that?
> 
> Tulsi Gabbard.




It's interesting that it can be read either way.


----------



## Eric

Hope he's staying safe but it feels like it's just a matter of time. This man is braver than most of us will ever be. 

Zelensky won't address Council of Europe due to 'urgent, unforeseen circumstances'​








						Zelensky won’t address Council of Europe due to ‘urgent, unforeseen circumstances’
					

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will not give his scheduled Monday address to the Council of Europe, citing “urgent, unforeseen circumstances.”Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyha…




					thehill.com


----------



## MarkusL

This woman is my new role model for how to quit your job.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Pumbaa said:


> Why would you assume that?
> 
> Tulsi Gabbard.




Gotcha hahaha. Thanks for the clarification. 

I don’t have a problem with most of what she she said. It is a fact the US is funding dangerous biomedical research in an area that’s currently in a war zone. These labs absolutely need to be off limits for attacks, at least until they are safely shut down. The last thing we need is a shell destroying the containment building and potentially releasing some pathogen into the environment on top of the current tragedies of war. It’s not terribly different than concern over nuclear sites. It sounds like the US is working with the Ukrainians to make sure these research sites are secure. 

She also says the Wuhan lab “may” have been the origin of COVID-19, which I still think is very much up for debate and something I suspect we will never have the answer to. Where I have a problem is the claim that all these sites around the world need to be shut down. I don’t know of any evidence these Ukrainian labs are doing gain of function research. 

It’s possible to read between the lines and believe she is regurgitating claims of US funded bioweapons labs. I can see how people are interpreting it that way, especially due to the timing. But these labs were also not publicly known (not that they were secret, clearly they were not, they just weren’t in the public conscious) until a few days ago. But I don’t think concerns of lab safety, particularly in a war zone, are illegitimate. Nor is it worth asking why almost 3 weeks into a brutal war are we just now publicly hearing about the security issue of these labs. 

The Russian propaganda, parroted by China, is clearly intended to play off the fears of COVID-19 and the lab leak hypothesis. It also potentially sets  the stage for bioweapons being explained away by blaming the US and Ukrainians. 

I suspect Gabbard and the many others demanding these labs be shut down are misinformed as to the importance of these labs and what many actually do on a day to day basis. Plus, countries are going to have labs whether we like it or not. It’s better to ensure 3rd oversight and sufficient funding than have labs operating with sketchy protocols and insufficient funding. 

To say all these labs need to be shut down because they are risky sites in war and the potential for pathogen escape is like saying every single nuclear reactor needs to be shut down because they are risky sites during war and the potential for accidents like Chernobyl- in spite of hundreds of reactors operating around the world safely for decades on end, it’s an extremely clean source of energy when it comes to carbon, and there are uses of reactors beyond power generation and ship/submarine propulsion (ie medicine, biomedical research, etc). That said, having nuclear reactors and materials in the middle of an active war zone is extremely troubling and every effort should be taken to ensure the safety of these sites. 

Her response is far more measured than people like Tucker Carlson who are practically parroting back the Russian propaganda. I think Gabbard is one of the more honest, straight shooting politicians, even if I don’t agree with her, so I will give her the benefit of the doubt on her statements and not look for meaning that wasn’t explicitly said. Tucker on the other hand- I’m not sure  to what extent actually believes what he’s saying, but I sense this is more about supporting the anti-Fauci/NIH/CDC and anti-China narrative. 

So no, I don’t think her language is at all treasonous when read at face value. Even if she was alluding to the Russian propaganda, I don’t think that would rise anything close to the level of treason either from a legal perspective. I totally disagree about shutting down these labs, I think the COVID-19 origin story is murky and unproven either way, but having legitimate concern over labs in active combat zone is not at all unreasonable. 

I would agree these Ukrainian labs need to be shut down and have any potentially dangerous pathogens destroyed immediately. This should have happened weeks ago. I would say the same about nuclear sites if was as easy as incinerating them, though obviously that’s not the case (plus they need the power).


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

MarkusL said:


> This woman is my new role model for how to quit your job.




She’ll probably be found dead in a ditch.

Meanwhile, in the US we can’t even get somebody to walk on a Fox set with a sign that just says “Tucker is a racist chode” and they would probably get lucrative job offers as a result.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> She’ll probably be found dead in a ditch.
> 
> Meanwhile, in the US we can’t even get somebody to walk on a Fox set with a sign that just says “Tucker is a racist chode” and they would probably get lucrative job offers as a result.



Carlson isn’t live, right????


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Carlson isn’t live, right????




They wouldn't need to do it during his show, any live broadcast on Fox would do.


----------



## Eric

Here comes China...









						China has expressed some openness to providing military and financial aid to Russia, US cable suggests
					

The US has information suggesting China has expressed some openness to providing Russia with requested military and financial assistance as part of its war on Ukraine, a Western official and a US diplomat told CNN, and is conveying what it knows to its NATO allies.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## GermanSuplex

This is getting ugly and it’s so unnecessary. Some of the stuff coming from the Trump-wing of the GOP would have been pretty unthinkable before Trump came along. These folks are in this until the end, nothing has stopped them yet, even commie Russia invading a democratic nation violently.


----------



## Zoidberg

Zoidberg said:


> I've been following Roscosmos fairly closely for some time, so I can confidently say that anything coming from Rogozin is pure trolling for the amusement of Putin and it's better to just ignore it... Mainstream media still report on his tweets because of the outrageous things he says, but the general attitude of the experts in the Space industry is just to shrug, ignore him and wait until an adult who actually knows what they are talking about provides some information.



And as expected, Roscosmos has confirmed that Rogozin was just running his mouth as usual and that the US astronaut will return to Earth as initially scheduled.









						Russia says it will not strand American astronaut in space despite media reports
					

NASA and Roscosmos still continue to work together on the International Space Station.




					www.theverge.com


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> Interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China blames NATO for pushing Russia-Ukraine tension to 'breaking point'
> 
> 
> Moves by U.S.-led NATO have pushed tension between Russia and Ukraine to a "breaking point", Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



China as a future trading partner…From CNN:
_Pressure is mounting on President Biden and NATO members to provide further assistance to Ukrainians. Russian troops continue to strike residential buildings and populated areas, and recently left smoldering homes in the besieged city of Mariupol.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has asked Biden to ratchet up efforts to cut off Russia from international trade and to continue targeting the Russian elite. The US and its allies have issued a wide range of actions in recent weeks intended to punish Moscow, including harsh new sanctions aimed at imposing severe costs on the Russian economy.

*However, while Biden is working to isolate and punish Russia, American officials are expressing concern about the budding partnership between Moscow and Beijing. The US now has information suggesting China has expressed some openness to providing Russia with assistance as part of its war on Ukraine, a Western official and a US diplomat told CNN. *President Zelensky is also planning to virtually address Congress tomorrow_


----------



## Eric

Huntn said:


> From CNN:
> Pressure is mounting on President Biden and NATO members to provide further assistance to Ukrainians. Russian troops continue to strike residential buildings and populated areas, and recently left smoldering homes in the besieged city of Mariupol. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has asked Biden to ratchet up efforts to cut off Russia from international trade and to continue targeting the Russian elite. The US and its allies have issued a wide range of actions in recent weeks intended to punish Moscow, including harsh new sanctions aimed at imposing severe costs on the Russian economy. However, while Biden is working to isolate and punish Russia, American officials are expressing concern about the budding partnership between Moscow and Beijing. The US now has information suggesting China has expressed some openness to providing Russia with assistance as part of its war on Ukraine, a Western official and a US diplomat told CNN. President Zelensky is also planning to virtually address Congress tomorrow



Russia is essentially indiscriminately bombing the entire country into rubble, so much so that it's hard to understand the endgame for Putin other than a land grab with thousands of dead citizens on it. On top of that he's going to start bombing trade routes and is just about to cross the line there. It feels like it's just a matter of time before NATO takes a stand, let's just hope China plays nice.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> Let's hope we don't have World War III erupting over a NATO defense of the Sulwaki gap...  the thing is, that corridor between Kalingrad and Belarus affords the only ground routes from Poland to the little Baltic states, which are also NATO members.
> 
> View attachment 12360



With the way things are going Ukraine, this could be years away, but possible if they succeed in Ukraine. Vlad: _Let me take over Ukraine at any cost to the Ukrainians, and then I’ll negotiate with the West  and play nice until I can fool them again._

Scenario: Russia invades Lithuania in defense of Kalingrad for its security against NATO Nazis, and dares the West to do anything about it, with Latvia and Estonia in its  sights.

However, the sanctions ironically could destabilize Russia to such a point that it becomes economically caged, but militarily dangerous. I can imagine NATO hesitating to militarily respond to the above for the same rational that they are letting Russia have it’s way with Ukraine, Russia’s nukes.  However I would expect this to be a red line and so who knows.


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> With the way things are going Ukraine, this could be years away, but possible if they succeed in Ukraine. Vlad: _Let me take over Ukraine at any cost to the Ukrainians, and then I’ll negotiate with the West  and play nice until I can fool them again._
> 
> Scenario: *Russia invades Lithuania in defense of Kalingrad *for its security against NATO Nazis, and dares the West to do anything about it, with Latvia and Estonia in its  sights.
> 
> However, the sanctions ironically could destabilize Russia to such a point that it becomes economically caged, but militarily dangerous. *I can imagine NATO hesitating to militarily respond* to the above for the same rational that they are letting Russia have it’s way with Ukraine, Russia’s nukes. However I would expect this to be a red line and so who knows.




Lithuania would be one hell of a line for Russia to cross.

Very different to Ukraine.

Russia invades Lithuania? Full scale war.

Lithuania is a member of the EU;
Lithuania is a member of NATO.

The invasion of Ukraine has pushed most western governments to breaking point towards Russia.

Russia invading _any_ of the Baltic states would have us back at September 1939.

I would hope Putin (or successor) will have the mental stability to see that.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Arkitect said:


> Lithuania would be one hell of a line for Russia to cross.
> 
> Very different to Ukraine.
> 
> Russia invades Lithuania? Full scale war.
> 
> Lithuania is a member of the EU;
> Lithuania is a member of NATO.
> 
> The invasion of Ukraine has pushed most western governments to breaking point towards Russia.
> 
> Russia invading _any_ of the Baltic states would have us back at September 1939.
> 
> I would hope Putin (or successor) will have the mental stability to see that.




let's hope that the EU and NATO will be sufficiently prepared so that Putin (or some future replacement) would decide trying to take Lithuania wouldn't be a successful operation


----------



## Eric

Macky-Mac said:


> let's hope that the EU and NATO will be sufficiently prepared so that Putin (or some future replacement) would decide trying to take Lithuania wouldn't be a successful operation



Putin will only respond to force, if any country is close to being threatened they're best served to amass troops along their borders. NATO should be proactive here, waiting on Putin will only cost more lives and give him the advantage, his goals are clear. At this point it would be strategic and defensive and no so much provocative, nobody expects these countries to sit idly by defenseless and wait for Russia to attack.


----------



## MarkusL

Despite all his other ambitions, the thing I believe Putin wants more than anything else is to go down in history as the man who broke NATO apart. I am convinced he has fantasies about taking just a little bit of one of the Baltic countries and ask NATO if it's worth a nuclear war or if they will let him have it. NATO backing down would erode trust within the alliance, but is the scenario realistic? Actually I think it's not so interesting whether it is realistic or not. The more interesting question is whether Putin thinks it is realistic. And the poor performance of the invasion in Ukraine seems to indicate that his intelligence advisors are telling him what he wants to hear, not necessarily what they really think.


----------



## Huntn

Macky-Mac said:


> let's hope that the EU and NATO will be sufficiently prepared so that Putin (or some future replacement) would decide trying to take Lithuania wouldn't be a successful operation



My guess is that a slew of war scenarios are being formulated. Now this goes on all the time, so the best than can be said about Ukraine is that from a declaration of war standpoint was that Ukraine was expendable.

My question is if they had wanted to after the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014, could Ukraine have qualified for NATO or EU membership since then?


----------



## SuperMatt

MarkusL said:


> Despite all his other ambitions, the thing I believe Putin wants more than anything else is to go down in history as the man who broke NATO apart. I am convinced he has fantasies about taking just a little bit of one of the Baltic countries and ask NATO if it's worth a nuclear war or if they will let him have it. NATO backing down would erode trust within the alliance, but is the scenario realistic? Actually I think it's not so interesting whether it is realistic or not. The more interesting question is whether Putin thinks it is realistic. And the poor performance of the invasion in Ukraine seems to indicate that his intelligence advisors are telling him what he wants to hear, not necessarily what they really think.



His puppet Donald Trump attempted to break apart NATO and perhaps made some progress. However, Biden started to try and repair those relationships as soon as he got in. 

This war by Putin did the opposite of what he wanted. He has made NATO stronger.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> His puppet Donald Trump attempted to break apart NATO and perhaps made some progress. However, Biden started to try and repair those relationships as soon as he got in.
> 
> This war by Putin did the opposite of what he wanted. He has made NATO stronger.



As a side comment to this post, if anything Trump has done to be happy about is the self inflicted damage from his praise of _Vlad the genius, _post invasion.


----------



## Arkitect

Huntn said:


> My guess is that a slew of war scenarios are being formulated. Now this goes on all the time, so the best than can be said about Ukraine is that from a declaration of war standpoint was that Ukraine was expendable.



I agree with you.
Terrible as it is, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is similar to the German invasion of the rump Czechoslovakia, March 1939.
European governments decried it, shouted and waved fists and bits of paper, but all knew they were not going to go to war.
Poland had an "assurance" from the United Kingdom and so… fast forward to September 1939.



Huntn said:


> My question is if they had wanted to after the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014, could Ukraine have qualified for NATO or EU membership since then?



Probably not.

The path to membership to EU and NATO is both Byzantine and labyrinthine…

To start, hinderances to Ukraine joining the EU:
Ukraine does not yet have the requisite level of economic development to join;
Large scale corruption. (Where Denmark is a Gold Standard 88/100, Ukraine is 33/100, Russia 30/100)

Yes, this is a country in devastating agony, but that does not mean all previous concerns evaporate — the lesser of evils? Zelensky's approval rating prior to the invasion was 25%.

If Ukraine had been a model candidate the EU would be doing all it can to allow Ukraine to join as fast as possible. The feet dragging should tell us something.


----------



## Eric

Arkitect said:


> I agree with you.
> Terrible as it is, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is similar to the German invasion of the rump Czechoslovakia, March 1939.
> European governments decried it, shouted and waved fists and bits of paper, but all knew they were not going to go to war.
> Poland had an "assurance" from the United Kingdom and so… fast forward to September 1939.



It's like we learn absolutely nothing from our pasts.


----------



## Zoidberg

So, if you want some more gloom and doom, here's the latest (6th) letter from the Russian whistleblower:

Caveat: as always, take it for what it is. That means it's ***_*probably*_*** authentic, but nothing is certain. The contents of the first letter had been confirmed by Bellingcat and others as being almost certainly legit from someone in the FSB. However, that doesn't mean the guy didn't get caught in the meantime, or it could be some elaborate psy-ops by the FSB, or who knows what else.



> “It appears World War III has begun; our guys are opening champagne - the war between Iran and the United States disrupts the nuclear deal and blocks the ability to replace Russian oil with Iranian oil. The inevitable shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz will cause oil to skyrocket in price. I have no idea why Iran chose to shoot itself in the foot. I could even believe in the existence of some kind of generally incomprehensible agreements (between Russia & Iran), but I don’t have a single fact that supports this.
> 
> Today I just want to convey information about the impending "exit" for Russia through our eyes (FSB as an organization) and the courtiers at the Kremlin. (Reference to a royal court under a King)
> 
> This is not a “copy” of the actual brief but an extremely accurate retelling, so you can do with this as you wish, including full publication without any redactions.
> 
> Currently there is only an outline, and a final report will be much more voluminous, detailed, and more concrete as the work has only just begun. Afterward I will try to provide my own input as I am currently pre-occupied with the situation of the Iranian-American conflict. The “Gordian Knot” will definitely be seriously revised/adapted (because of Iran launching a missile at the US base in Iraq).
> 
> Operation “Gordian Knot”
> 
> 1st Stage: Most likely, Konashenkov (Major General, chief spokesman for the Russian Ministry of Defence) will officially declare at a briefing that Europe and the “collective West” have declared war on Russia by intervening in the Ukrainian conflict with their weapons and mercenaries, while simultaneously attacking Russia in the economic plane (sanctions). There will be an extended lecture that war is not contained to military operations on the battlefield, but it includes an array of aggressive actions aimed at causing direct damage to the opponent. That the West’s action de-facto unleashed a world war. That this war has not yet moved into the “hot stage” with missiles and tanks only because Putin, as the supreme commander in chief, did not give such an order. Nevertheless, Konashenkov will declare that the third world war has begun.
> 
> 2nd Stage: Assessment of the reaction (by the West) – 1-2 days.
> 
> 3rd Stage: Putin will make a speech. In this long lecture he will declare that the modern world is not as it was before, that war now includes cyber attacks, preparation of biological attacks, direct attacks, training of terrorist & saboteurs, and imposing of sanctions devastating to the economy. He [allegedly] does not want war, but the West has already started it (against Russia). As a result, (Russian) response need not be symmetrical and can respond to any act of aggression with any means available in a military confrontation. “I warned with Ukraine – but nobody listened” (Putin’s message). Russia has shown that its words (threats) are not empty. Putin will declare that he is ready to come to terms (forgive) with what the West has already done, but only if sanctions are lifted within 24 hours, all assistance to Ukraine is stopped, and that NATO will guarantee not to expand. (Still Putin’s upcoming speech) Otherwise, Russia will have no choice but to accept the war and respond with all available means.
> 
> 4th Stage: A fierce negotiation process (between Russia and the West) – in the initial hours Putin will be conspicuously unavailable for communication (with the West). Other countries’ presidents will be obliged to discuss issues with Putin’s aides – “or not at all.”
> 
> Putin's demonstrative private phone calls will begin with the leaders of countries that Russia is betting on: Serbia, Hungary, China, the Arab world, African countries and Asian countries.
> 
> Assessing the situation of the West’s readiness to respond to the challenge, agents of political influence will be activated. They will call to “immediately fulfill Russia’s just demands, and not drag the world into a new war” - here the task is to quickly propagate the message that “the war was unleashed by the West, but Russia cannot not to answer.”
> 
> Stage 5: Based on the assessment of the situation over the following 24 hours, the following options are possible:





> 1) The West blinks and is prepared to make local concessions. In this instance the following position will be voiced: “we have been heard, there are positive signals and we consider this a factor that allows us to delay making a final decision." (Whether to start military operations against the West) Putin will set aside several days for the negotiation process, after which he will “make a decision.” In this scenario the West is given time to go through stages from denial to acceptance – practically all that will remain is to extract maximal concessions (from the West), which will turn out to be the most significant. The maximal objective is to sign a new international treaty of a global nature (total appeasement of Russia)
> 
> 
> 2) The West does not comply, but openly does not want war. In this instance “military targets” will be demonstrably identified: Poland and the Baltic countries. Moreover, identification of “limited targets” in these countries is possible, with a public appeal to civilians not to be near these objects. Immediately after this, a super-intensive format of negotiations will start, with a key goal of forcing the West to reject all support for Ukraine and a possible “compelling of Ukraine to peace” by the West. Strategic aviation and nuclear triad will be activated, and a No Fly Zone may be declared over these countries (by Russia). Chances of success (for desired concessions from the West) are considered to be highly realistic (if it gets to this point). Otherwise, localized missile strikes (against Poland and Baltics) will be almost inevitable.
> 
> 
> 3) The West does not comply and demonstrates readiness for war in response. This scenario is considered to be extremely unlikely. In this instance cyber attacks will be launched on key infrastructure facilities of Western countries. Russia will not take direct responsibility, while actively "moving" its forces of the (nuclear) triad. With this development of events, the risks of the West using military methods to respond are assessed as negligible, which gives Russia room to maneuver to conduct an indirect war to create unacceptable conditions for the West with the risk of total economic collapse. After this, negotiations are considered inevitable and will result in the scenario #2 above.
> 
> 
> 4) In the case of an absence of clear coordinated signals (from the West), which is assessed as unlikely but acceptable, the (Russian) behaviour will again be similar to scenario #2 above.
> 
> 
> 5) A fundamental collapse of the West within the time allotted (by Putin) after the ultimatum was issued. Rejection of “collective security”: Withdrawal of several countries from NATO (and possibly European Union), each with separate appeals to Russia that they are not conducting aggressive actions against Russia and they are not part of the possible war. Then everything will default back to scenario #1 above, but Russia’s strength in position (for negotiations) will be comparable to that of the USSR. In the future, this will allow Russia to take political control of a number of countries that were part of the USSR. NATO as an integral structure will cease to exist.
> 
> 
> 6) A fundamental collapse of the West, but with a clear separation of a number of countries [Poland and the Baltics] from the moderate position of other countries. (Here, #WindofChange means a scenario in which NATO tries to appease Russia but Poland and the Baltics refuse to stand down to Russia) In this case the “pro-Russian wing” of the Western countries will accuse these countries (Poland/Baltics) of fomenting conflict along with a demand “not to drag our governments into someone else’s conflict.” Russia's objective in this scenario is to apply maximum pressure on Western countries with a moderate position, demanding that they “keep the aggressors (Poland/Baltics) from reckless actions." In this situation, within a period of 3 to 7 days, Western countries with a moderate position will be ready to accept local strikes against countries with radically irreconcilable countries (Poland/Baltics), after which missile strikes [on military targets] will be launched on them (Poland/Baltics). Direct infantry invasion is considered acceptable but unlikely.
> For all the above (six) scenarios, these assumptions are assessed as extremely probable:
> 
> - Arab countries, Iran, China, some African countries, and [presumably] India and Brazil will take neutrality with a general condemnation of "mutual aggression"
> 
> - Some European countries are guaranteed not to support military confrontation: Italy, Hungary, Serbia, possibly France
> 
> - Powerful movements will be activated inside Western countries aimed to both support Russia and recognize it as a “defending side.” A number of anti-war movements not necessarily in support of Russia but which will create an impossible environment for their governments to make a pro-war decision
> 
> - Global nuclear war will not happen
> 
> - The Ukraine question will be resolved with finality by the West.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Wild Kremlin TV Hosts Threaten the U.S. With Nuclear Strikes
					

Russian state media has shut down last week’s minor dissent and now demands an end to sanctions and even reparations for affected Russians. Or else.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Eric

More reporters down  I don't care what network they are from, the put their lives on the line to cover these things. Nothing but respect for every one of them.









						Ukraine war: Fox News cameraman and Ukrainian journalist killed in attack near Kyiv
					

Pierre Zakrzewski had been travelling in a vehicle near Kyiv with correspondent Benjamin Hall, who was injured, and Ukrainian journalist Oleksandra Kuvshinova, who was also killed.




					news.sky.com
				




Ukraine war: Fox News cameraman and Ukrainian journalist killed in attack near Kyiv​Pierre Zakrzewski had been travelling in a vehicle near Kyiv with correspondent Benjamin Hall, who was injured, and Ukrainian journalist Oleksandra Kuvshinova, who was also killed.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Eric said:


> More reporters down  I don't care what network they are from, the put their lives on the line to cover these things. Nothing but respect for every one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine war: Fox News cameraman and Ukrainian journalist killed in attack near Kyiv
> 
> 
> Pierre Zakrzewski had been travelling in a vehicle near Kyiv with correspondent Benjamin Hall, who was injured, and Ukrainian journalist Oleksandra Kuvshinova, who was also killed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine war: Fox News cameraman and Ukrainian journalist killed in attack near Kyiv​Pierre Zakrzewski had been travelling in a vehicle near Kyiv with correspondent Benjamin Hall, who was injured, and Ukrainian journalist Oleksandra Kuvshinova, who was also killed.



was the fox news guy shot by a Nazi?


----------



## Thomas Veil

Get ready to face palm.









						Eric Trump: Putin Was Pants-Pissingly Terrified of My Dad, O.K.? — Vanity Fair
					

Another Trump boy is claiming Donald Trump was so big and strong the president of Russia knew not to cross him.




					apple.news
				




*Eric Trump: Putin Was Pants-Pissingly Terrified of My Dad, O.K.?*


> In an interview with Sean Hannity on Monday night, the former president’s son claimed Putin used his training as a spy to deduce that Trump—a five-time draft dodger who used bone spurs as an excuse to avoid service—was a man he did _not_ want to mess with. “Putin was in with the KBG, he can read people and he could tell that Donald Trump was a very strong person,” Eric declared with a completely straight face, adding: “Listen, my father would call up and would have said, ‘Vladimir, don’t even think about it, don’t even try us. I’m telling you it’s not going to work out very well for you.’”





> Naturally, Eric isn’t the only Trump boy spinning historical fan fiction about his father. In a video uploaded to Twitter last week, Donald Trump Jr. insisted that when the former president praises dictators like Putin, he’s not doing so because there’s something uniquely wrong with him but because he’s playing a high-level game of 3D chess. “He knew exactly how to play these guys, and he played it like a fiddle,” Junior claimed, a statement that would take a family therapist years to unpack.



Give me a freaking break, and don't talk to us like we're idiots.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Eric said:


> More reporters down  I don't care what network they are from, the put their lives on the line to cover these things. Nothing but respect for every one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine war: Fox News cameraman and Ukrainian journalist killed in attack near Kyiv
> 
> 
> Pierre Zakrzewski had been travelling in a vehicle near Kyiv with correspondent Benjamin Hall, who was injured, and Ukrainian journalist Oleksandra Kuvshinova, who was also killed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine war: Fox News cameraman and Ukrainian journalist killed in attack near Kyiv​Pierre Zakrzewski had been travelling in a vehicle near Kyiv with correspondent Benjamin Hall, who was injured, and Ukrainian journalist Oleksandra Kuvshinova, who was also killed.



I also admire the three prime ministers who went to Kyiv to talk to Zelensky.









						‘Europe stands with you’: EU leaders vow support for Ukraine during Kyiv visit
					

Leaders of Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovenia express ‘unequivocal support’ for Ukraine after making perilous journey by train to meet Zelenskiy




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Eric

Zelensky's address was powerful, as was the video he presented as he made the case for a no-fly zone. I hope this changes some minds and we all do more for them, it's flat out genocide at this point and we have all have a responsibility to stop it.


----------



## Arkitect

Zoidberg said:


> it could be some elaborate psy-ops by the FSB, or who knows what else.



That's what I'd suspect. This reads as delusional, wishful thinking.
Who knows, I suspect something might have been lost in translation.

The big strategy is to drive a wedge between NATO and "the rest of the world" by Putin getting on the hotline to all and sundry and painting Russia as the non-agressor? How does that even begin to work plausibly? After all the sunflowers and Yello/Blue flags and emotive emojis…
Meanwhile, fingers crossed Iran and the US go to war.
Oh and BTW, the western governments are going to ask their populations whether going to war is OK?
That's not how it works.
24hours to lift sanctions? The West to say, _"Oops we're sorry Comrade Putin. Carry on as before?"_

I mean… really?

This reads like Berchtesgaden Kaffeehaus Tischgespräche.

At least, I hope so. Because if the Ruskies truly are this deluded, then god help us all.

I think Europe and the USA have kicked this can down the road as far as it can roll.


----------



## Huntn

Arkitect said:


> I agree with you.
> Terrible as it is, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is similar to the German invasion of the rump Czechoslovakia, March 1939.
> European governments decried it, shouted and waved fists and bits of paper, but all knew they were not going to go to war.
> Poland had an "assurance" from the United Kingdom and so… fast forward to September 1939.
> 
> 
> Probably not.
> 
> The path to membership to EU and NATO is both Byzantine and labyrinthine…
> 
> To start, hinderances to Ukraine joining the EU:
> Ukraine does not yet have the requisite level of economic development to join;
> Large scale corruption. (Where Denmark is a Gold Standard 88/100, Ukraine is 33/100, Russia 30/100)
> 
> Yes, this is a country in devastating agony, but that does not mean all previous concerns evaporate — the lesser of evils? Zelensky's approval rating prior to the invasion was 25%.
> 
> If Ukraine had been a model candidate the EU would be doing all it can to allow Ukraine to join as fast as possible. The feet dragging should tell us something.




This is a case were there are no good choices, but there are better, cross your fingers choices. The argument might be there is a painful economic choice and possibly, but not guaranteed, world war, possibly world destruction ending choice and all it took was one megliomaniac with nukes to bring us to this point. 

And depending on Vlad, the powers in Russia that support him, and the people of Russia, there is no totally safe choice when significantly  pushing back, crippling Russia’s economy.  Is there any real surprise we are in this boat? I admit, it is easy to say as we watch the scenario unfold. Yet, the existence of nukes all along including MAD, means that the human race has been teetering with a short noose for the last 70 years, we have been playing with fire, hoping for the best, and the psychology is for average people not to think about it until they get their face shoved into it.

I’ll also speculate how much difference does it make that Russia has nukes? I’d say a little, but maybe not. I suspect a major war with Russia, with no nuclear exchange, would still be plenty painful to the world. The major difference is that without nukes we’d be much more assured of no armageddon scenario.

And it will  be very interesting to see how China shakes out in this, in the end, Virtually all or the vast majority of their wealth (as far as I know) comes from trade with the West. If push comes to shove they know in the status quo they are in good shape with the West until they try something like invade Taiwan. Not guaranteed, but I could imagine them coming down on the side of the West in a shooting World War. And it’s interesting that in this scenario, while the West pushes back economically, and provides military aid to Ukrsine,  they are verbally and economically coming down on Russia’s side, blaming the West, and no sanctions or cancelation of  Russian business as far as I know. In this way until the WWIII breaks out, they can preserve their business deals all around.

The bottom line here is how much of a madman is Putin when Russia implodes economically? Yes him being remived from power, coming from Russians could solve the problem quickly, or regardless, if we blow up as a result of it, just how much of a surprise will this be? Honestly I will not be surprised If the worst happens. I spent part of my childhood practicing to kiss my ass goodbye under a school desk and we got a 60 year reprieve. Maybe we will find the strength to get rid of nukes if we survive this or we will just keep muddling on until the odds catch up with us.




Zoidberg said:


> So, if you want some more gloom and doom, here's the latest (6th) letter from the Russian whistleblower:
> 
> Caveat: as always, take it for what it is. That means it's ***_*probably*_*** authentic, but nothing is certain. The contents of the first letter had been confirmed by Bellingcat and others as being almost certainly legit from someone in the FSB. However, that doesn't mean the guy didn't get caught in the meantime, or it could be some elaborate psy-ops by the FSB, or who knows what else.



This is fascinating and simo scary because it might sound plausible. Now that could be the purpose, to scare us. Yet, I’ll say all bets are off yet as I mentioned above, with Russia’s go for broke military action in Ukraine, at this point I predict Putin won’t stop until he possesses the country completely   or somehow it manages to survive and the action turns into a stalemate.

The variables i see:

The West must have the will to keep economic sanctions applied.
The West caves, Ukraine falls and Putin suceeds in part 2 or 3 of his resurrection of the USSR and with a several year rest to recoup, while keeping a new Cold War going, is emboldened to keep the expansion going.
The Russian people or the powers around Putin, rise up and remove him from power.
Initiating a nuclear launch is a death wish. Putin is either sane or insane and for the latter, for a good outcome, there must be a failsafe, people in a position to counter, to prevent the launch of nuclear weapons if his situation ever turns to shit.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> Zelensky's address was powerful, as was the video he presented as he made the case for a no-fly zone. I hope this changes some minds and we all do more for them, it's flat out genocide at this point and we have all have a responsibility to stop it.




Do you think it's worth the gamble of potentially billions getting killed by nukes?  There's no easy answer here but that possibility needs to be taken into consideration.  NATO collectively could easily crush the Russian military and Putin knows that, or at least he knows that now looking at the poor performance in Ukraine.  The only card left to potentially tip the scales would be nukes, and if he thinks he's going to go out regardless then why not go out big.  For whatever reason, Russia has a nice long history of not giving a fuck about the lives of millions if ending them serves the state.    

You'd like to hope somebody in the loop would disobey orders to fire nukes, but there's also a high probability that their propaganda would tell them that the west already launched theirs and they are just retaliating.  Once launched there won't really be much left to dispute that narrative.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Well, that’s pretty frank…









						Biden on Putin: 'I think he is a war criminal'
					

President Joe Biden called Russian President Vladimir Putin a "war criminal" Wednesday, a rhetorical leap that came as civilian deaths mount in Ukraine.




					www.cnn.com
				




…and entirely appropriate.


----------



## SuperMatt

Lindsey’s back:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1504121066050015237/


----------



## Skunk

The world would almost certainly be better off without Lindsey Graham, too.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Biden’s commendation sounds like an Onion article “Leader of country with long string of war criminal leaders calls leader of another country a war criminal. Global whites agree with this assessment.”


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> Lindsey’s back:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1504121066050015237/



I 100% agree with Lindsey here. The man is murdering innocent people daily, not just incidentally either, targeting people in bread lines, in homes, and those trying to flee the country. That human piece of shit deserves a target on his head.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Russia announced that it was withdrawing from the Council of Europe (yesterday, 15 March), a move probably intended to pre-empt the decision of the Council of Europe to expel - or exclude - Russia (in fact, the Council of Ministers of the Council of Europe "agreed to suspend the Russian Federation from its rights of representation in the Council of Europe"), from the body later that same day.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Heh. The old "You can't fire me, I quit!" routine, eh?

How...weak.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Zelensky's address was powerful, as was the video he presented as he made the case for a no-fly zone. I hope this changes some minds and we all do more for them, it's flat out genocide at this point and we have all have a responsibility to stop it.




I think it was a great speech, very likely to be historic. I’m always impressed with how Zelenskyy tailors his speeches to his audience- talking about MLK, 9/11, Pearl Harbor with the Americans, talking about WWII, quoting Churchill, etc with the British. 

Emotionally I totally support a no fly zone. In an ideal world I think everyone on the side of peace and freedom would as well. I’d love to see a bunch of F-35s and F-22s and F-15’s sweep in obliterate the Russian forces. 

Every USAF or Navy airwing person I’ve spoken to and heard in the media says that a no-fly zone is feasible, not without likely starting the next world war. To have a no fly zone means it has to be enforced. That means NATO pilots vs Russian pilots. It also may mean having to take out Russian air defenses stationed in Russia or Belarus. It’s also possible NATO jets could be fired upon by Russian aircraft loitering in Russian territory. There are a lot of complications with that. When it comes to rules of engagement, that could potentially be worked out, but evidently Russia’s pilots have such little experience and the way they are flying their sorties indicates they are probably already afraid of Russian jets taking out other Russian jets. They apparently are having issues deconflicting their own aircraft as is. 

One of the better insights I have heard that is if NATO starts patrolling Ukrainian Airspace and especially if NATO pilots start taking down Russian planes is that it feeds right into the Russian Propaganda of NATO being this existential evil force and consequently justifies the invasion to Russian people who already support the war *special military operation* or don’t know what to believe. 

I’m thrilled to see the US via NATO allies will be transferring (Soviet) S-300 air defense systems and similar. Stinger missiles are very short range and really only useful against cruise helicopters and low flying planes- maybe very large drones too. The S-300 has much longer range and can take out high flying planes as well as cruise missiles. It’s also mobile to keep the Russians on their toes. If we can’t “close the skies” with NATO jets, the next best thing is flooding Ukraine; especially cities, with air defense systems. We need to make flying into Ukraine as dangerous as possible. In effect this might “close the skies” entirely, but make flying into Ukrainian held territory extremely risky. 

Some S-300 variants also can handle ballistic missiles, which would also be very helpful. That said the Russian’s Iskander BM’s are very capable, with the ability for some maneuvering unlike typical BM’s and just recently have been found to have up to 6 decoys, something not known to exist in any other short range BM system. I would assume it’s best to destroy these before they are launched. Which I suppose is where drones might come in. 

The Turkish TB2 drones have been extremely successful for the Ukrainians, as well as Azerbaijan in their war with Armenia. I’m happy to see the US will be supplying Switchblade “kamikaze” drones, which are pretty interesting- they’re almost like controlled artillery and amazingly cheap. They’re range isn’t particularly far so hopefully they will be provided with something more substantial as well. 

If we’re supplying armed/Kamikaze drones I’m not sure why supplying Mig-29’s is that different. Evidently these Polish Migs have been fitted with NATO communications equipment that would have to be removed and replaced with something compatible with Ukrainians systems before transferring, which could take some time. Perhaps things are happening behind the scenes we aren’t aware of. 

Apparently Mig 29’s have notoriously poor fuel consumption and no drop tanks, and to fly at an altitude below Russian’s radar obviously kills your fight time, so realistically they’re only capable of 30 min of flight time in such conditions… granted they’re cruising around at Mach 1.2 or so. So I’m not sure how useful these planes would be, but I think at the very least it would be a huge moral booster. 

One thing I have heard nothing about are land based anti-ship missiles. I’m not sure what NATO has, but I believe the US’s system is still in development. This seems like an important capability when it comes to amphibious invasions and ships sitting in the Black Sea blasting cruise missiles into cities.


----------



## Eric

*Mod Note:*
Did a little clean up, first of all let's keep all the Fox News/Tulsi, et al. posts in the Racism in Europe, refugees, and topics tangentially related to the war in Ukraine thread going forward. I've also merged the two Russia threads into the one Yaxo started since his was created first.

Carry on.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Draghi (PM of Italy) said that it’s time for his government to think about rationing supplies, food etc.


----------



## Yoused

Seems as though I had forgotten (never really knew) how bad war can be. The R troops captured a hospital and took to using the 400 patients and doctors in it as hostages. Perhaps we should thank Vlad and his soldiers for reminding us how much it sucks.

AFAIC, anyone who complains about pacifists after this deserves to be [redacted].


----------



## Yoused

Wow, the way this guy talks





"Civil mutiny"? "Self-cleansing"? Does he have Hermann Goering on his staff?


----------



## SuperMatt

31 Republican Senators voted *against* $13.6 billion for Ukraine. Now they have the unmitigated gall to accuse Biden of not doing enough to help.

The most prominent voice of hypocrisy is Mr. tax-the-poor himself, Sen. Dick Scott.



			https://wapo.st/362yIoX
		

(paywall removed)

They talk as if they care, but when it was time to actually help, they voted against it. Remember who they are and never re-elect them.

And of course Josh Hawley is in the story:



> In early February, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), another possible White House candidate, sent a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggesting that the United States would be worse off if Ukraine were admitted to NATO, the military alliance of 30 mainly Western countries— including the United States — bound by a mutual defense treaty, andargued that the United States should instead focus on countering China.
> Hawley, who voted against the spending bill with billions for Ukraine, said Wednesday that Biden needs to “step up” and send MiG jet fighters and other weapons to Ukraine, accusing the administration of “dragging its feet.”


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Yoused said:


> Wow, the way this guy talks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Civil mutiny"? "Self-cleansing"? Does he have Hermann Goering on his staff?



Well, Mike Godwin (the gentleman who actually created Godwin's Law, as his Twitter handle, @sfmnemonic, confirms), watched this speech (in full, as I did), and subsequently, (and, quite wonderfully), tweeted: "You're not going to believe who this guy reminds me of."


----------



## Thomas Veil

In line with that, watch this CNN interview with the ex-partner of a Russian oligarch. More confirmation about how Mafia-like Putin’s government is and Putin’s unbalanced state of mind.

Right at the end she makes a comment that, to my mind, draws comparisons to Individual-1.

'*Complete lack of normal human morals': Russian oligarch's ex-partner describes life around Putin*








						'Ruthless': Ex-partner to Putin's close friend speaks out  - CNN Video
					

CNN's Erin Burnett speaks with Countess Alexandra Tolstoy, the former partner to Russian oligarch Sergei Pugachev, about their relationship with Vladimir Putin.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> Draghi (PM of Italy) said that it’s time for his government to think about rationing supplies, food etc.




is this because things have already gotten hard to find, or in anticipation of how things might develop?


----------



## Thomas Veil

This keeps getting more and more Trumpy. 









						Putin holds rally to bolster support as Ukraine war falters
					

Russian President Vladimir Putin held a rally on Friday to boost public morale, as the invasion of Ukraine he launched last month continued to meet with determined resistance, bolstered by the United States and Europe.




					news.yahoo.com
				




He’s holding _rallies_ now? For a _war??_

With sloganeering on posters yet?

Looks like he’s learned a thing or two from Donny. Next he’ll be leading crowds in “Build that wall!”-style chants.


----------



## Eric

Thomas Veil said:


> This keeps getting more and more Trumpy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin holds rally to bolster support as Ukraine war falters
> 
> 
> Russian President Vladimir Putin held a rally on Friday to boost public morale, as the invasion of Ukraine he launched last month continued to meet with determined resistance, bolstered by the United States and Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He’s holding _rallies_ now? For a _war??_
> 
> With sloganeering on posters yet?
> 
> Looks like he’s learned a thing or two from Donny. Next he’ll be leading crowds in “Build that wall!”-style chants.



A tactic that worked well for Hitler in the beginning, only he was more revered than Putin who has very little support from anyone in this war effort.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Macky-Mac said:


> is this because things have already gotten hard to find, or in anticipation of how things might develop?



My understanding is that they are having minimal problems; in my opinion it was more to make sure that the gravity of the situation is clear to everyone.


----------



## SuperMatt

A powerful story of refugees commenting on the current crisis through relaying their past experiences.









						Refugees from other wars see themselves in fleeing Ukrainians
					

NPR's Mary Louise Kelly talks with people about the experience of being a refugee, how fleeing their home country has affected their life and what life is like now.




					www.npr.org


----------



## Yoused

here is the public google drive page where Ukrainians upload their videos from their homeland


----------



## Zoidberg

The cosmonauts that just arrived onboard the ISS had a little surprise.





When asked about it, the Russian commander replied, tongue in cheek, that they had “too much yellow fabric in the warehouse”.

Oddly, Rogozin hasn’t posted a picture of their arrival yet…


----------



## SuperMatt

Zoidberg said:


> The cosmonauts that just arrived onboard the ISS had a little surprise.
> 
> View attachment 12521
> 
> When asked about it, the Russian commander replied, tongue in cheek, that they had “too much yellow fabric in the warehouse”.
> 
> Oddly, Rogozin hasn’t posted a picture of their arrival yet…



WOW. Incredible that Russian cosmonauts would stick it directly to Putin. The more signs of people pushing back on Putin, the better.

I just saw a bit on PBS News Hour about the shuttering of the last open McDonald’s in Russia (which was also the first one there, opening in 1990). I wasn’t aware that McDonald’s was so popular there. It seems frivolous, but the more signs that can be sent to Russia that Putin is shunned by the world, the better.

Also saw that a big rally with Putin was interrupted by pre-recorded footage. I’m not sure if that is big news or not. However, I did marvel at how similar the Putin event seemed to a Trump rally, or perhaps Trump’s pre-inauguration event in DC. Trump also had the big July 4th event a couple years ago where he tried to make it all about him, instead of the traditional American celebrations.

Trump really is a wanna-be Putin. If Putin‘s war fails and his economy collapses, and he has to come crawling to the negotiating table, will America’s aspiring autocrats take the lesson? Will American voters take the lesson? One can hope.

I am discouraged when I see Republicans voting against aid for Ukraine, but then trying to find any reason to attack Biden’s response as insufficient. This is a time to come together. There will be plenty of time for sniping political opponents later.


----------



## Yoused

Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister praised F**news for providing alternative coverage of happenings.



			
				Sergei Lavrov said:
			
		

> But when you see, you watch other channels, and when you—watch, read the social networks and internet platforms, when the acting president was blocked, as you know, and this censorship continues in a very big way and the substitution of notions whenever something is happening by the way of mass protest mass demonstrations, which they don't like, they immediately call it domestic terrorism. So it's a war, and it's a war which involves the methods of information terrorism. There is no doubt about this.




If that is not a messed up translation, he must have taken the same course in Coherent Communication as did Individual-ONE.


----------



## AG_PhamD

There’s a lot in the media today about Russia allegedly using a Kinzhal “hypersonic” missile against Ukraine and all the potential consequences of such a weapon. 

What they’re not saying is the that the Kinzhal missile is basically a Islander ballistic missile modified to be air launched instead of ground launched. The Russians have launched numerous Iskanders and they were developed in the 80’s. And it’s worth mentioning nearly all ballistic missiles travel at hypersonic speed. 

The Kinzhal (and Islander) are technically quasi-ballistic missiles in that they presumably travel in a depressed ballistic trajectory and/or have some degree of maneuverability in flight. There are doubts as to how maneuverable these missiles actually are based on their design. 

This is a very different and much more rudimentary concept than hypersonic glide vehicles and hypersonic cruise missiles we hear so much about. Calling the Kinzhal a hypersonic weapon is more like a marketing strategy. 

That said, these are still very capable weapons. It’s rather interesting Russia presumably has chosen to use Kinzhal considering Ukraine has little ability to defend from cruise and standard ballistic missiles as it is. Similarly it was discovered Iskanders were being launched with decoys, again a strange choice when there are little-no defenses on the other side. All this might actually suggest their weapons supplies are running low and they’re having to use unnecessarily more complex and expensive weapons.


----------



## Thomas Veil

New development per CNN. Russia is taking thousands of Ukrainian citizens from Mariupol and transporting them against their will to Russia. I’m presuming this means prison camps.

Gets more Hitler-like by the day, doesn’t it?



> Captured Mariupol residents were taken to camps where Russian forces checked their phones and documents, then redirected some of the residents to remote cities in Russia, the statement said, adding that the "fate of the others is unknown."











						Mariupol residents are being forced to go to Russia, city council says | CNN
					

Residents of the Ukrainian city of Mariupol are being taken to Russia against their will by Russian forces, the Mariupol City Council said Saturday.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Citysnaps

Thomas Veil said:


> New development per CNN. Russia is taking thousands of Ukrainian citizens from Mariupol and transporting them against their will to Russia. I’m presuming this means prison camps.
> 
> Gets more Hitler-like by the day, doesn’t it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mariupol residents are being forced to go to Russia, city council says | CNN
> 
> 
> Residents of the Ukrainian city of Mariupol are being taken to Russia against their will by Russian forces, the Mariupol City Council said Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com




Smells like kidnapping, or potentially worse, to me.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Now, having shared that, I have to say I’ve been unable to find any other news reports about this. Either other news outfits are still chasing down confirmation of the story, or CNN got it wrong.

Edit: nope, here it is from Reuters.









						Mariupol says thousands deported from besieged Ukrainian city
					

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said Russia's siege of the port city of Mariupol was "a terror that will be remembered for centuries to come", while local authorities said thousands of residents there had been taken by force across the border.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## AG_PhamD

Allegedly they’re taking Ukrainian citizens and filtering them out to remote work camps in remote parts of Russia where they are forced to sign papers promising to live there for a number of years and work for free. 

I am hesitant to accept this as fact given the amount of false information that flies around during wars, but this definitely needs to be investigated. I would not be surprised if this or something similar is happening. If so, I believe this forced relocation could be  a form of genocide, which I believe has already been met with the complete destruction of Mariupol. And Putin will go down in history among the likes of Hitler and Stalin.


----------



## Citysnaps

By Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist Steve Breen for the San Diego Union-Tribune.


----------



## Yoused

Russia could not attack Ukraine before because we had a bigly tough president,

_ Rudey Ghouliani blorts:
*(Individual-ONE) says, ‘Vladimir, you shouldn’t, like, attack Ukraine. I never liked those big, what are those things you got in Moscow, those big bubbles? Those big gold bubbles, I never liked those things, so I’m gonna have to blow them up.

So Putin says, ‘They’re churches,’

 'Oh, Vladimir, don’t tell me that about churches, c’mon. Churches? You can fool Bush, you can’t fool me. You care about churches?'

That’s why he’s a genius. Of course he says he’s smart: ‘Hey Vladimir, you’re really, really smart.’*​
It does not have to make sense – maybe even better if not.


----------



## Eric

Hope he was able to have some good times throughout his life as well.


This is Boris Romanchenko. He survived four different nazi concentration camps - last Friday he was killed by the Russians in his home in Kharkiv from
      ukraine


----------



## yaxomoxay

another piece of news that might be of interest - especially to @Scepticalscribe - on March 25th, Pope Francis in unison with all the Bishops of the world and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI will consecrate Russia (and Ukraine).

This is a major event which has been discussed and subject of much controversy since at least 1917. For the political purpose of this forum, just know that this will be one of the strongest political signals of the Catholic Church in recent memory, and will likely piss off the Russian Orthodox Church to no end. It will also set the tone for Catholics worldwide (that’s also why Catholic Churches worldwide are rising lots of $$$ for Ukraine). 

In other words, within its context, this is a massive development 









						Pope invites bishops to join him in consecration of Russia and Ukraine - Vatican News
					

The Consecration of Russia and Ukraine to the Immaculate Heart of Mary will be pronounced by the Pope on the afternoon of Friday 25 March in St ...




					www.vaticannews.va


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> another piece of news that might be of interest - especially to @Scepticalscribe - on March 25th, Pope Francis in unison with all the Bishops of the world and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI will consecrate Russia (and Ukraine).
> 
> This is a major event which has been discussed and subject of much controversy since at least 1917. For the political purpose of this forum, just know that this will be one of the strongest political signals of the Catholic Church in recent memory, and will likely piss off the Russian Orthodox Church to no end. It will also set the tone for Catholics worldwide (that’s also why Catholic Churches worldwide are rising lots of $$$ for Ukraine).
> 
> In other words, within its context, this is a massive development
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pope invites bishops to join him in consecration of Russia and Ukraine - Vatican News
> 
> 
> The Consecration of Russia and Ukraine to the Immaculate Heart of Mary will be pronounced by the Pope on the afternoon of Friday 25 March in St ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vaticannews.va



What is the significance of this?
consecrate
kŏn′sĭ-krāt″
transitive verb​
To declare or set apart as sacred.
To sanctify (bread and wine) for Eucharistic use through a ritual regarded by some Christian churches as effecting transubstantiation.
To initiate (a priest) into the order of bishops.


----------



## sgtaylor5

Huntn said:


> What is the significance of this?
> consecrate
> kŏn′sĭ-krāt″
> transitive verb​
> To declare or set apart as sacred.
> To sanctify (bread and wine) for Eucharistic use through a ritual regarded by some Christian churches as effecting transubstantiation.
> To initiate (a priest) into the order of bishops.




Apparently, this is why, quoting from the article:


> In the apparition of 13 July 1917 in Fatima, Our Lady [Mary, the mother of Jesus - sgt] had asked for the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart and the communion of reparation on the First Saturdays, stating that if this request was not granted, Russia would “spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church,” and “the good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated.”



Not trying to say this makes sense to my Protestant heart, but, by this act, the Catholic Church [Vatican] is trying to stop the war.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> What is the significance of this?
> consecrate
> kŏn′sĭ-krāt″
> transitive verb​
> To declare or set apart as sacred.
> To sanctify (bread and wine) for Eucharistic use through a ritual regarded by some Christian churches as effecting transubstantiation.
> To initiate (a priest) into the order of bishops.



From the Church’s perspective, and formally, it means that Russia will be “reserved” for a holy purpose. The symbolic mean of the consecration to the immaculate heart of Mary basically means that through the wounds, Russia will serve a holy purpose.


sgtaylor5 said:


> Apparently, this is why, quoting from the article:
> 
> Not trying to say this makes sense to my Protestant heart, but, by this act, the Catholic Church [Vatican] is trying to stop the war.



Obviously I know that I am the only one here that believes in this stuff, so I report it more for political and historical importance.

The main political significance - and why John Paul II was very intentional in not naming Russia in his consecrations - is that by consecrating the Vatican “expects/wants” Russia to become westernized (and of course to become Catholic ), in order to be in the future a bastion of… goodness, if you will.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Here’s a decent explanation








						Pope Francis will consecrate Russia and Ukraine. What's that mean?
					

The Vatican announced Tuesday that Pope Francis will consecrate Russia and Ukraine to the Immaculate Heart of Mary March 25, and that a papal envoy will conduct the same consecration in Fatima.  The consecrations - performed by Pope Francis and papal almoner Cardinal Konrad Krajewski - come...




					www.pillarcatholic.com
				




Which touches the important point ref. John Paul II:

“the pope was urged not to mention Russia by name in the public prayers of the 1984 consecration, because it would anger the Russian Orthodox hierarchy, who opposed the notion of Catholics consecrating their country to Mary, and because of Vatican efforts at political diplomacy with the USSR.”

In other words, the Pope is now saying that “fixing” Russia (and the Russian Orthodox Church) is fair game and the ethical thing to do.


----------



## Thomas Veil

So it seems like Putin’s use of these hypersonic missiles doesn’t make a lot of sense. 









						Moscow's claim about firing hypersonic missiles could be more hype, experts say
					

"It’s a bit of a head-scratcher to be honest with you," a Pentagon official said.




					www.nbcnews.com
				






> “Russia doesn’t have many of them and, frankly, doesn’t need to use them in this conflict,” said Mark Cancian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Thomas Veil said:


> So it seems like Putin’s use of these hypersonic missiles doesn’t make a lot of sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moscow's claim about firing hypersonic missiles could be more hype, experts say
> 
> 
> "It’s a bit of a head-scratcher to be honest with you," a Pentagon official said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com




A page or so back I have a post questioning their use considering the circumstances. And the fact that these “hypersonic” weapons are not what we think of when that word is used. They are quasi ballistic air launch missiles. Nearly all ballistic missiles are hypersonic. These are no hypersonic glide or cruise missiles that are really an entirely different story. 

Another question is how many of these actually exist. Russia is very much into hyping new technologies but can’t afford to field them. Take for instance the Su-57, there are maybe 3 operational planes. The T-14 tank was supposed to be in mass production years ago but haven’t gone anywhere. They maybe have 100 models. It’s a lot of posturing and marketing. Marketing because without foreign sales Russia can’t afford to fund their own army. 

In other news, the US is finally sending our Soviet era air defense systems, which we acquired for testing and reverse engineering many years ago. It’s far from the best technology but any little bit helps.


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> From the Church’s perspective, and formally, it means that Russia will be “reserved” for a holy purpose. The symbolic mean of the consecration to the immaculate heart of Mary basically means that through the wounds, Russia will serve a holy purpose.
> 
> Obviously I know that I am the only one here that believes in this stuff, so I report it more for political and historical importance.
> 
> The main political significance - and why John Paul II was very intentional in not naming Russia in his consecrations - is that by consecrating the Vatican “expects/wants” Russia to become westernized (and of course to become Catholic ), in order to be in the future a bastion of… goodness, if you will.



But in your previous post you, unless I misread it, you said Russia and Ukraine would be consecrated. so I was thinking consecrated is considered something done as an approval mechanism. 

Post in thread 'Russia-Ukraine'
https://talkedabout.com/threads/russia-ukraine.2303/post-94787


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> Here’s a decent explanation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pope Francis will consecrate Russia and Ukraine. What's that mean?
> 
> 
> The Vatican announced Tuesday that Pope Francis will consecrate Russia and Ukraine to the Immaculate Heart of Mary March 25, and that a papal envoy will conduct the same consecration in Fatima.  The consecrations - performed by Pope Francis and papal almoner Cardinal Konrad Krajewski - come...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pillarcatholic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which touches the important point ref. John Paul II:
> 
> “the pope was urged not to mention Russia by name in the public prayers of the 1984 consecration, because it would anger the Russian Orthodox hierarchy, who opposed the notion of Catholics consecrating their country to Mary, and because of Vatican efforts at political diplomacy with the USSR.”
> 
> In other words, the Pope is now saying that “fixing” Russia (and the Russian Orthodox Church) is fair game and the ethical thing to do.



What I think of as consecration is when some person of notoriety like Mary is consecrated, she is recognized as a holy, special person. I don’t see how this would apply to Russia, not even Ukraine, just because you are unjustly attacked by an evil person does that make you “holy”?

To clarify, I’m not arguing or disagreeing with anything you have said about this, just trying to understand what this means to the Catholic Church. I’m assuming it is trying to put pressure on Russia and I wonder would the Church consecrate someone like Putin, Hitler, or Nazi Germany? It’s just not making sense to me, unless they are trying to say _Russia you are sacred, don’t let this ass wipe of a leader ruin you?_


----------



## yaxomoxay

Huntn said:


> What I think of as consecration is when some person of notoriety like Mary is consecrated, she is recognized as a holy, special person. I don’t see how this would apply to Russia, not even Ukraine, just because you are unjustly attacked by an evil person does that make you “holy”?
> 
> To clarify, I’m not arguing or disagreeing with anything you have said about this, just trying to understand what this means to the Catholic Church. I’m assuming it is trying to put pressure on Russia and I wonder would the Church consecrate someone like Putin, Hitler, or Nazi Germany? It’s just not making sense to me, unless they are trying to say _Russia you are sacred, don’t let this ass wipe of a leader ruin you?_



No problem. Let’s see if I can explain it better. 

First and foremost, a consecration is a formal act, and it can be true for a person as for an entity (church, family etc). In this case, it’s a very important formal act of the Vatican, with clear political meaning and consequences; it also stems from the 2010-2015 reluctance by the Vatican from formally accusing Russia and Putin. This act is a total pivot in diplomatic ties which will have consequences for years to come and will likely cause a huge chasm between Catholics and Russian Orthodox. I don’t see a persecution of Russian Catholics as impossible. 

As for the more “theological” explanation, remember that it’s not simply “consecration of Russia” but “consecration of Russia _to the immaculate heart of Mary.” _In other words, the pope entrusts the sanctity of Russia to Mary’s intercession, and affirms the Church’s belief that Russia can become a place in which holiness (within human limits) might actually arise. It’s an affirmation that in order to have long-lasting peace, Russia needs to be… fixed, purified. It is also a recognition (or a declaration, if you will) that the situation is so dire that simple human intervention isn’t enough (which theologically it will piss off the Russian patriarch as technically he would be the one entrusted with the sanctity of Russia). 

As for your last question, no. The consecration of Russia wouldn’t consecrate Putin unless he repented. Actually, with this formal act, the Vatican is making sure that Russia (the people, heritage etc) are separate from the ruler (Putin, oligarchs, etc.)


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> No problem. Let’s see if I can explain it better.
> 
> First and foremost, a consecration is a formal act, and it can be true for a person as for an entity (church, family etc). In this case, it’s a very important formal act of the Vatican, with clear political meaning and consequences; it also stems from the 2010-2015 reluctance by the Vatican from formally accusing Russia and Putin. This act is a total pivot in diplomatic ties which will have consequences for years to come and will likely cause a huge chasm between Catholics and Russian Orthodox. I don’t see a persecution of Russian Catholics as impossible.
> 
> As for the more “theological” explanation, remember that it’s not simply “consecration of Russia” but “consecration of Russia _to the immaculate heart of Mary.” _In other words, the pope entrusts the sanctity of Russia to Mary’s intercession, and affirms the Church’s belief that Russia can become a place in which holiness (within human limits) might actually arise. It’s an affirmation that in order to have long-lasting peace, Russia needs to be… fixed, purified. It is also a recognition (or a declaration, if you will) that the situation is so dire that simple human intervention isn’t enough (which theologically it will piss off the Russian patriarch as technically he would be the one entrusted with the sanctity of Russia).
> 
> As for your last question, no. The consecration of Russia wouldn’t consecrate Putin unless he repented. Actually, with this formal act, the Vatican is making sure that Russia (the people, heritage etc) are separate from the ruler (Putin, oligarchs, etc.)



Thank you, I appreciate it. It kind of sounds like we will consecrate Russia so it burns him when he touches it, while being a totally symbolic religious-political act of scolding.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> another piece of news that might be of interest - especially to @Scepticalscribe - on March 25th, Pope Francis in unison with all the Bishops of the world and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI will consecrate Russia (and Ukraine).
> 
> This is a major event which has been discussed and subject of much controversy since at least 1917. For the political purpose of this forum, just know that this will be one of the strongest political signals of the Catholic Church in recent memory, and will likely piss off the Russian Orthodox Church to no end. It will also set the tone for Catholics worldwide (that’s also why Catholic Churches worldwide are rising lots of $$$ for Ukraine).
> 
> In other words, within its context, this is a massive development
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pope invites bishops to join him in consecration of Russia and Ukraine - Vatican News
> 
> 
> The Consecration of Russia and Ukraine to the Immaculate Heart of Mary will be pronounced by the Pope on the afternoon of Friday 25 March in St ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vaticannews.va



Fascinating.

Whatever about the role of the Catholic Church in this, I cannot see any way in which the Orthodox communion will not be deeply, and perhaps irrevocably, split as a result of this invasion.

That deranged dream of a united Russian/Slav world - with a political capital in Moscow, and a spiritual capital in Kyiv, (even though Moscow is, supposedly, "the third Jerusalem") - is, paradoxically, ever further away, as a direct consequence of this invasion.

Reaching into the depths of pan-Slavic history, I am reminded of the bitter observation - recalled by some of the reform communists of the Dubcek government during the Prague Spring, (quoting and paraphrasing the 19th century writer and philospher, Palacky) - that, "Russians say that Russians are Slavs, so that they can say that Slavs are Russian."


----------



## Scepticalscribe

yaxomoxay said:


> No problem. Let’s see if I can explain it better.
> 
> First and foremost, a consecration is a formal act, and it can be true for a person as for an entity (church, family etc). In this case, it’s a very important formal act of the Vatican, with clear political meaning and consequences; it also stems from the 2010-2015 reluctance by the Vatican from formally accusing Russia and Putin. This act is a total pivot in diplomatic ties which will have consequences for years to come and will likely cause a huge chasm between Catholics and Russian Orthodox. I don’t see a persecution of Russian Catholics as impossible.
> 
> As for the more “theological” explanation, remember that it’s not simply “consecration of Russia” but “consecration of Russia _to the immaculate heart of Mary.” _In other words, the pope entrusts the sanctity of Russia to Mary’s intercession, and affirms the Church’s belief that Russia can become a place in which holiness (within human limits) might actually arise. It’s an affirmation that in order to have long-lasting peace, Russia needs to be… fixed, purified. *It is also a recognition (or a declaration, if you will) that the situation is so dire that simple human intervention isn’t enough (which theologically it will piss off the Russian patriarch as technically he would be the one entrusted with the sanctity of Russia).*
> 
> As for your last question, no. The consecration of Russia wouldn’t consecrate Putin unless he repented. Actually, with this formal act, the Vatican is making sure that Russia (the people, heritage etc) are separate from the ruler (Putin, oligarchs, etc.)



Exactly.

Normally, (in political, philosophical, diplomatic, geographical and theological terms) the Catholic Church will not, (not in these somewhat ecumenical times,) stamp on, or tread on, the theological toes of a fellow Christian denomination, instead, recognising that the spiritual welfare of those people is the responsibility of - and lies in the hands of - their own (national) church, Protestant, or Orthodox, as the case may be.

This is the Catholic Church (never mind that its name states that it has a "universal" theological jurisdiction) asserting its right - or claim - to pass judgment - theologically - on what is happening in the lands of (and under the theological jurisdiction of) a fellow Christian denomination.

As @yaxomoxay says, in that context, - where theology meets diplomacy (for the Vatican is a state as well as the home to one of the world's great religions) this is significant. 

Not least as - until recently - the Catholic Church had been attempting to construct closer ties with the Orthodox world.


----------



## Eric

Good.

TikToker arrested after posting clip of Ukrainian military vehicles parked near a mall that Russia later blew up​








						TikToker arrested after posting clip of Ukrainian military vehicles parked near a mall that Russia later blew up
					

Officials have urged Ukrainians not to share footage of military equipment or checkpoints on social media.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## Zoidberg

Eric said:


> Good.
> 
> TikToker arrested after posting clip of Ukrainian military vehicles parked near a mall that Russia later blew up​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TikToker arrested after posting clip of Ukrainian military vehicles parked near a mall that Russia later blew up
> 
> 
> Officials have urged Ukrainians not to share footage of military equipment or checkpoints on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com



"Loose TikToks Sink Ships."

One of the journalists I follow on Twitter did a short thread on the security measures the Ukrainians have put in place, and they are quite stringent. You'd think that not broadcasting on TikTok the position of the forces that are defending your life would be obvious, but apparently not.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Good.
> 
> TikToker arrested after posting clip of Ukrainian military vehicles parked near a mall that Russia later blew up​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TikToker arrested after posting clip of Ukrainian military vehicles parked near a mall that Russia later blew up
> 
> 
> Officials have urged Ukrainians not to share footage of military equipment or checkpoints on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com




What a moron. Why would you risk the people and hardware that stand between you and occupation? 

I suppose that makes striking the mall legitimate strike. It’s hard to say it’s a civilian target if it’s storing military equipment.


----------



## Citysnaps

Ukraine Just Captured Part Of One Of Russia's Most Capable Electronic Warfare Systems
					

Russia's lost Krasukha-4 electronic warfare system command module would be a prize for foreign intelligence agencies.




					www.thedrive.com
				




Ooops.


----------



## yaxomoxay

And so, it begins. 









						Putin Wants Hostile States to Pay Rubles for Gas, Interfax Says
					

Russia plans to demand ruble payments for natural gas purchases from European nations, deepening its standoff with the west and potentially aggravating Europe’s worst energy crunch since the 1970s.




					www.bloomberg.com


----------



## Eric

yaxomoxay said:


> And so, it begins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin Wants Hostile States to Pay Rubles for Gas, Interfax Says
> 
> 
> Russia plans to demand ruble payments for natural gas purchases from European nations, deepening its standoff with the west and potentially aggravating Europe’s worst energy crunch since the 1970s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bloomberg.com



Behind a paywall but l assume hostile states = anyone who doesn't support the bombing hospitals and schools.

Looking forward to the day someone drops a bunker buster on this piece of shit.


----------



## yaxomoxay

Eric said:


> Behind a paywall but l assume hostile states = anyone who doesn't support the bombing hospitals and schools.
> 
> Looking forward to the day someone drops a bunker buster on this piece of shit.



It says all the EU plus Japan, Switzerland and a few more.


----------



## Eric

IMO he's dangerous whether we put boots on the ground or not.

Putin ally warns of nuclear dystopia due to United States​








						Putin ally warns of nuclear dystopia due to United States
					

One of President Vladimir Putin's closest allies warned the United States on Wednesday that the world could spiral towards a nuclear dystopia if Washington pressed on with what the Kremlin casts as a long-term plot to destroy Russia.  Dmitry Medvedev, who was president from 2008 to 2012 and is...




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> And so, it begins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin Wants Hostile States to Pay Rubles for Gas, Interfax Says
> 
> 
> Russia plans to demand ruble payments for natural gas purchases from European nations, deepening its standoff with the west and potentially aggravating Europe’s worst energy crunch since the 1970s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bloomberg.com




It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. It seems to me that this would be an inevitable aspect of this conflict. Of course there are contracts in place that specify how payment is to be made, so Russia may not be able to make this switch happen at all, although it could just stop the supply.  As the article points out;

"...The order may mean some terms of Russia’s contracts with European customers, which are mostly in euros -- will need to be renegotiated...."


----------



## yaxomoxay

Macky-Mac said:


> It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. It seems to me that this would be an inevitable aspect of this conflict. Of course there are contracts in place that specify how payment is to be made, so Russia may not be able to make this switch happen at all, although it could just stop the supply.  As the article points out;
> 
> "...The order may mean some terms of Russia’s contracts with European customers, which are mostly in euros -- will need to be renegotiated...."



Like you, I am really curious. I see the negotiation happening because the EU badly needs gas and Russia badly needs Rubles (and one method to keep its value up).


----------



## Yoused

Anonymous hacks unsecured printers to send anti-war messages across Russia
					

Follow us on Twitter @HackRead - Facebook @ /HackRead




					www.hackread.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

__





						Watch This Russian Journalist and Former Politician Predict the Outcome in Ukraine Back in April 2021
					

Aleksandr Nevzorov seemed to see exactly how things would play out. Why didn't Vladimir Putin?




					www.esquire.com
				




So it seems when you surround yourself with yes men you don’t always get the outcome you believed. 

I’m tempted to make some US connections on that one but I won’t derail the thread.


----------



## Skunk

Astoundingly prescient (Mr Nevzorov, I mean). Well worth watching.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

yaxomoxay said:


> And so, it begins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin Wants Hostile States to Pay Rubles for Gas, Interfax Says
> 
> 
> Russia plans to demand ruble payments for natural gas purchases from European nations, deepening its standoff with the west and potentially aggravating Europe’s worst energy crunch since the 1970s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bloomberg.com




The UK has pledged to cease buying Russian gas by the end of this year. Germany is in the worse position as they get most of theirs from Russia. My gas bill is about to go up over a 100% from next week.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch This Russian Journalist and Former Politician Predict the Outcome in Ukraine Back in April 2021
> 
> 
> Aleksandr Nevzorov seemed to see exactly how things would play out. Why didn't Vladimir Putin?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.esquire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So it seems when you surround yourself with yes men you don’t always get the outcome you believed.
> 
> I’m tempted to make some US connections on that one but I won’t derail the thread.



Brilliant, barbed, bitter, and well worth watching.

Thanks for sharing, @Chew Toy McCoy.


----------



## yaxomoxay

The-Real-Deal82 said:


> The UK has pledged to cease buying Russian gas by the end of this year. Germany is in the worse position as they get most of theirs from Russia. My gas bill is about to go up over a 100% from next week.



If I remember correctly UK doesn’t get much gas from Russia, they should barely feel it. Germany, Spain, Italy etc will feel it.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Mariupol today, 3/23/2022:




Or should I say, what’s left of it. 

I know the West doesn’t want to escalate tensions, but this is criminal insanity. It’s high time the West gets tough with their language. Besides, the last thing Putin wants is conflict with NATO, especially considering his army is floundering before his eyes. 

I think the west needs to tell Putin if he continues this scorched earth campaign targeting civilians, the West will respond in devastating (non-nuclear) force to entities participating in such war crimes at a time and place of our choosing. ie That destroyer off the coast shooting cruise missiles will be blown out of the water. If he wants to occupy Ukraine, he’s going to have to do it fighting the Ukrainian forces like a civilized military. 

I am so utterly disgusted by this. Honestly, what is the end game here? Ruling over a smoldering pile of ash and corpses? Or does he think he’ll win the hearts and minds of Ukrainians completely destroying everything they once knew?


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> Like you, I am really curious. I see the negotiation happening because the EU badly needs gas and Russia badly needs Rubles (and one method to keep its value up).




Yes, it's possible that it will go into negotiations....that's always a good way to stall any action.

Cutting off gas would certainly cause problems for some EU and NATO countries, but such an action might not get the reaction that Putin wants, indeed it could turn out to be another miscalculation on Putin's part.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Behind a paywall but l assume hostile states = anyone who doesn't support the bombing hospitals and schools.
> 
> Looking forward to the day someone drops a bunker buster on this piece of shit.




I’ve heard a number of analysts suggest one way or another Russia is likely to cut off the gas supply to Europe. The reality is the world is dependent on oil, it’s just a shame Europe is so dependent on one country, in this case Russia. 

If Russia wants rubbles, fine, pay them in rubbles. If they want to shut off the gas entirely, go ahead. But then the West and our allies should sanction the crap out of every single last import Russia. Crash their market further and let China buy up every last resource they have. 

I’m not an economist but I’m not sure how much this will even help them. I don’t think this will help them repay their upcoming debt payments due in USD and Euros. Most western banks don’t want to touch the ruble right now. Changing the payment method is likely a breach of contract too.


----------



## Yoused

Looks like enough Russians saw Arnold's message that State Media felt compelled to respond









						Russian TV retaliates against Schwarzenegger after his video message reached millions
					

In the middle of March, former California governor and global action movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger recorded a video that he said he hoped would serve as counterpropaganda for Russian citizens regarding the invasion of Ukraine. Schwarzenegger, who is...




					www.dailykos.com


----------



## Huntn

yaxomoxay said:


> And so, it begins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin Wants Hostile States to Pay Rubles for Gas, Interfax Says
> 
> 
> Russia plans to demand ruble payments for natural gas purchases from European nations, deepening its standoff with the west and potentially aggravating Europe’s worst energy crunch since the 1970s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bloomberg.com



If they cave, the Russian POS wins. Next we'll see Orange POS back in charge 2024 and we'll be friends with Russia once again.


----------



## leman

AG_PhamD said:


> I’ve heard a number of analysts suggest one way or another Russia is likely to cut off the gas supply to Europe. The reality is the world is dependent on oil, it’s just a shame Europe is so dependent on one country, in this case Russia.
> 
> If Russia wants rubbles, fine, pay them in rubbles. If they want to shut off the gas entirely, go ahead. But then the West and our allies should sanction the crap out of every single last import Russia. Crash their market further and let China buy up every last resource they have.
> 
> I’m not an economist but I’m not sure how much this will even help them. I don’t think this will help them repay their upcoming debt payments due in USD and Euros. Most western banks don’t want to touch the ruble right now. Changing the payment method is likely a breach of contract too.




I am not too worried about Putler's new "pay in rubles" scheme. First of all, it's a bluff — he is just as desperate to sell as EU is desperate to buy. Second, by demanding one-sided contract changes, he is opening a can of worms. Third, price is set in USD/EUR in the contract, so I am sure that EUs economists can devise a scheme to respond to this nonsense in a proper way. And finally, if he indeed cuts gas/oil, I am fairly confident that any inhibitions EU leaders have for imposing stricter sanctions will disappear in an instant.


----------



## leman

By the way, if anyone here wants to donate to humanitarian relief in Ukraine, consider buying some merch from here (I am not affiliated in any way, I just like the designs and the people): https://www.saintjavelin.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

AG_PhamD said:


> I am so utterly disgusted by this. Honestly, what is the end game here? Ruling over a smoldering pile of ash and corpses? Or does he think he’ll win the hearts and minds of Ukrainians completely destroying everything they once knew?




I honestly wonder what Putin’s best case scenario looks like to him at this point. At minimum he has to realize that his dream of rebuilding the Soviet Union and becoming a major power in a new economic world order is toast and with Russian casualties piling up I fail to see how he is going to sell it to the Russian people as totally worth it. Just as troubling, if they reached a peace agreement today I don’t know what he could sell as justifying all the death and destruction up to this point. I think he is aware of that and it’s like he’s just going to continue with the death and destruction until he comes up with a narrative that the Russian people will reasonably buy.  He won't be able to shield them from the realities on the battelfield or justified global condemnation for forever.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

AG_PhamD said:


> The reality is the world is dependent on oil, it’s just a shame Europe is so dependent on one country, in this case Russia.




I also wonder if that is part of the reason Saudi Arabia is giving us the finger, expecting new customers or increased demands. But the fact is, we could screw Saudi Arabia even harder than Russia and we’ve put up with their shit for way too long, including being the homeland of the 9/11 hijackers. They are way too dependent on Western money, culture, technology, and weapons. Trying to pivot to “made in China” would be a disaster. I dare them to try it and we should force them against the wall on it. They need to be reminded on who has been most responsible for protecting them and allowing them to stay in power.


----------



## Macky-Mac

leman said:


> I am not too worried about Putler's new "pay in rubles" scheme. First of all, it's a bluff — he is just as desperate to sell as EU is desperate to buy. Second, by demanding one-sided contract changes, he is opening a can of worms. Third, price is set in USD/EUR in the contract, so I am sure that EUs economists can devise a scheme to respond to this nonsense in a proper way. And finally, if he indeed cuts gas/oil, I am fairly confident that any inhibitions EU leaders have for imposing stricter sanctions will disappear in an instant.




the response has started and not surprisingly it's to point out that the contracts already specify the required currencies for payment;

The German response to Putin's scheme to switch currencies;



> *The German chancellor Olaf Scholz has rebuffed Vladimir Putin’s demand that “unfriendly countries” pay for Russian gas in rubles.....
> 
> ...*Scholz suggested this was unlikely to happen.
> 
> “We’ve looked at this to try to get an overview. What we have learned so far is that there are fixed contracts everywhere, which include the currency in which payments are made,” Scholz told reporters, according to Politico.
> 
> “And most of the time it says euro or dollar ... and that’s what counts then.”




It'll become a question of what Putin will to do next. He'll probably threaten to cut off supplies, but will he actually carry thru with such a threat?


----------



## Macky-Mac

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I also wonder if that is part of the reason Saudi Arabia is giving us the finger.....



Part of the reason that the Saudis are "giving us the finger" is that Biden has been refusing to talk to Prince MBS on the telephone. Instead he calls the King, much to the annoyance of the Prince who is more or less the de facto ruler of SA


----------



## AG_PhamD

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I also wonder if that is part of the reason Saudi Arabia is giving us the finger, expecting new customers or increased demands. But the fact is, we could screw Saudi Arabia even harder than Russia and we’ve put up with their shit for way too long, including being the homeland of the 9/11 hijackers. They are way too dependent on Western money, culture, technology, and weapons. Trying to pivot to “made in China” would be a disaster. I dare them to try it and we should force them against the wall on it. They need to be reminded on who has been most responsible for protecting them and allowing them to stay in power.




I think Saudi Arabia is ignoring the US is because of the Biden Administration’s stance with the Iran Nuclear deal and lack of support with Yemen’s Civil war. It’s no secret the Biden Administration does not have the same level of cooperation than the previous one. 

My thoughts exactly- this should not be too complicated though, the US is the only reason the Saudis have a military. If they’re not going to answer our phone calls, maybe we shouldn’t send them anymore weapons, related parts, or technical support? 

We still get 20% of our oil from SA, so best not to get into an economic conflict with them.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

AG_PhamD said:


> I think Saudi Arabia is ignoring the US is because of the Biden Administration’s stance with the Iran Nuclear deal and lack of support with Yemen’s Civil war. It’s no secret the Biden Administration does not have the same level of cooperation than the previous one.
> 
> My thoughts exactly- this should not be too complicated though, the US is the only reason the Saudis have a military. If they’re not going to answer our phone calls, maybe we shouldn’t send them anymore weapons, related parts, or technical support?
> 
> We still get 20% of our oil from SA, so best not to get into an economic conflict with them.




For countless reasons we'd probably be a lot better off shifting our Saudi oil needs to Venezuela, but we kind of stepped on a rake with that relationship.


----------



## Yoused

Big Russian ship go boom boom
​

It is believed it was a troop carrier loading up to go help out the attack on Mariupol.


----------



## Eric

It's an interesting split in the Republican party on this, who are normally hawks when it comes to this sort of policy, particularly when it includes Russia. But the radicals are so fixated with Putin that they're actually backing him, mostly the same people who supported January 6. Reagan is probably rolling over in his grave over this.

However, many also seem to be aligned against Russia so we can't pin on all of them. I like that Biden is cautious in his approach but don't like that everyone walks on eggshells to placate Putin when he's going out of his way to murder women, children and the sick.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> It's an interesting split in the Republican party on this, who are normally hawks when it comes to this sort of policy, particularly when it includes Russia. But the radicals are so fixated with Putin that they're actually backing him, mostly the same people who supported January 6. Reagan is probably rolling over in his grave over this.
> 
> However, many also seem to be aligned against Russia so we can't pin on all of them. I like that Biden is cautious in his approach but don't like that everyone walks on eggshells to placate Putin when he's going out of his way to murder women, children and the sick.




The barbaric and intentional levels of Putin's cruelty towards civilians --aside from stupidities and errors-- makes one tend to question even any conventional arrangements Putin or his generals may offer on the way to eventual negotiations for an end to open conflict.

For example,  I read today in the Boston Globe that a Russian general has arranged for a humanitarian corridor for ships that have been trapped in Ukrainian ports to leave there,  gather offshore at a designated area in the Black Sea,  and then follow a specified path out of the conflict zone, starting Friday.



> Col. Gen. Mikhail Mizintsev said Thursday that Russia is offering to allow foreign vessels to gather in the Black Sea 20 miles (32 kilometers) southeast of the port of Illichivsk and then follow a 80-mile-long (129-kilometer-long) “humanitarian corridor” to safety. He added that the safe route will be open daily from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. Moscow time (0500 to 1600 GMT) starting Friday.




 First thing into my mind was...  yeah... and then he blows them up?   I really do dislike being so cynical,  but Putin's war on Ukraine is bringing that out in me for sure.    I have to work hard to accord them humanity when they so egregiously demonstrate willingness to ignore humanity of Ukrainian civilians during this aggression.


----------



## AG_PhamD

leman said:


> By the way, if anyone here wants to donate to humanitarian relief in Ukraine, consider buying some merch from here (I am not affiliated in any way, I just like the designs and the people): https://www.saintjavelin.com




I have to admit that is quite humorous.   Someone should make a shirt that says “I found the NLAW and the NLAW won”. 

As with any charity I would just do some research to make sure you know where the money is going. 

I donated to Americares which I’m well aquatinted with- they provide medical supplies. I’ve already donated a trunk load of medical supplies I’ve collected to a local Ukrainian-American owned business who is working with some charities, the Ukrainian church, and a Ukrainian-American owned logistics company to hopefully get supplies where they need to go. 

The hospital network I work for has also be providing medical assistance to doctors in Ukraine via phone and video chat. Most doctors aren’t proficient in handling battle wounds so having real time access to clinical knowledge is great. I thought that was a pretty clever idea.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> For countless reasons we'd probably be a lot better off shifting our Saudi oil needs to Venezuela, but we kind of stepped on a rake with that relationship.




Well, Venezuela is it’s own corrupt and abusing dictatorship. It don’t feel particularly comfortable handing money over to a regime that in recent times has been collaborating with Russia to become the next Cuba. It wasn’t long ago Venezuela was housing Russian nuclear-capable bombers for “exercises”. 

I’ve always found our relationship with Saudi Arabia quite bizarre. I suppose it’s one of convenience and necessity to an extent- the less of evils. 

I think it’s best to deal as little with these countries as possible.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> Big Russian ship go boom boom
> 
> 
> ​
> It is believed it was a troop carrier loading up to go help out the attack on Mariupol.





I'll just say now that when our support for Ukraine goes sideways in a couple decades, when their sleeper cells enter the US they'll be taking down a lot more than a couple buildings. 

Of course that's an absurd thought, to believe there will be any buildings left to take down after several decades of Trumpism.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> For countless reasons we'd probably be a lot better off shifting our Saudi oil needs to Venezuela, but we kind of stepped on a rake with that relationship.



Venezuela would be a bad choice even if you'd prefer to continue to get oil from a corrupt authoritarian regime.......but perhaps you could choose a criminal regime that can also keep their oil industry away from the brink of collapse? Seriously, you pay for oil, you want to get the amount of oil what you paid for....right? 


Just ask the Chinese how Venezuela has done as far as actually delivering on their contracts


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

AG_PhamD said:


> Well, Venezuela is it’s own corrupt and abusing dictatorship. It don’t feel particularly comfortable handing money over to a regime that in recent times has been collaborating with Russia to become the next Cuba. It wasn’t long ago Venezuela was housing Russian nuclear-capable bombers for “exercises”.
> 
> I’ve always found our relationship with Saudi Arabia quite bizarre. I suppose it’s one of convenience and necessity to an extent- the less of evils.
> 
> I think it’s best to deal as little with these countries as possible.




I know Venezuela has a lot of problems but I'm not going to buy the western narrative that any socialist country is 90% fucked up and more corrupt.  As far as their Russian connection past (or even present?), it's not like the west was their biggest world power supporter until just a few years ago.  Of course Chavez was a big part of that.  I'm pretty ignorant on the finer details, but using history as indicator pretty much any country that doesn't put the US dollar above God or their own self interests interestingly needs to be "liberated".  Every one of them.  There are 3 things you can count on in life.  Death, taxes, and all anti-dollar countries need to receive our freedom bombs.        

You know who makes the perfect poster boy for extreme capitalism taken to it's worst outcome?  Putin.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Macky-Mac said:


> Venezuela would be a bad choice even if you'd prefer to continue to get oil from a corrupt authoritarian regime.......but perhaps you could choose a criminal regime that can also keep their oil industry away from the brink of collapse? Seriously, you pay for oil, you want to get the amount of oil what you paid for....right?
> 
> 
> Just ask the Chinese how Venezuela has done as far as actually delivering on their contracts




I admit I don't really know about delivering on their commitments.  I just don't think they would be anywhere near the cash drunk assholes that the Saudis are and use their privileged status to fuck with other countries.  It's like they are the arrogant trust fund bullies of the region going everywhere with their knuckle dragging big brother the US yelling "Me smash!" in the background of every interaction.


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I'll just say now that when our support for Ukraine goes sideways in a couple decades, when their sleeper cells enter the US they'll be taking down a lot more than a couple buildings.



This is the inverse, though. ObL got pissed off at seeing dirty infidel boots on sacred Saudi soil (even 600 miles from the grand mosque, if it inside KSA, no non-muslim may set foot there). In this case, the US is _not_ sending Americans there to fight. Yet, anyway.


----------



## AG_PhamD

lizkat said:


> The barbaric and intentional levels of Putin's cruelty towards civilians --aside from stupidities and errors-- makes one tend to question even any conventional arrangements Putin or his generals may offer on the way to eventual negotiations for an end to open conflict.
> 
> For example,  I read today in the Boston Globe that a Russian general has arranged for a humanitarian corridor for ships that have been trapped in Ukrainian ports to leave there,  gather offshore at a designated area in the Black Sea,  and then follow a specified path out of the conflict zone, starting Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> First thing into my mind was...  yeah... and then he blows them up?   I really do dislike being so cynical,  but Putin's war on Ukraine is bringing that out in me for sure.    I have to work hard to accord them humanity when they so egregiously demonstrate willingness to ignore humanity of Ukrainian civilians during this aggression.




I can’t imagine anyone is going to take that offer. As it is Russia has not held up past humanitarian corridors, at least reportedly. I guess the question is do these boats get to sail east to eastern Ukraine or other free countries? Or will these civilians be directed to Russian “filtration camps”?

It would make sense however to get as many civilians out as possible. It makes conquering the city easier from the perspective of not having to explain thousands of dead civilians or having to fight them if they don’t surrender. 

On the other hand, who is sailing in these waters? I’m pretty sure it’s filled with mines. Perhaps this is just a ploy to make it appear they are offering humanity when it’s not a realistic offer. 

There is absolutely no reason I see to trust the Russians at this point. Maybe this General is trying to do the humane thing, but who knows.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I admit I don't really know about delivering on their commitments.  I just don't think they would be anywhere near the cash drunk assholes that the Saudis are and use their privileged status to fuck with other countries.  It's like they are the arrogant trust fund bullies of the region going everywhere with their knuckle dragging big brother the US yelling "Me smash!" in the background of every interaction.




Well, from a human rights perspective  Venezuela if not just as bad, is probably worse than the Saudis.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> This is the inverse, though. ObL got pissed off at seeing dirty infidel boots on sacred Saudi soil (even 600 miles from the grand mosque, if it inside KSA, no non-muslim may set foot there). In this case, the US is _not_ sending Americans there to fight. Yet, anyway.





I still don't like us.    We are long overdue to have our asses handed to us to gain some humility and perspective.  I would be honored to have it happen at the hands of these brave Ukrainians.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> It's an interesting split in the Republican party on this, who are normally hawks when it comes to this sort of policy, particularly when it includes Russia. But the radicals are so fixated with Putin that they're actually backing him, mostly the same people who supported January 6. Reagan is probably rolling over in his grave over this.
> 
> However, many also seem to be aligned against Russia so we can't pin on all of them. I like that Biden is cautious in his approach but don't like that everyone walks on eggshells to placate Putin when he's going out of his way to murder women, children and the sick.




Yeah, this doesn’t make much sense to me. The same right wing voices condemning the heinously executed withdrawal of Biden because of the potential future security risks from the Taliban and that we for the sake of our safety and standing on the world stage we cannot be isolationist. Then when it comes to Russia-Ukraine it’s a totally different story. We shouldn’t be involved at all.

It’s not like this war doesn’t have implications for the US directly. If Russia was allowed to sweep the floor Ukraine, Taiwan would be next, and then possibly other Eastern European states prompting a NATO response. And even if the latter never happened (or we allowed Russia to take those countries), do we really want to deal with an unchecked China-Russia alliance? Because the right (I believe rightfully) has an awful lot of concern about China taking over the world.


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> I can’t imagine anyone is going to take that offer. As it is Russia has not held up past humanitarian corridors, at least reportedly. I guess the question is do these boats get to sail east to eastern Ukraine or other free countries? Or will these civilians be directed to Russian “filtration camps”?
> 
> It would make sense however to get as many civilians out as possible. It makes conquering the city easier from the perspective of not having to explain thousands of dead civilians or having to fight them if they don’t surrender.



It is not about ferrying Ukrainians out of the country. As we live in an age of global commerce, the ships in question are traders from other countries that got caught in the crossfire, and the Russians would rather just kill Ukrainians with abandon, but blowing up, say, a Maersk could further escalate international tensions in very bad ways. To call it "humanitarian" is in a way the exact opposite of what it means, because getting them out of the way just clears the road for more, greater violence.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> It is not about ferrying Ukrainians out of the country. As we live in an age of global commerce, the ships in question are traders from other countries that got caught in the crossfire, and the Russians would rather just kill Ukrainians with abandon, but blowing up, say, a Maersk could further escalate international tensions in very bad ways. To call it "humanitarian" is in a way the exact opposite of what it means, because getting them out of the way just clears the road for more, greater violence.




Ahh okay. I would suspect the only ships that would even remotely consider that offer would be Ukrainian ships. No company, let alone insurer, is going to risk millions of dollars of ship and product. 

I would suspect the more likely outcome than the Russian navy blowing up the ships is seizing them and then trying using them as leverage.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Great talking points for the assembly floor but do they have any unobtainium? Because without that America really couldn't give a shit and that's what you'll see with minor hand slapping and _strong words of condemnation_ by the president as Russia takes them over.




I would say we’ve been leading from behind and everything is reactionary. It seems we will give just about the bare minimum to keep the Ukrainians going. I understand playing it safe early on, when Ukraine was expected to fold in days. But we’re a month in now and it’s apparent the Russians would struggle to defeat a paper tiger.  

Putin doesn’t want a war with NATO. Give the Ukrainians all the tools they need and let them exploit Putin’s army’s disorganization while the chance exists. 

This also came out today:








						US, allies working to provide anti-ship missiles to Ukraine
					

The U.S. and allies are working to send anti-ship missiles to Ukraine as it scrambles to bolster up Kyiv’s ability to defend itself against Russia’s invasion.“We have started consulting with Allies…




					thehill.com
				



Apparently anti-ship missiles are in the works, which is great news and about time. A lot of the cruise missiles hitting cities are being launched from ships in the Black Sea. 

I’m sure everyone has heard that the Ukrainians destroyed a docked Russian supply ship. What’s interesting about this is that it was allegedly a Luna M ballistic missile, which is 1960’s technology and have a 400 meter margin of error. The ship hit was about 110m long. Maybe upgrades have been made to their missiles, but that is nonetheless an impressive hit. 

But a ballistic missile only worked because the ship was docked, which is why they need to get anti-ship missiles. 

It’s my understanding Turkey has closed access to the Black Sea, so whatever ships Russia has there is what they have. Unless they want a war with Turkey.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I know Venezuela has a lot of problems but I'm not going to buy the western narrative that any socialist country is 90% fucked up and more corrupt.  As far as their Russian connection past (or even present?), it's not like the west was their biggest world power supporter until just a few years ago.  Of course Chavez was a big part of that.  I'm pretty ignorant on the finer details, but using history as indicator pretty much any country that doesn't put the US dollar above God or their own self interests interestingly needs to be "liberated".  Every one of them.  There are 3 things you can count on in life.  Death, taxes, and all anti-dollar countries need to receive our freedom bombs.
> 
> You know who makes the perfect poster boy for extreme capitalism taken to it's worst outcome?  Putin.



Venezuela is not a socialist country though. I’ve worked there and it’s awfully corrupt. It’s not rabidly agressive like Russia or a medieval monarchy like SA, but to call them socialists (in the modern Western sense) is wrong. The government’s main and only goal is to enrich their own oligarchs, and send their money abroad. They are letting their country fall into disrepair because they are too busy raiding it.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Exclusive: Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence Chief Warns of “Real Hell” for Russians
					

Brig. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov’s warning that Russia was about to invade his country was widely dismissed—until the war began. So his latest predictions about the course of what is turning out to be a surprisingly long war are probably worth taking more seriously.




					www.thenation.com
				




He’s only 36.   These people are like modern day Spartans.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Zoidberg said:


> Venezuela is not a socialist country though. I’ve worked there and it’s awfully corrupt. It’s not rabidly agressive like Russia or a medieval monarchy like SA, but to call them socialists (in the modern Western sense) is wrong. The government’s main and only goal is to enrich their own oligarchs, and send their money abroad. They are letting their country fall into disrepair because they are too busy raiding it.




Interesting.  In this case I thought they proudly called themselves socialist as opposed to the west labeling them that a la our socialist President Biden.

The US gets raided by Wall St, but hey, since you can also get 0.00000234% of that wealth gain I guess we're a lot better.


----------



## Nycturne

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Interesting.  In this case I thought they proudly called themselves socialist as opposed to the west labeling them that a la our socialist President Biden.
> 
> The US gets raided by Wall St, but hey, since you can also get 0.00000234% of that wealth gain I guess we're a lot better.




The key thing to think of in my mind is the two questions of: what does the state control, and who controls the state? 

The philosophy of communism is that the people _are _the state, along with the state being in control of industry. Socialism originating as the idea of a transitional state towards communism talks about _community _control of industry. When the power gets invested in an authoritarian, or an oligarchy, it’s not really community control anymore. Thus an argument that it’s not really socialism or communism anymore, but rather an authoritarian perversion of it. Much like the Nazi party called themselves a socialist party, despite not only being an authortarian party rather than a communal one, pledging to the industrialists to purge communists from government to get financial backing when they needed it, and continuing to enrich those same industrialists under their regime while keeping them private entities.

The label itself is less useful than the actual organization and operation of the state.

As for Putin being capitalism taken to an extreme, I’m not sure I buy it. A corporatocracy like the US will want to keep the state deferential to the oligarchs to avoid having to become deferential to the state, which is the opposite of what Putin has done. It is much closer to China which has enriched oligarchs via the party that is in charge of the state, for the interests of the party (or Putin in his case).

Note I’m not trying to say Russia is communist, but rather that they are both authoritarian in nature. Ones where oligarchs are deferential to the authoritarian(s) in control of the state, state owned industry or no.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Nycturne said:


> The key thing to think of in my mind is the two questions of: what does the state control, and who controls the state?
> 
> The philosophy of communism is that the people _are _the state, along with the state being in control of industry. Socialism originating as the idea of a transitional state towards communism talks about _community _control of industry. When the power gets invested in an authoritarian, or an oligarchy, it’s not really community control anymore. Thus an argument that it’s not really socialism or communism anymore, but rather an authoritarian perversion of it. Much like the Nazi party called themselves a socialist party, despite not only being an authortarian party rather than a communal one, pledging to the industrialists to purge communists from government to get financial backing when they needed it, and continuing to enrich those same industrialists under their regime while keeping them private entities.
> 
> The label itself is less useful than the actual organization and operation of the state.
> 
> As for Putin being capitalism taken to an extreme, I’m not sure I buy it. A corporatocracy like the US will want to keep the state deferential to the oligarchs to avoid having to become deferential to the state, which is the opposite of what Putin has done. It is much closer to China which has enriched oligarchs via the party that is in charge of the state, for the interests of the party (or Putin in his case).
> 
> Note I’m not trying to say Russia is communist, but rather that they are both authoritarian in nature. Ones where oligarchs are deferential to the authoritarian(s) in control of the state, state owned industry or no.




So on the “pure” scale the countries widely known as socialist or communist are nowhere near the actual definition and to distort things further the detractors of those systems are constantly pointing out their failings as being a part of a system that they don’t fit the definition of.


----------



## Yoused

"A lieutenant general commanding the 49th Combined Arms Army has also died in the fighting - the *seventh* to perish in the war. … " and meanwhile, "of Colonel Medvedev: 'He was killed by his own troops we believe as a consequence of the scale of losses that had been taken by his brigade,' they added. 'That gives an insight into some of the morale challenges the Russian forces are having.' … the colonel appeared to have been run down using a tank. 'We believe he was killed by his own troops deliberately.' …"


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Kremlin TV Descends Into Screaming Match Over Putin’s War Failures
					

There’s no hiding the cracks that have formed on Russian airwaves over the war in Ukraine any longer.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Kremlin TV Descends Into Screaming Match Over Putin’s War Failures
> 
> 
> There’s no hiding the cracks that have formed on Russian airwaves over the war in Ukraine any longer.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com




I think I'm surprised.   Hope every Russian with a TV was watching (before Putin decides TV is an evil invention).


----------



## Macky-Mac

hmmmm, have Russia's decision makers recalculated the possible outcome? is there any chance that Putin has decided it's time to declare victory?

From The Guardian's ongoing coverage, and as various news sources are reporting;
​_"First phase of invasion 'generally' complete, says Russia in downgrading of aims_​_*Russia*’s defence ministry said on Friday that the first phase of its military operation was “generally” complete, saying the country will focus on the “liberation” of *Ukraine*’s eastern *Donbas* region.

The defence ministry stated Russian-backed separatists now controlled 93% of *Luhansk* and 54% of *Donetsk*, the self-proclaimed republics in Ukraine’s east. The two together are commonly known as the Donbas region.

“The main objectives of the first stage of the operation have generally been accomplished,” Sergei Rudskoi, the head of the Russian general staff’s main operational directorate said during a briefing...."_


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Macky-Mac said:


> hmmmm, have Russia's decision makers recalculated the possible outcome? is there any chance that Putin has decided it's time to declare victory?
> 
> From The Guardian's ongoing coverage, and as various news sources are reporting;
> ​_"First phase of invasion 'generally' complete, says Russia in downgrading of aims_​_*Russia*’s defence ministry said on Friday that the first phase of its military operation was “generally” complete, saying the country will focus on the “liberation” of *Ukraine*’s eastern *Donbas* region.
> 
> The defence ministry stated Russian-backed separatists now controlled 93% of *Luhansk* and 54% of *Donetsk*, the self-proclaimed republics in Ukraine’s east. The two together are commonly known as the Donbas region.
> 
> “The main objectives of the first stage of the operation have generally been accomplished,” Sergei Rudskoi, the head of the Russian general staff’s main operational directorate said during a briefing...."_





It’s being speculated that he’s exhausted all his military options short of doing something that will potentially trigger WW3. I’m curious to see how he plans to sell the justification for all the death and destruction in the areas that aren’t exactly around the separatist regions. Since they are already a big fan of Tucker Carlson maybe review his coverage of 1/6 for some tips on how to bury people’s head in the sand. “It was just a couple patriot knuckleheads leveling the city. Mostly it was a field trip”.


----------



## Edd

J.K. Rowling Slams Vladimir Putin on Twitter After He Defends Her Against ‘Cancel Culture’
					

J.K. Rowling slammed Vladimir Putin on Twitter following a television appearance in which the Russian president said his country was being “canceled” by Western culture, similar to how …




					variety.com
				




This bit from his speech today, about JK Rowling being canceled and how that’s similar to Russia being canceled was…..

This seems super Trumpy, right? Like, Trump got the boot, and VP is following that playbook? Seems like he’s truly fucked on the PR front.


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> is there any chance that Putin has decided it's time to declare victory?




Welcome to open-source Russian war planning.   What else should we expect when we already saw Russians using cheap mobiles and unencrypted comms on the battle field.  Putin's generals are getting slain on the front lines while they try to teach recruits how to conduct attacks.  The Kremlin has finally confirmed a (most likely highly understated) death toll of over a thousand of their combatants in a month..  and that was before the bombing of that troop carrier, photos of which went viral,  plus his own state TV outlet has now aired a risky and loud dispute over whether the war is won and if not, what to try next.

Memo to Vladimir:  pull in your horns and keep saying you got what you needed.

He should go back to trying to hold it together in Donbas, which will now have become more and not less difficult, since all Ukrainians have now had their consciousness raised regarding Putin's actual intentions towards their whole country, not just  eastern and southeastern areas.

No one can unring that bell.   Ukrainians all know now, and so does the world, especially Eastern Europe, NATO, the EU as well as China and India.

You can tell Putin's status has evolved now to that of a mere star in geopolitical theatre, when Kim Jong-un launches a missile to remind the world that he too is a lethal threat.   This is not a compliment to Putin's battlefield accomplishments in Ukraine, and Putin surely knows that.  So may most Russians,  after the extraordinary shouting matches on Russian state television.

Time to head to the negotiating table.   I don't think Russia has the same advantage they may have had there a few weeks ago.  It's not likely to get better.  Their well documented attacks on civilians churn the stomach regardless of whether intentional or the result in some cases of crap hardware or poor judgment in attempts to deploy it.  Their morale is sapped by unexpected resistance, poor command training and a rising death toll among troops and brigadier generals alike.

Someone from the Bush 43 admin should ship Putin that unfortunate Mission Accomplished banner with a note that says "Ours wasn't and yours can't be either;  go home already and save some lives."


----------



## MarkusL

Edd said:


> J.K. Rowling Slams Vladimir Putin on Twitter After He Defends Her Against ‘Cancel Culture’
> 
> 
> J.K. Rowling slammed Vladimir Putin on Twitter following a television appearance in which the Russian president said his country was being “canceled” by Western culture, similar to how …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This bit from his speech today, about JK Rowling being canceled and how that’s similar to Russia being canceled was…..
> 
> This seems super Trumpy, right? Like, Trump got the boot, and VP is following that playbook? Seems like he’s truly fucked on the PR front.



Well, Putin is losing the war so it makes sense for him to put some attention on his next career move. Such as auditioning for a job on Fox News.


----------



## lizkat

MarkusL said:


> Well, Putin is losing the war so it makes sense for him to put some attention on his next career move. Such as auditioning for a job on Fox News.




Maybe Putin could replace Tucker Carlson who lately seems to have lost his mind trying to decide which way to spin the world  (and path to electoral politics?) that he thought he had created.

One may well wonder what it would actually take to get the Murdochs to do a Fox course correction.


----------



## Edd

MarkusL said:


> Well, Putin is losing the war so it makes sense for him to put some attention on his next career move. Such as auditioning for a job on Fox News.



Let’s take that further, Putin and Trump have their own Fox show, prime time, replacing Tucker Carlson. I support this move for Fox.


----------



## Edd

lizkat said:


> Maybe Putin could replace Tucker Carlson who lately seems to have lost his mind trying to decide which way to spin the world  (and path to electoral politics?) that he thought he had created.
> 
> One may well wonder what it would actually take to get the Murdochs to do a Fox course correction.



Goddamn it, two minutes before me?


----------



## lizkat

Edd said:


> Let’s take that further, Putin and Trump have their own Fox show, prime time, replacing Tucker Carlson. I support this move for Fox.




Perfect.  I never thought of throwing in Trump.


----------



## Nycturne

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> So on the “pure” scale the countries widely known as socialist or communist are nowhere near the actual definition and to distort things further the detractors of those systems are constantly pointing out their failings as being a part of a system that they don’t fit the definition of.




It certainly muddies the waters of politics when different folks will use different meanings with the same terms, yes. I keep thinking of Nietzsche's writings on the social contract nature of "truth", and how applicable it is here. How can we as a society effectively debate the merits/problems with a form of state if we can't even agree on what the terms mean? In the US, there's definitely a common interpretation that communism and socialism comes hand-in-hand with single-party authoritarianism, which causes lashing out at not only authoritarian communist regimes, but also democratic socialist regimes that hold competitive elections. They are really different axes in my mind, although it is fair to say that states that call themselves communist have so far veered pretty quickly into some form of single-party authoritarianism, making me doubt that communism's original intent (of being a giant worker co-op as a government) being feasible at large scales.



lizkat said:


> No one can unring that bell. Ukrainians all know now, and so does the world, especially Eastern Europe, NATO, the EU as well as China and India.




So much this. A clear war of aggression is crossing a line that will get folks to take notice. But the reason Nazi Germany was given concessions was because of their military successes and the recent memory of the last war, not simply because they were saber rattling. The worst outcome for Putin here is to cross that line, and then on top of it show that his only bite is in his willingness to commit war crimes as he fails militarily. While the nuclear arsenal will keep others from wading in and risking escalation, which has come at grave cost in Ukraine, I don't think it will prevent Russia from facing containment strategies from NATO and others.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

lizkat said:


> Maybe Putin could replace Tucker Carlson who lately seems to have lost his mind trying to decide which way to spin the world  (and path to electoral politics?) that he thought he had created.
> 
> One may well wonder what it would actually take to get the Murdochs to do a Fox course correction.




If he hasn't already, I can't wait to hear Tuckers spin on Ukrainian refugees in the US.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> If he hasn't already, I can't wait to hear Tuckers spin on Ukrainian refugees in the US.




I'm gonna take someone else's word on it.   I can't usually even view clips of his stuff...   I really appreciate some of those "we watched this so you wouldn't have to" sites once in awhile!


----------



## Yoused

Nycturne said:


> it is fair to say that states that call themselves communist have so far veered pretty quickly into some form of single-party authoritarianism, making me doubt that communism's original intent (of being a giant worker co-op as a government) being feasible at large scales.



There has always been a few factors at play here, the biggest probably being socioeconomic pressure from the "capitalist" global community. A "communist" state has to tighten up because capitalists are constantly trying to break or undermine them, using in part the tools of the countries they already own. Communism may threaten their access to resources but it also threatens the viability of the labor architecture of capitalist systems: if a communist country is allowed to succeed on its own terms, the labor pool in the capitalist countries will start making outrageous demands that threaten the profitability of industry.

In reality, I believe that the original goal of the Soviets was to transition to a confederation model where the power structure was strongest at the lower levels, because that really is the only practical way to implement sustainable collectivism. People who get their hands on power, however, seem to be reluctant to let go of any of it, and when your entire national experiment is under unending existential threat, the chance of restructuring your system fades rapidly. You need that despot to help defend you from foreign enemies.

The system in the US is not hugely different from the old USSR in practical terms. We are forming a strong klepto-plutocracy, which ultimately adds up to the net equivalent. It is pretty hard to avoid being depressed by the serious flaws in human nature that lead us to form all these broken nations, but one can always hope that we might someday discover the path out before we go extinct.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

The change of Russian propaganda and strategy is welcome, but also clearly an embarrassing lie. It’s like if on 9/11 the planes bounced off the twin towers leaving them completely untouched and then Osama posted a video saying “We have successfully lit an oily rag and thrown it in a dumpster. This was our plan all along. We have greatly reduced the enemy’s ability to dispose of garbage for at least several hours. Allahu akbar.”


----------



## Macky-Mac

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> The change of Russian propaganda and strategy is welcome....




Assuming it's real and not just an announcement for propaganda purposes. I'd say this is very much a "wait and see" situation. If it happens, then yeah it's a somewhat positive development, but don't be surprised if it doesn't happen


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Macky-Mac said:


> Assuming it's real and not just an announcement for propaganda purposes. I'd say this is very much a "wait and see" situation. If it happens, then yeah it's a somewhat positive development, but don't be surprised if it doesn't happen



I just think it’s comical they said they have greatly reduced Ukraine’s military capacity even though there has been no signs of that and as long as Russia hasn’t sealed all borders weapons will continue to pour in from the collective west which will also be the reality if they just decide to post up in the separatist regions.  

I think it’s telling that even their stranglehold of the Russian media has somewhat gone off the rails with telling people that it sure seems like the Ukrainians don’t want them there or to be liberated from the Nazi drug addicts.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

By realistic estimates Russia has lost more troops in the last month than all US military casualties combined since Vietnam and we've been involved in a ton of military action.


----------



## Zoidberg

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Interesting.  In this case I thought they proudly called themselves socialist as opposed to the west labeling them that a la our socialist President Biden.
> 
> The US gets raided by Wall St, but hey, since you can also get 0.00000234% of that wealth gain I guess we're a lot better.



No. You can’t compare Wall St and Venezuela/Russia/whatever. When I say raided, I mean it. It’s like Russia, but they don’t have Nukes, and the weather is nice.


----------



## Nycturne

Yoused said:


> There has always been a few factors at play here, the biggest probably being socioeconomic pressure from the "capitalist" global community. A "communist" state has to tighten up because capitalists are constantly trying to break or undermine them, using in part the tools of the countries they already own. Communism may threaten their access to resources but it also threatens the viability of the labor architecture of capitalist systems: if a communist country is allowed to succeed on its own terms, the labor pool in the capitalist countries will start making outrageous demands that threaten the profitability of industry.



While not trying to derail things too much, do you have specific examples here? I never got the impression that Stalin was _given_ the power to do the things he did, but rather he was able to elevate himself after Lenin’s death and proceeded to continue the conversion to communism, using force to both ensure compliance and to ultimately purge his political rivals. I thought that in practical terms, by the time the west had started to step up to the USSR, the USSR was well down the path of being autocratic.



Yoused said:


> In reality, I believe that the original goal of the Soviets was to transition to a confederation model where the power structure was strongest at the lower levels, because that really is the only practical way to implement sustainable collectivism. People who get their hands on power, however, seem to be reluctant to let go of any of it, and when your entire national experiment is under unending existential threat, the chance of restructuring your system fades rapidly. You need that despot to help defend you from foreign enemies.



This was my understanding as well, but clearly they got derailed on the way to the endgame. Note that I’m not trying to say I don’t think it can ever happen, but I’m more of the mind that I’m skeptical until someone can show a working strategy to implement it in such a way that avoids having a populist-turned-autocrat steal the reins from the people the state is meant to serve.



Yoused said:


> The system in the US is not hugely different from the old USSR in practical terms. We are forming a strong klepto-plutocracy, which ultimately adds up to the net equivalent. It is pretty hard to avoid being depressed by the serious flaws in human nature that lead us to form all these broken nations, but one can always hope that we might someday discover the path out before we go extinct.



Forming? I’d argue we have been a plutocracy for ages. Plantations by their very nature, and the 3/5ths compromise represent a plutocracy that existed at the nation’s founding, in my mind. We’ve since tried to apply fixes to the system, but time is a flat circle, and what is built can be torn down. That said, I don’t have much evidence of us being a kleptocracy historically, so I could certainly buy the argument that Reganism helped bring that aspect about. 



Chew Toy McCoy said:


> By realistic estimates Russia has lost more troops in the last month than all US military casualties combined since Vietnam and we've been involved in a ton of military action.



I wouldn’t want to be in either the Russian or Ukranian shoes at the moment. Russia has basically showed their ass to the world. Ukraine has the tough decision here to leverage a possible advantage and try to turn it into a full rout at possibly great cost, or give Russia concessions. I’m not fond of the “give the mouse the cookie” approach though, so I’d be very tempted to tell Russia’s diplomats to eff off and go for the rout if things looked favorable.


----------



## Citysnaps

Putin says Russian culture being 'cancelled' like J.K. Rowling
					

President Vladimir Putin on Friday accused the West of trying to cancel Russia's rich musical and literary culture, including composers Pyotr Tchaikovsky and Sergei Rachmaninov, in the same way he said it had cancelled "Harry Potter" author J.K. Rowling.




					www.reuters.com
				




Poor baby, not feeling loved!  Someone get Vlad an FTD Pick-Me-Up Bouquet. Stat!


----------



## Yoused

Joe the President says _*enough, already*_,









						Biden says Putin 'cannot remain in power'
					

President Joe Biden declared forcefully Saturday that Russian President Vladimir Putin should no longer remain in power, an unabashed challenge that came at the very end of a swing through Europe meant to reinforce Western unity.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Joe the President says _*enough, already*_,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden says Putin 'cannot remain in power'
> 
> 
> President Joe Biden declared forcefully Saturday that Russian President Vladimir Putin should no longer remain in power, an unabashed challenge that came at the very end of a swing through Europe meant to reinforce Western unity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com



Perhaps “the west” needs to make it impossible for Russia to trade with their neighbors while Putin is in power. Make it clear relations will not be restored until he is gone. Attempt to get as much information as possible to the Russian people. Let them act if they want to remove him.


----------



## Yoused

Northern Ukraine town tells Russian soldiers to surrender their mayor and go away









						Russian soldiers release Ukraine town’s mayor and agree to leave after protests
					

Russian forces agreed to leave town of Slavutych if those with arms handed them over to the mayor




					www.theguardian.com
				




After failing to get the protesters to back down, Russian soldiers release the mayor and leave


----------



## SuperMatt

Anybody still want to tell us how “smart” Putin is now? Not hearing that much from Trump and friends anymore.


----------



## Edd

citypix said:


> Putin says Russian culture being 'cancelled' like J.K. Rowling
> 
> 
> President Vladimir Putin on Friday accused the West of trying to cancel Russia's rich musical and literary culture, including composers Pyotr Tchaikovsky and Sergei Rachmaninov, in the same way he said it had cancelled "Harry Potter" author J.K. Rowling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poor baby, not feeling loved!  Someone get Vlad an FTD Pick-Me-Up Bouquet. Stat!



Fuck, that was Trumpy nonsense.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I just think it’s comical they said they have greatly reduced Ukraine’s military capacity even though there has been no signs of that and as long as Russia hasn’t sealed all borders weapons will continue to pour in from the collective west which will also be the reality if they just decide to post up in the separatist regions.
> 
> I think it’s telling that even their stranglehold of the Russian media has somewhat gone off the rails with telling people that it sure seems like the Ukrainians don’t want them there or to be liberated from the Nazi drug addicts.




There was a huge protest march in Prague today.   Russians there by the tens of thousands protesting against Putin's aggression in Ukraine.   And expats always have a grapevine to back home that can help put the lie to whatever propaganda the Russian state outlet is still trying to float.









						Thousands of Russians in Prague protest against war in Ukraine
					

Thousands of Russians marched through Prague on Saturday, waving the white-blue-white flag that has become a symbol of protests against Moscow's invasion of Ukraine.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Yoused

Nycturne said:


> While not trying to derail things too much, do you have specific examples here?



It is more of a vague sense, I guess. When looking at the early history of the USSR, I appear to be mistaken about there being a genuine adversarial relationship between the "free" world and the Communists. It looks like the rise of the authoritarian state was more of the machinations of an internal conflict – which is exactly the sort of thing that could have happened (and may yet) in the US on the right. Top-heavy power structures are always at risk, as we see in Moscow today.


----------



## Nycturne

Yoused said:


> It is more of a vague sense, I guess. When looking at the early history of the USSR, I appear to be mistaken about there being a genuine adversarial relationship between the "free" world and the Communists. It looks like the rise of the authoritarian state was more of the machinations of an internal conflict – which is exactly the sort of thing that could have happened (and may yet) in the US on the right. *Top-heavy power structures are always at risk*, as we see in Moscow today.



The bolded bit is exactly what I was thinking. And the fact that numerous communist states came into being via populist revolutions with a figurehead or small group leading things makes it harder to blunt that particular risk.



SuperMatt said:


> Perhaps “the west” needs to make it impossible for Russia to trade with their neighbors while Putin is in power. Make it clear relations will not be restored until he is gone. Attempt to get as much information as possible to the Russian people. Let them act if they want to remove him.



I do suspect that NATO will attempt some long term containment strategy here. But I would not be surprised if China believes that they benefit from Russia and NATO going at it with each other in some new cold war, wasting money and resources. In that sense, it would be consistent with China’s current approach of maintaining economic ties with Russia. Prop up Russia economically to keep it in the game, but not to the point of risking getting drawn into Russia’s nonsense directly.


----------



## Citysnaps

Cmon, give me a big smile!


----------



## Yoused

Russian soldier surrenders with tank in return for £7.5k & Ukrainian citizenship
					

A RUSSIAN soldier has surrendered with a tank in return for £7,500 and Ukrainian citizenship. The man, named only as Misha, waved the white flag and begged to switch sides after military colleagues…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## lizkat

The Academy Awards will be presented tonight.  I was thinking they should give Zelensky an honorary award for best actor in the demanding role of a head of state.   I mean it's pretty outstanding to rise from stand-up comedy gigs to having become a truly inspiring commander in chief.


----------



## Eric

lizkat said:


> The Academy Awards will be presented tonight.  I was thinking they should give Zelensky an honorary award for best actor in the demanding role of a head of state.   I mean it's pretty outstanding to rise from stand-up comedy gigs to having become a truly inspiring commander in chief.



I'm hoping we see some sort of tribute and bet we hear his name a lot tonight.


----------



## Eric

The irony of this...

General Staff: Russian troops in Belarus are exchanging fuel and food for alcohol​








						General Staff: Russian troops in Belarus are exchanging fuel and food for alcohol
					

OLHA HLUSHCHENKO — SUNDAY, 27 MARCH, 2022, 07:22




					www.pravda.com.ua


----------



## Eric

lizkat said:


> The Academy Awards will be presented tonight.  I was thinking they should give Zelensky an honorary award for best actor in the demanding role of a head of state.   I mean it's pretty outstanding to rise from stand-up comedy gigs to having become a truly inspiring commander in chief.



You called it, at least an honorable mention and a moment of silence.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> The irony of this...
> 
> General Staff: Russian troops in Belarus are exchanging fuel and food for alcohol​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> General Staff: Russian troops in Belarus are exchanging fuel and food for alcohol
> 
> 
> OLHA HLUSHCHENKO — SUNDAY, 27 MARCH, 2022, 07:22
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pravda.com.ua




FWIW there were reports of this from Belorussian locals prior to the invasion. Apparently the Russian army leadership would sell diesel from their vehicles to the locals in order to buy alcohol and would all be wasted. No wonder they were all running out of fuel on their way to Kiev. Evidently they also left endless amounts of garbage, including evidence of their drinking. 

This seems par for the course for the Russian military in terms of diverting resources and corruption. I suppose it doesn’t help if you deceive all but the very top leadership into believing they’re just assembling for “military exercises” and not an actual war.


----------



## Yoused

_Hey, buddy, wanna buy a watch?_

The FSB seized stole millions of [pick your currency] worth of watches from a boutique watch dealer in Moscow, in retaliation for sanctions imposed by Switzerland.

I swear, one has to be not-quite-right-in-the-head to spend us$10K for one of these gaudy diamond-encrusted pieces of ugly.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> You called it, at least an honorable mention and a moment of silence.




Maybe Zelensky should have overseen the Oscars in his spare time...  they needed the help!


----------



## SuperMatt

The day Biden gets to experience Jen Psaki’s daily frustrations:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1508526346929991682/

And Doocy realizes that Psaki has actually been nicer than he deserves all this time.

Even “senile” Joe Biden has no problem schooling a Fox News “journalist.”


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> The day Biden gets to experience Jen Psaki’s daily frustrations:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1508526346929991682/
> 
> And Doocy realizes that Psaki has actually been nicer than he deserves all this time.
> 
> Even “senile” Joe Biden has no problem schooling a Fox News “journalist.”




Perfect response.    

As an aside...A few weeks ago I watched Biden being interviewed by Heather Cox Richardson. His very nuanced and thoughtful responses to her questions convinced me he's nowhere near being senile.


----------



## SuperMatt

Russia seems to have given up on taking Kyiv. 



> “In order to increase mutual trust and create the necessary conditions for further negotiations and achieving the ultimate goal of agreeing and signing (an) agreement, a decision was made to radically, by a large margin, reduce military activity in the Kyiv and Chernihiv directions,” Russian Deputy Defence Minister Alexander Fomin told reporters.











						Russia pledges to reduce attack on Kyiv but U.S. warns threat not over — Reuters
					

Russia promised on Tuesday to scale down military operations around Kyiv and another city but the United States warned the threat was not over as Ukraine proposed adopting a neutral status in a sign of progress at face-to-face negotiations.




					apple.news
				




Ukraine hopefully realizes how weak a position Russia is in right now. They shouldn’t concede much, because Russia seems only to be looking for a way to get out while saving face.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I listened to a podcast where they spent half an hour talking about Biden saying Putin should be removed from power. I even fast forwarded several times to hopefully get to other news events but they were still droning on about it. It was a leftist podcast (if that matters) and their whole thing was how dangerous of a statement that was. I get it, but there wasn’t anything in that half hour that wasn’t obnoxiously repetitive and beyond that, regardless of how this thing ends, it was a completely unjustified loss of life and property and to suggest that Putin somehow personally gets held accountable for this invasion that was 100% his doing is some kind of dangerous taboo? We’re not even talking being imprisoned or disappeared, which would fit the crime, but just taking him out of a position where he could continue or do it again, and the response is “Oh no, you din’t! I can’t believe you SAID that!”, and you can probably include Putin in that group.

It's just another reminder that regardless of what you do most of us are just cannon and economic fodder for assholes like Putin (and every country has them) and the best you can hope for is that they don’t get bored with their billions and then have to start fucking with everybody else to entertain themselves and prove their dominance.


----------



## Citysnaps

citypix said:


> Perfect response.
> 
> As an aside...A few weeks ago I watched Biden being interviewed by Heather Cox Richardson. His very nuanced and thoughtful responses to her questions convinced me he's nowhere near being senile.




Also... Watching that HCR-Biden interview, I was wondering how trump (when he was President) would have answered HCR's questions and carry on an extemporaneous conversation. All I could come up with was it would have been knee-slapping entertainment.

Regarding Biden's “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” many believe that was a gaffe. I don't. I think it was an intentional  and well orchestrated message directed to the Russian population to get them stirred up a little.  Yeah, some in the administration were walking it back, but that was simply required optics.


----------



## Eric

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I listened to a podcast where they spent half an hour talking about Biden saying Putin should be removed from power. I even fast forwarded several times to hopefully get to other news events but they were still droning on about it. It was a leftist podcast (if that matters) and their whole thing was how dangerous of a statement that was. I get it, but there wasn’t anything in that half hour that wasn’t obnoxiously repetitive and beyond that, regardless of how this thing ends, it was a completely unjustified loss of life and property and to suggest that Putin somehow personally gets held accountable for this invasion that was 100% his doing is some kind of dangerous taboo? We’re not even talking being imprisoned or disappeared, which would fit the crime, but just taking him out of a position where he could continue or do it again, and the response is “Oh no, you din’t! I can’t believe you SAID that!”, and you can probably include Putin in that group.
> 
> It's just another reminder that regardless of what you do most of us are just cannon and economic fodder for assholes like Putin (and every country has them) and the best you can hope for is that they don’t get bored with their billions and then have to start fucking with everybody else to entertain themselves and prove their dominance.



I'm pretty left-leaning but cannot begin to understand this movement of protecting Putin, just the suggestion that he be directly held accountable is met with serious hostility. The man is deliberately targeting women, children and the sick in hospitals and you have a bunch of liberals saying "whoa now, let's not be too hasty here". WT actual F?

I get their argument is not to start another war, but we're ALL impacted by this and if nothing else are in at least the proxy phase of it. You also hear that it could be worse if he were removed, many of these people maintain the same about removing Hitler, even today. There's just no reasoning with them, but if it were your neighborhood being bombed into rubble, you would probably give a shit.


----------



## Citysnaps

In addition to supplying weapons, I believe the US is doing a ton behind the scenes supporting Ukraine in nearby countries Poland, Romania, Hungary, and Slovakia. And though not permitted, submarines in the Black Sea. And assets in space.  There's no doubt a wealth of tactical intelligence that's being gathered, interpreted, and forwarded to Ukraine battlefield commanders in real time. I also suspect we're  also helping with electronic counter measures to degrade Russia's ability to communicate and launch missile attacks. And I wouldn't be surprised if there were special forces helping out inside Ukraine on special missions.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> I'm pretty left-leaning but cannot begin to understand this movement of protecting Putin, just the suggestion that he be directly held accountable is met with serious hostility. The man is deliberately targeting women, children and the sick in hospitals and you have a bunch of liberals saying "whoa now, let's not be too hasty here". WT actual F?
> 
> I get their argument is not to start another war, but we're ALL impacted by this and if nothing else are in at least the proxy phase of it. You also hear that it could be worse if he were removed, many of these people maintain the same about removing Hitler, even today. There's just no reasoning with them, but if it were your neighborhood being bombed into rubble, you would probably give a shit.




I understand certain US or NATO military action can escalate things, but saying something that is literally on everybody’s mind isn’t in the same category. The biggest damage is it provides Putin with a nice little soundbite for Russians he’s somehow convinced that Russia won’t exist without him on the throne. I’m sure there are some of those (equivalent to Trump supporters), but as the West has been open to Russians for decades there are also plenty of Russians who have lived or visited outside Russia who see the propaganda for exactly what it is. Also couple this with Russia’s long history of propaganda hyperbole that the outside world wants to destroy them. Russia’s political upheavals have largely been the result of Russians, not the west.


----------



## Yoused

I saw something about the Russian Federal Aviation and Transport Administration being hacked into. Intruders apparently deleted 65Tb. They cannot seem to find a backup and are now using paper documents.


----------



## Citysnaps

Yoused said:


> I saw something about the Russian Federal Aviation and Transport Administration being hacked into. Intruders apparently deleted 65Tb. They cannot seem to find a backup and are now using paper documents.




Go USA!


----------



## Macky-Mac

SuperMatt said:


> Russia seems to have given up on taking Kyiv.




that's good news.....if it actually happens.  It could just be a ploy to buy some time in the Kyiv area while they regroup and re-equip in advance of a second attempt to take the city.

But even if it happens, the war continues elsewhere in Ukraine. Putin is adding some highly experienced pros to his effort.  From yesterday's news feed from The Guardian:



> *UK military intelligence says that Russia is expected to send more than 1,000 mercenaries into eastern Ukraine amid heavy losses. *
> 
> Russia’s private military company, the Wagner group, has already deployed to eastern Ukraine and is expected to send more than 1,000 mercenaries, including senior officials in the organisation, tweeted the Ministry of Defence....
> 
> ...Wagner group personnel have reportedly been pulled from separate missions in Syria and other parts of Africa as Ukraine remains prioritized....


----------



## Yoused

prescience


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I listened to a podcast where they spent half an hour talking about Biden saying Putin should be removed from power. I even fast forwarded several times to hopefully get to other news events but they were still droning on about it. It was a leftist podcast (if that matters) and their whole thing was how dangerous of a statement that was. I get it, but there wasn’t anything in that half hour that wasn’t obnoxiously repetitive and beyond that, regardless of how this thing ends, it was a completely unjustified loss of life and property and to suggest that Putin somehow personally gets held accountable for this invasion that was 100% his doing is some kind of dangerous taboo? We’re not even talking being imprisoned or disappeared, which would fit the crime, but just taking him out of a position where he could continue or do it again, and the response is “Oh no, you din’t! I can’t believe you SAID that!”, and you can probably include Putin in that group.
> 
> It's just another reminder that regardless of what you do most of us are just cannon and economic fodder for assholes like Putin (and every country has them) and the best you can hope for is that they don’t get bored with their billions and then have to start fucking with everybody else to entertain themselves and prove their dominance.



A lot of people are talking about how terrible and dangerous the statement supposedly was... and the next day, Putin is pulling back his troops and talking about a diplomatic end to the war. I guess it wasn’t that dangerous of a statement after all. Just a chance for people to armchair-QB international diplomacy.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> A lot of people are talking about how terrible and dangerous the statement supposedly was... and the next day, Putin is pulling back his troops and talking about a diplomatic end to the war. I guess it wasn’t that dangerous of a statement after all.



State is skeptical: the Russians do not seem to be bringing anything to the table. The talk about negotiating looks more like a delaying tactic, to give the troops some time to regroup, mercenaries to arrive and for the mud to firm up.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

A far-right battalion has a key role in Ukraine's resistance. Its neo-Nazi history has been exploited by Putin | CNN
					

President Vladimir Putin framed the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a "special mission" to protect Russian speakers from genocide at the hands of "neo-Nazis."




					www.cnn.com
				




Good to see the major news media acknowledging this.

And as somebody (source unknown) said, saying there are no neo-nazis in Ukraine based on Zielinski being Jewish is like saying there are no racists in the US because Obama was black.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> A far-right battalion has a key role in Ukraine's resistance. Its neo-Nazi history has been exploited by Putin | CNN
> 
> 
> President Vladimir Putin framed the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a "special mission" to protect Russian speakers from genocide at the hands of "neo-Nazis."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good to see the major news media acknowledging this.
> 
> And as somebody (source unknown) said, saying there are no neo-nazis in Ukraine based on Zielinski being Jewish is like saying there are no racists in the US because Obama was black.



So do you believe Putin is waging the war to de-Nazify Ukraine?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> So do you believe Putin is waging the war to de-Nazify Ukraine?





Not at all, and the irony of some on the right in the US still supporting Putin based on this lie, if Russia invaded the US it would be Trump supporters he would attacking based on their shared nazi ideology, calling a spade a spade.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Not at all, and the irony of some on the right in the US still supporting Putin based on this lie, if Russia invaded the US it would be Trump supporters he would attacking based on their shared nazi ideology, calling a spade a spade.



The numbers of the Azov appear to be lower than the numbers of white supremacists in America’s military and police forces. Imagine if America was invaded and we needed to ask civilians to grab a gun and fight. I imagine the white power militias would be heavily involved. After the fighting ended, what would you do about these empowered groups? That might be something Ukraine will have to deal with.


----------



## Yoused

TIL a new word: "LOLsuit"

*The lawsuit was filed in Hillsborough County Court, but Armstead says she “won’t be stopped”. If Hillsborough County Courts fail to take action and oust the Russian President, Armstead says she will file suit in every Florida county court if needed.*​


SuperMatt said:


> Imagine if America was invaded and we needed to ask civilians to grab a gun and fight. I imagine the white power militias would be heavily involved.



Those people are notorious cowards. Pressed to defend our borders, they would be hightailing it home to grandma's basement where they could safely praise macho Vlad on 8chan.


----------



## MEJHarrison

Yoused said:


> TIL a new word: "LOLsuit"
> 
> *The lawsuit was filed in Hillsborough County Court, but Armstead says she “won’t be stopped”. If Hillsborough County Courts fail to take action and oust the Russian President, Armstead says she will file suit in every Florida county court if needed.*​




The little bit you included didn't make much sense.  So I read the whole story you linked.  It still doesn't make much sense.  A county court in Florida is supposed to remove Putin from office? How? Are they supposed to fire him or remove him by force?


----------



## Cmaier

MEJHarrison said:


> The little bit you included didn't make much sense.  So I read the whole story you linked.  It still doesn't make much sense.  A county court in Florida is supposed to remove Putin from office? How? Are they supposed to fire him or remove him by force?




i was sued in florida by a lady for $500 Million - she claimed I (who am not a government employee) violated her civil rights by successfully defending against her company’s patent lawsuit.  *florida-lawsuit-shenanigans-shrug*


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> The numbers of the Azov appear to be lower than the numbers of white supremacists in America’s military and police forces. Imagine if America was invaded and we needed to ask civilians to grab a gun and fight. I imagine the white power militias would be heavily involved. After the fighting ended, what would you do about these empowered groups? That might be something Ukraine will have to deal with.




Not disagreeing, but it seems the Azov are a lot more up front about who and what they are and have been for quite a long time.  I feel a lot of our white supremacists keep it on the down low are in denial, probably way more than the ones that are proudly out in the open. Sometimes you have to make deals with the devil to keep the (relative) peace.  The US does it all the time.  Putin just way over exaggerated it to make an excuse.  I feel the west just initially said it was non existent.  So it's good that they are acknowledging it.  It doesn't change anything in the overall situation.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> TIL a new word: "LOLsuit"
> 
> *The lawsuit was filed in Hillsborough County Court, but Armstead says she “won’t be stopped”. If Hillsborough County Courts fail to take action and oust the Russian President, Armstead says she will file suit in every Florida county court if needed.*​
> 
> Those people are notorious cowards. Pressed to defend our borders, they would be hightailing it home to grandma's basement where they could safely praise macho Vlad on 8chan.





Probably all the weekend larpers, but I don't know about ex-military.


----------



## hulugu

SuperMatt said:


> The numbers of the Azov appear to be lower than the numbers of white supremacists in America’s military and police forces. Imagine if America was invaded and we needed to ask civilians to grab a gun and fight. I imagine the white power militias would be heavily involved. After the fighting ended, what would you do about these empowered groups? That might be something Ukraine will have to deal with.




The Azov "Battalion" is estimated around 900 to 2,500 members. There are as many as 6,000 shitheads in the Proud Boys alone. 

Hell, I could probably scrape together a "battalion" of similar vicious idiots from the suburbs of Phoenix alone, much less the state of Arizona.

Moreover, the Russian involvement in Ukraine over the last several years has fueled these assholes, not to mention that a significant chunk of its membership are foreign fighters, who flocked to the area. We saw similar movements in Iraq and Syria, where bored, disaffected teenagers would flock to combat zones to see something. A flock of assholes in the Donbas that's maybe a battalion on a warm summer day is largely meaningless. 

As for the relative value of neo-Nazi fighters, I never met a bigger bunch of scared dimwits this side of a Trump rally. 

All the so-called "militias" that stalked the border were incompetent nobodies who were terrified of coyotes, and would wet themselves if they ran into a group of scared migrants, much less a guide, or a _falcon_ or _sicarrio_.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

We need a lot more government transparency and I’m all for freedom of the press, but I’m growing pretty damn tired of the press pushing on knowing what the US is doing or not doing, or what they will do or not do. Why don’t we just send all our involvement and plans to Putin for his review. It serves no purpose other than the media begging for more outrage revenue, regardless of which side you stand on. Be outraged we aren’t doing enough. Be outraged we’re using dangerous rhetoric. Hey, here’s another dead civilian. Another bombed out building. What’s our response to the atrocities that happened in the last 15 minutes? Still waiting to hear about our response to the atrocities that happened 15 minutes before that. It seems like we don’t even care about the atrocities that happened an hour ago. Are we not doing anything?!?!


----------



## Yoused

Russians are smart. Very, very smart. And they are strong.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1509287796065845250/

Like Pakled.

Or maybe their leaders are just assholes.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> Russians are smart. Very, very smart. And they are strong.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1509287796065845250/
> 
> Like Pakled.
> 
> Or maybe their leaders are just assholes.





Now they're just Putin's version of suicide bombers.  It's more of a slow-release thing.


----------



## Nycturne

Yoused said:


> Russians are smart. Very, very smart. And they are strong.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1509287796065845250/
> 
> Like Pakled.
> 
> Or maybe their leaders are just assholes.




I can't say I'm too surprised considering how much the Soviet state downplayed the disaster and hid their records to avoid looking weak in the first place. After it being "someone else's problem" for 30 years, does Russia even have any proper records on the radiological survey left, I wonder?

But a daylight charge over the minefield is certainly unexpected, I guess.


----------



## Edd

So I wonder how well the Russians are maintaining their nukes since their military readiness isn't what they've projected.


----------



## Nycturne

Edd said:


> So I wonder how well the Russians are maintaining their nukes since their military readiness isn't what they've projected.




Oof, my brain went to a dark place with that thought. Hopefully they aren't selling those for alcohol too.


----------



## Yoused

Nycturne said:


> Oof, my brain went to a dark place with that thought. Hopefully they aren't selling those for alcohol too.



Vodkonium-239?


----------



## Macky-Mac

yaxomoxay said:


> And so, it begins.
> 
> 
> 
> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?





and so Putin moves ahead with the energy weapon......

PUTIN says;



> ...Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that he had signed a decree saying foreign buyers must pay in roubles for Russian gas from April 1, and contracts would be halted if these payments were not made.
> 
> “In order to purchase Russian natural gas, they must open rouble accounts in Russian banks. It is from these accounts that payments will be made for gas delivered starting from tomorrow,” Putin said in televised remarks.
> 
> “If such payments are not made, we will consider this a default on the part of buyers, with all the ensuing consequences. Nobody sells us anything for free, and we are not going to do charity either – that is, existing contracts will be stopped.”....


----------



## Edd

Macky-Mac said:


> and so Putin moves ahead with the energy weapon......
> 
> PUTIN says;



Tricky business.  It would be so satisfying if Europe were able to say "Got a better idea, how about we buy nothing mother fucker?"


----------



## Yoused

Next up: kitchen sink









						Russia’s Only Prototype T-80UM2 Tank Was Destroyed In Ukraine
					

The T-80UM2 never led to quantity production and its presence in Ukraine remains mysterious.




					www.thedrive.com
				




The tank had "_Drozd_ (thrush) active protection system" meant to identify and destroy incoming threats. Apparently Drozd turned out to be ineffective.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Edd said:


> Tricky business.  It would be so satisfying if Europe were able to say "Got a better idea, how about we buy nothing mother fucker?"




Indeed It would be. 

Since the start of this mess, the potential of a cut off of gas has been pointed out, so I'm hoping that there's been some preparation for what to do when it actually happens


----------



## Macky-Mac

Edd said:


> Tricky business.  It would be so satisfying if Europe were able to say "Got a better idea, how about we buy nothing mother fucker?"




Perhaps the Baltic states are doing just that.....link:



> "Baltic states stop Russian gas imports​The head of Latvia's natural gas storage operator said Saturday the Baltic states were no longer importing Russian natural gas.
> 
> "If there were still any doubts about whether there may be any trust in deliveries from Russia, current events clearly show us that there is no more trust," said Uldis Bariss, CEO of Conexus Baltic Grid.
> 
> "Since April 1st Russian natural gas is no longer flowing to Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania," he told Latvian radio.
> He added that the Baltic market was currently being served by gas reserves stored underground in Latvia....
> 
> 
> ...Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda called on the rest of the EU to follow the Baltic example.
> 
> "From this month on - no more Russian gas in Lithuania," he said on Twitter...."


----------



## Yoused

As Ukraine retakes control of nothern cities the behavior of the Russian army is seen to have been as ugly as we expected – beware of this before you click that (BBC) link.


----------



## Zoidberg

A great documentary from 2019. Just watch the first few minutes, and it will explain a lot.
Link


----------



## DT

Zoidberg said:


> A great documentary from 2019. Just watch the first few minutes, and it will explain a lot.
> Link




Fascinating, I'll going to watch the whole thing later this evening.


----------



## lizkat

One unintended consequence of the USA having a longtime all-volunteer military: apparently not all that many people can recognize unexploded ordnance encountered in a non-military landscape here at home.

Imagine telling this tale to someone in Ukraine right now:  Guy working for a nearby village sanitation department saw "a piece of metal" alongside road edge and brought it back to the town sheds, meaning to get rid of it at the recycle section of the landfill.  His boss took one look at it and called the bomb squad of state police. Half the main drag in town was then evacuated until the thing was secured and taken away,









						'Explosive device' spurs evacuations in Walton
					

Several businesses were evacuated in the village of Walton on Tuesday, April 5, after an unexploded ordnance was found at the *Delaware County Department of Public Works garage on Water




					www.thedailystar.com


----------



## Zoidberg

Zoidberg said:


> A great documentary from 2019. Just watch the first few minutes, and it will explain a lot.
> Link



I just read that one of the makers of the documentary I linked to just a few days ago has fled to Israel:









						Russian filmmaker flees Moscow to Israel due to documentary critical of Putin regime
					

Dmitry Bogolyubov's 'Town of Glory' depicts town of Yelnya as representative of fanatical militarism fueling Russians' strong support for brutal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine




					www.timesofisrael.com


----------



## Eric

Missile kills at least 50 after hitting crowded Ukrainian train station
					

At least 50 people died in an attack on a crowd of mostly women and children trying to flee a new, looming Russian offensive in the country’s east.




					www.pbs.org
				




They're committing genocide and the world is sitting idly by and watching, it makes you sad for humanity. Heaven forbid that this last into 2024 but if nothing were to change and a candidate runs on saving these human beings from senselessly being eradicated from the earth, they'll be getting my vote no matter what party they're in.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> They're committing genocide and the world is sitting idly by and watching,



That’s not accurate. The actions being taken are clearly not the ones you favor, but things are being done. Just today:



			Biden signs sanctions bills targeting Russian oil and trade with Russia and Belarus
		


The above bill would have passed a month ago if not for one of the world’s biggest shitheads, Rand Paul. 

It has taken too long for Europe to stop coal purchases, and they are still buying Russian oil and gas. They should do more.

As for 2024, I hope this war is over by then.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> That’s not accurate. The actions being taken are clearly not the ones you favor, but things are being done. Just today:
> 
> 
> 
> Biden signs sanctions bills targeting Russian oil and trade with Russia and Belarus
> 
> 
> 
> The above bill would have passed a month ago if not for one of the world’s biggest shitheads, Rand Paul.
> 
> It has taken too long for Europe to stop coal purchases, and they are still buying Russian oil and gas. They should do more.
> 
> As for 2024, I hope this war is over by then.



Yeah, tell that to the families of the 50 people who died in today's bombing, all women and children deliberately targeted. The actions being taken are not enough, Putin will only respond to force. Would love to see Romney in charge right now.


----------



## Macky-Mac

an interesting article about when US & UK intelligence agencies had realized Putin was planning the invasion and what they did about it

link to BBC



> Ukraine: Inside the spies’ attempts to stop the war​


----------



## Eric

Interesting polling data on Biden, looks like people are as split as you and I @SuperMatt in any case it puts him in an untenable position. Not sure that anything he can do will make us all happy and I do get he's doing what he thinks is best, even if it's not enough for me.









						Most Americans don't like Biden's Ukraine response and worry about inflation
					

A new NPR/Ipsos poll finds that most Americans give President Biden low marks for his handling of the war in Ukraine, and concerns about inflation are overshadowing positive news about the economy.




					www.npr.org
				






> A new NPR/Ipsos poll finds that a majority of Americans think President Biden has not done a good job in his handling of the war. Many say the president has been too cautious, even as a majority say they're wary of sparking a broader conflict.
> 
> "The American people are supportive of Ukraine, up to a point," said Chris Jackson, a senior vice president at Ipsos, which conducted the poll.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Fewer than 2 out of 10 want an all-out war with Russia, which is really the only thing he hasn't done. So then what do they want? 

"We don't approve of Biden's handling of Ukraine, but we don't think he should've done anything differently".


----------



## Cmaier

TBL said:


> Fewer than 2 out of 10 want an all-out war with Russia, which is really the only thing he hasn't done. So then what do they want?
> 
> "We don't approve of Biden's handling of Ukraine, but we don't think he should've done anything differently".



Lots of space between what’s been done and war with Russia. We can provide tanks, patriot batteries, drones, etc. to Ukraine. We can declare no fly zones and enforce them. (Russia is all talk. They aren;t going to violate them).  We can declare we won’t do any business with any country that does any business with Russia, whether or not they are our friends. 

Not saying these are good ideas, but there are lots of things we can do.


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> Fewer than 2 out of 10 want an all-out war with Russia, which is really the only thing he hasn't done. So then what do they want?
> 
> "We don't approve of Biden's handling of Ukraine, but we don't think he should've done anything differently".



If you look at the actual issues, most people support what Biden is doing. But the highlighted poll question combines two things: approval of Biden and approval of the American response to Russia. So you will get the 40-something percent people that say “bad” just because they don’t like Biden, and you’re adding people who oppose the policy to that… you’re sure to get an underwater poll number.


----------



## Citysnaps

This will never be publicly acknowledged in the short-term, but I believe we're supplying a ton of assistance to Ukraine leaders and commanders in the field with respect to real time US-collected signals intelligence and imagery, and ECM (electronic counter measures) support when needed. As well as SOCOM/JSOC support on the ground in Ukraine. It's a win for both Ukraine on the battlefield and the US for the trove of valuable Russian intelligence collected.

Not to take anything away from Ukraine fighter's bravery/commitment/resourcefulness, there are other factors in play why the Russians are doing so poorly.


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> This will never be publicly acknowledged in the short-term, but I believe we're supplying a ton of assistance to Ukraine leaders and commanders in the field with respect to real time US-collected signals intelligence and imagery, and ECM (electronic counter measures) support when needed. As well as SOCOM/JSOC support in Ukraine. It's a win for both Ukraine on the battlefield and the US for the trove of valuable Russian intelligence collected.
> 
> There's a reason why the Russians are doing so poorly.



I believe you are correct. I think NATO is doing everything they can short of pulling the trigger on the weapons.

I don’t think it is the only reason for Russia’s failure though. All systems in a corrupt dictatorship suffer decay. Sycophants insist everything is going great, and anybody who spots a problem keeps their mouth shut. Russia is primed for another epic collapse, similar to what happened in 1991. Maybe they will adopt a better system of government next time. They’ve had quite a few major changes in the past, none of which turned out very well.


----------



## Renzatic

TBL said:


> "We don't approve of Biden's handling of Ukraine, but we don't think he should've done anything differently".




Welcome to politics.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> If you look at the actual issues, most people support what Biden is doing. But the highlighted poll question combines two things: approval of Biden and approval of the American response to Russia. So you will get the 40-something percent people that say “bad” just because they don’t like Biden, and you’re adding people who oppose the policy to that… you’re sure to get an underwater poll number.



Most polls are showing him underwater, not quite Trump bad but still pretty bad.














						How Popular Is Joe Biden?
					

Latest polls on President Joe Biden’s approval ratings




					projects.fivethirtyeight.com
				












						Biden approval hits new low at one-year mark: AP-NORC poll
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden  ends his first year in the White House  with a clear majority of Americans for the first time disapproving of his handling of the presidency in the face of an unrelenting pandemic and roaring inflation, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC...




					apnews.com
				









						Biden Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports®
					






					www.rasmussenreports.com
				




I don't think there's a lot he can do here personally, there's a war and record inflation, both of which are out of his hands. Not sure any president would have good numbers under the circumstances.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Most polls are showing him underwater, not quite Trump bad but still pretty bad.
> 
> View attachment 13140
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Popular Is Joe Biden?
> 
> 
> Latest polls on President Joe Biden’s approval ratings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> projects.fivethirtyeight.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden approval hits new low at one-year mark: AP-NORC poll
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden  ends his first year in the White House  with a clear majority of Americans for the first time disapproving of his handling of the presidency in the face of an unrelenting pandemic and roaring inflation, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports®
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rasmussenreports.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think there's a lot he can do here personally, there's a war and record inflation, both of which are out of his hands. Not sure any president would have good numbers under the circumstances.



That is exactly my point. The poll asking “Do you approve of Biden’s handling of Russia?’ Is basically the sum of Biden’s disapproval rating + people that generally approve of him but have some issue with the handling of Russia. Then people get asked specific questions about how it should be handled (not mentioning the president specifically), and you get a totally different picture.


----------



## Citysnaps

Here's fascinating NYT Magazine article, based on conversations with Fiona Hill and others, about how trump's actions and inactions, cozying up to Russia, denying aid to Ukraine, his refusal to meet with Zelensky, and the January 6th insurrection, pretty much green lighted Putin's planning to invade Ukraine.  It's a long read, but worth it. 

_"Instead, Vindman said, the opposite occurred: “Ukraine became radioactive for the duration of the Trump administration. There wasn’t serious engagement. Putin had been wanting to reclaim Ukraine for eight years, but he was trying to gauge when was the right time to do it. Starting just months after Jan. 6, Putin began building up forces on the border. He saw the discord here. He saw the huge opportunity presented by Donald Trump and his Republican lackeys. I’m not pulling any punches here. I’m not using diplomatic niceties. These folks sent the signal Putin was waiting for.”"_









						‘This Was Trump Pulling a Putin’
					

Amid the current crisis, Fiona Hill and other former advisers are connecting President Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine to Jan. 6. And they’re ready to talk.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> Here's fascinating NYT Magazine article, based on conversations with Fiona Hill and others, about how trump's actions and inactions, cozying up to Russia, denying aid to Ukraine, his refusal to meet with Zelensky, and the January 6th insurrection, pretty much green lighted Putin's planning to invade Ukraine.  It's a long read, but worth it.
> 
> _"Instead, Vindman said, the opposite occurred: “Ukraine became radioactive for the duration of the Trump administration. There wasn’t serious engagement. Putin had been wanting to reclaim Ukraine for eight years, but he was trying to gauge when was the right time to do it. Starting just months after Jan. 6, Putin began building up forces on the border. He saw the discord here. He saw the huge opportunity presented by Donald Trump and his Republican lackeys. I’m not pulling any punches here. I’m not using diplomatic niceties. These folks sent the signal Putin was waiting for.”"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘This Was Trump Pulling a Putin’
> 
> 
> Amid the current crisis, Fiona Hill and other former advisers are connecting President Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine to Jan. 6. And they’re ready to talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com




The opening story about Dick Cheney and GW Bush was appalling, but pretty much what I expected. Dick Cheney believed in “diplomacy” through brute force, and Bush is an empty suit who didn’t know or care, so he let Cheney and Rumsfeld do whatever they wanted.



> In the Oval Office, Hill recalls, describing a scene that has not been previously reported, she told Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney that offering a membership path to Ukraine and Georgia could be problematic. While Bush’s appetite for promoting the spread of democracy had not been dampened by the Iraq war, President Vladimir Putin of Russia viewed NATO with suspicion and was vehemently opposed to neighboring countries joining its ranks. He would regard it as a provocation, which was one reason the United States’ key NATO allies opposed the idea. Cheney took umbrage at Hill’s assessment. “So, you’re telling me you’re opposed to freedom and democracy,” she says he snapped. According to Hill, he abruptly gathered his materials and walked out of the Oval Office.
> 
> Ignoring the advice of Hill and the U.S. intelligence community, Bush announced in Bucharest that “NATO should welcome Georgia and Ukraine into the Membership Action Plan.” Hill’s prediction came true: Several other leaders at the summit objected to Bush’s recommendation. NATO ultimately issued a compromise declaration that would prove unsatisfying to nearly everyone, stating that the two countries “will become members” without specifying how and when they would do so — and still in defiance of Putin’s wishes. (They still have not become members.)
> 
> “It was the worst of all possible worlds,” Hill said...


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy




----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> The numbers of the Azov appear to be lower than the numbers of white supremacists in America’s military and police forces. Imagine if America was invaded and we needed to ask civilians to grab a gun and fight. I imagine the white power militias would be heavily involved. After the fighting ended, what would you do about these empowered groups? That might be something Ukraine will have to deal with.



If your country is facing an existential fight, especially with extremely limited resources in a highly dangerous war, you’ll be more than happy to work with volunteers willing to fight, even if they’re not morally the best people. This is pretty true of many governments throughout history. The Azov Battalion consists of ultra-nationalists and therefore are probably some of the most passionate fighters when it comes to defending the country. I suppose empowering a thousand or so radicals has been deemed the lesser of two evils. 

I can only hope throughout this war these neo-nazis find a new appreciation for freedom and ones right to rightfully and peacefully exist in their home regardless of religion or race. 



hulugu said:


> The Azov "Battalion" is estimated around 900 to 2,500 members. There are as many as 6,000 shitheads in the Proud Boys alone.
> 
> Hell, I could probably scrape together a "battalion" of similar vicious idiots from the suburbs of Phoenix alone, much less the state of Arizona.
> 
> Moreover, the Russian involvement in Ukraine over the last several years has fueled these assholes, not to mention that a significant chunk of its membership are foreign fighters, who flocked to the area. We saw similar movements in Iraq and Syria, where bored, disaffected teenagers would flock to combat zones to see something. A flock of assholes in the Donbas that's maybe a battalion on a warm summer day is largely meaningless.
> 
> As for the relative value of neo-Nazi fighters, I never met a bigger bunch of scared dimwits this side of a Trump rally.
> 
> All the so-called "militias" that stalked the border were incompetent nobodies who were terrified of coyotes, and would wet themselves if they ran into a group of scared migrants, much less a guide, or a _falcon_ or _sicarrio_.




I agree, empowering a couple thousand radicals during an existential crisis is a small price to pay. And I say this as a Jew. Whether I believe their claim 10-20% are actually neo-nazis, I don’t know, probably not. Reportedly they have become less radical as time has persisted and have religious minorities in their fold. As with most racists, race/minority status becomes a minor issue when there is a much bigger threat at hand. Apparently in recent time people looking to really defend their nation and those looking for better training and equipment  have volunteered for the Azov. 

Back to @SuperMatt’s comment about what do you do with all these radicalized neo-nazis after the war after empowering them… in this case things might just work themselves out. I believe the majority of the Azov are in Mariupol which suggests many/most of their members will be dead within a short amount of time. 
@hulugu, It’s not clear to me your comment about neo-nazi’s as scared dimwits- I would generally agree that often applies to most Neo-Nazi Americans hiding behind their keyboard while polishing their AR-15, but the Azov Battallion has proven themselves quite formidable holding out Mariupol for weeks despite all odds. That said, they’ve actually had legit combat/tactical training and have been perfecting their art of battle daily since 2014.   

I think this war if anything the benefit of morale when inspired by the conviction of defending your homeland makes a monumental difference. With a United country and commitment, even the least trained, poorly equipped armies/militias/etc can be profoundly capable, at least in holding off the offender.


----------



## Yoused

There are reports that the heavy cruiser _Moskva_, which may or may not be the ship that shelled Odessa, has experienced an explosion and fire (the origin of which depends on whom you ask) resulting in its ultimate exploration of the Black Sea floor. The crew apparently avoided the ride down.


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> There are reports that the heavy cruiser _Moskva_, which may or may not be the ship that shelled Odessa, has experienced an explosion and fire (the origin of which depends on whom you ask) resulting in its ultimate exploration of the Black Sea floor. The crew apparently avoided the ride down.




Looking forward to people explaining to me why this is terrible news, because war is bad or whatnot.


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Looking forward to people explaining to me why this is terrible news, because war is bad or whatnot.



_Russia *good*, Ukraine *bad*, *urrrnnghh*_


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> There are reports that the heavy cruiser _Moskva_, which may or may not be the ship that shelled Odessa, has experienced an explosion and fire (the origin of which depends on whom you ask) resulting in its ultimate exploration of the Black Sea floor. The crew apparently avoided the ride down.




This is great news. The Moskva is one of two heavy cruisers in the Black Sea, basically designed to be the primary air defense for other ships- so it’s a big loss. It’s also a very potent anti-ship missile platform, though Ukraine’s navy is pretty defunct since much of it was seized the 2014 and before that it sounds like it was hardly operational. Ukraine was forced to scuttle their flagship, their single frigate, early in the war. It’s primary weapon was a deck gun and stood no chance against most of these anti-ship missile equipped Russian ships. So probably not much of a loss. 

Regarding the Moskva, Russia claims a fire lead to an ammunition explosion, Ukraine claims they hit it with two anti-ship missiles… quite impressive as these ships have an ton of air defense power. Who knows what the truth is… but Russia doesn’t have a great track record here. 

This ship was the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea fleet, its destruction probably hurting pride/morale and enough of a reason to lie about the cause. How does a perceived weak country with virtually no navy to speak of (more of a coast guard than a Navy) and little in terms of sophisticated offensive weapons sink their flagship?

If this was a fire non-caused by missiles, it might raise questions about the reliability/design of Russian ships and weapons, storage/handling of explosives, fire/damage control capabilities and crew training, etc. How does a fire spontaneously start and how do you let it spread to ammunition storage?


----------



## Yoused

The other good thing is that Russia as a rather large navy. Turkey has closed the straits of Dardanelles and Bosporus to warships, and most of the fleet is not in the Black Sea or up the Don, so they are mightily useless for setting upon the Ukraine coast.


----------



## Citysnaps

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/14/russia-baltic-nuclear-deployment-finland-sweden-nato/
		


Finland and Sweden announcing they're considering joining NATO was somewhat expected. As is Russia's response. Whether they follow through, or, are just tossing that possibility out to help encourage Russia getting out of Ukraine remains to be seen. In either case the dynamics are fascinating.


----------



## Cmaier

citypix said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/14/russia-baltic-nuclear-deployment-finland-sweden-nato/
> 
> 
> 
> Finland and Sweden announcing they're considering joining NATO was somewhat expected. As is Russia's response. Whether they follow through, or, are just tossing that possibility out to help encourage Russia getting out of Ukraine remains to be seen. In either case the dynamics are fascinating.



Moving nukes to the baltics seems like it makes little difference to Sweden and Finland. It’s not like they aren’t already in range. Also not like they’d be Russia’s first targets if they ever decide to launch them.

Seems pretty clear that Finland will join.  I’d give Sweden a 75% chance.


----------



## Cmaier

Looks like the E.U. Is finally going to ban Russian oil imports.


----------



## Citysnaps

Yoused said:


> Turkey has *closed* the straits of Dardanelles and Bosporus to warships, and most of the fleet is not in the Black Sea or up the Don, so they are mightily useless for setting upon the Ukraine coast.




On that subject, I'm wondering what closed really means.  Really closed, or closed with a wink.

Wouldn't be shocked if there wasn't at least one or a couple of US submarines there right now, likely Seawolf class (such as the Jimmy Carter) to collect various kinds of intelligence and surveillance and/or to provide electronic counter measures. They could even deploy special operators for support missions.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Goal: Restore the supposed glory days of the USSR

Regardless of outcome in Ukraine, here are the actual results

Further territorial expansion is DOA. And seriously Vlad, nobody does that shit anymore.

Strengthened the unity and resolve of NATO with a high probability that it will expand membership.

Far from becoming a top player in a new economic world order, Russia has been severely setback for decades or at least as long as Putin or somebody like him remains in power, at best a distant second fiddle to China or subservient to China.


Sooooo….mission accomplished?


----------



## Citysnaps

China missed a great April fools opportunity... could of said they were considering joining NATO.

C'mon, Xi. Poke the bear a little. And then follow through with a nah nah ni nah, nah.


----------



## Cmaier

Russia’s Moskva cruiser sinks following Ukrainian claim of missile strike — Guardian US
					

Russia initially denied reports that warship sank, then later claimed it went down in stormy seas while being towed to port




					apple.news
				




No, no, our ship didn’t sink.  What’s that? Oh, yeah, actually it sank.
No, no, it wasn’t hit by missiles. It was just incompetence that caused ammo to explode. (Quick: move all our ships 20 miles further away from Ukraine so they can’t hit us with missiles)


----------



## Skunk

citypix said:


> On that subject, I'm wondering what closed really means.  Really closed, or closed with a wink.
> 
> Wouldn't be shocked if there wasn't at least one or a couple of US submarines there right now, likely Seawolf class (such as the Jimmy Carter) to collect various kinds of intelligence and surveillance and/or to provide electronic counter measures. They could even deploy special operators for support missions.



Highly unlikely. The Bosphorus is only 13-15m deep in places, too shallow for unobserved passage.


----------



## Citysnaps

Cmaier said:


> Russia’s Moskva cruiser sinks following Ukrainian claim of missile strike — Guardian US
> 
> 
> Russia initially denied reports that warship sank, then later claimed it went down in stormy seas while being towed to port
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, no, our ship didn’t sink.  What’s that? Oh, yeah, actually it sank.
> No, no, it wasn’t hit by missiles. It was just incompetence that caused ammo to explode. (Quick: move all our ships 20 miles further away from Ukraine so they can’t hit us with missiles)




Made my day.  The clownish story changes are icing.


----------



## Yoused

citypix said:


> I'm wondering what closed really means.



What I understand is it means ships with a Black Sea homeport are granted passage. Currently, Russia's Black Sea fleet includes

 5 Frigatea
 17 Corvettes
 6 Landing Ships
 7 Landing Craft
 4 Special purpose ships
 15 Patrol boats
 10 Anti-mine ships
 6 Coventional Attack Submarines
 29 various auxiliaries
according to wiki thingy. Georgia, Romania and Bulgaria also have Black Sea ports, so it would seem improper to deny passage to any naval vessels from those countries, as they do not have other coastlines.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Yoused said:


> What I understand is it means ships with a Black Sea homeport are granted passage. Currently, Russia's Black Sea fleet includes
> 
> 5 Frigatea
> 17 Corvettes
> 6 Landing Ships
> 7 Landing Craft
> 4 Special purpose ships
> 15 Patrol boats
> 10 Anti-mine ships
> 6 Coventional Attack Submarines
> 29 various auxiliaries
> according to wiki thingy. Georgia, Romania and Bulgaria also have Black Sea ports, so it would seem improper to deny passage to any naval vessels from those countries, as they do not have other coastlines.




My recollection is that the restriction on passage applies only to warships, but it applies to ALL warships from any country?  The only exception being, as you wrote, that warships registered with a home base at a Black Sea port are allowed a one time passage to return to their registered base.

Reuters report

but all of the details may have changed at some point

edit; presumably if Russia felt it needed more warships in the Black Sea, it would have increased its fleet there before this whole mess started, so closing passage may have come too late in any event

edit 2; and it appears Russia did indeed increase the number of warships .....report from Feb 8


----------



## AG_PhamD

citypix said:


> On that subject, I'm wondering what closed really means.  Really closed, or closed with a wink.
> 
> Wouldn't be shocked if there wasn't at least one or a couple of US submarines there right now, likely Seawolf class (such as the Jimmy Carter) to collect various kinds of intelligence and surveillance and/or to provide electronic counter measures. They could even deploy special operators for support missions.




As far as I know the US does not put subs in the Black Sea. First of all, I believe there is a treaty against letting foreign subs in. Second, the seabed topography of Turkish Straight would prove extremely dangerous to navigate, transiting on the surface defeats the whole purpose, and traveling at parascope depth risks detection and getting hit by a ship. Third, the Russians likely have the entrance to the Black Sea highly monitored. Fourth, if the US submarine was detected, it could potentially become trapped which in the case of war would be a very high risk situation for such a valuable asset. Nuclear subs aren’t the best for getting in close to land in shallow water and are not the stealthiest option these days. 

More likely special ops would come in through a neighboring country. We also do have “mini-subs” (submersibles) for special ops but they have a very short range. I’m sure we have more than one disguised fishing vessel or pleasure craft passively collecting information in the Black Sea. 

As good as military radars are, picking up a small fiberglass or wooden boat or rigid inflatable boat can actually be difficult from a distance. That’s why sailboats (due to their limited agility) are generally required to have radar reflectors installed. 

There are also autonomous underwater drones that often look much like torpedos designed for reconnaissance purposes. Apparently we (the US) have announced we’re handing over ”unmanned coastal defense vessels”… it’s not really clear what those are but at the least probably provide recon and possibly (but unlikely) serve as weapons platform. 

Somehow we have managed to get very accurate intelligence through this entire conflict- and frankly even before it started. 

———

As for the sunken Russian battle cruiser, I highly doubt that if this thing had big enough fire and explosion of arms to ultimately cause enough damage to sink the ship (a naval ship mind you) that all 500 sailors survived. I suppose if everyone abandoned ship at the first sign of fire (if we believe the ship was not hit with missiles), then maybe everyone survived. One would expect however the crew to make an effort to save the ship… maybe not considering the reported morale of many of these Russians. Exploding munitions is obviously extremely dangerous. And these Slava class boats, like most Russian boats, are known to be over the top with the quantity of weapons they carry.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> As far as I know the US does not put subs in the Black Sea. First of all, I believe there is a treaty against letting foreign subs in. Second, the seabed topography of Turkish Straight would prove extremely dangerous to navigate, transiting on the surface defeats the whole purpose, and traveling at parascope depth risks detection and getting hit by a ship. Third, the Russians likely have the entrance to the Black Sea highly monitored. Fourth, if the US submarine was detected, it could potentially become trapped which in the case of war would be a very high risk situation for such a valuable asset. Nuclear subs aren’t the best for getting in close to land in shallow water and are not the stealthiest option these days.
> 
> More likely special ops would come in through a neighboring country. We also do have “mini-subs” (submersibles) for special ops but they have a very short range. I’m sure we have more than one disguised fishing vessel or pleasure craft passively collecting information in the Black Sea.
> 
> As good as military radars are, picking up a small fiberglass or wooden boat or rigid inflatable boat can actually be difficult from a distance. That’s why sailboats (due to their limited agility) are generally required to have radar reflectors installed.
> 
> There are also autonomous underwater drones that often look much like torpedos designed for reconnaissance purposes. Apparently we (the US) have announced we’re handing over ”unmanned coastal defense vessels”… it’s not really clear what those are but at the least probably provide recon and possibly (but unlikely) serve as weapons platform.
> 
> Somehow we have managed to get very accurate intelligence through this entire conflict- and frankly even before it started.
> 
> ———
> 
> As for the sunken Russian battle cruiser, I highly doubt that if this thing had big enough fire and explosion of arms to ultimately cause enough damage to sink the ship (a naval ship mind you) that all 500 sailors survived. I suppose if everyone abandoned ship at the first sign of fire (if we believe the ship was not hit with missiles), then maybe everyone survived. One would expect however the crew to make an effort to save the ship… maybe not considering the reported morale of many of these Russians. Exploding munitions is obviously extremely dangerous. And these Slava class boats, like most Russian boats, are known to be over the top with the quantity of weapons they carry.




I have a ton of respect for the US Navy and some of the amazing feats they've pulled off over the years. Denied waters don't deter them. Just astonishing.  The Montreaux Treaty governs passage through the Black Sea.  But that would never stand in the way of collecting intelligence we thought valuable enough that could be collected no other way. Personally, I don't think it would be impossible. No doubt in my mind we have the contours and undersea average currents mapped out over the entire globe. I agree that another possibility would be undersea manned submersibles or drones outfitted with electronics could be used to snag communications and other electronic signals,.

I believe most of the  intelligence before hostilities was collected through space assets.  Also, surveillance missions from RC-135 and Guardrail RC-12 aircraft flying in neighboring friendly countries. At a high enough elevation the range can be hundreds of miles. And they're packed with a ton of intercept electronics and geolocation capability.


----------



## AG_PhamD

citypix said:


> I have a ton of respect for the US Navy and some of the amazing feats they've pulled off over the years. Denied waters don't deter them. Just astonishing.  The Montreaux Treaty governs passage through the Black Sea.  But that would never stand in the way of collecting intelligence we thought valuable enough that could be collected no other way. Personally, I don't think it would be impossible. No doubt in my mind we have the contours and undersea average currents mapped out over the entire globe. I agree that another possibility would be undersea manned submersibles or drones outfitted with electronics could be used to snag communications and other electronic signals,.
> 
> I believe most of the  intelligence before hostilities was collected through space assets.  Also, surveillance missions from RC-135 and Guardrail RC-12 aircraft flying in neighboring friendly countries. At a high enough elevation the range can be hundreds of miles. And they're packed with a ton of intercept electronics and geolocation capability.




Oh, I definitely believe it could be done, especially when you consider things like Operation Ivy Bells (which I imagine you’re aware of) that they were lucky enough to get away with once, let alone carry out regularly for 10 years until some traitor sold out the secret. 

But I’d say that was a high risk, very high reward operation. This is probably a risky navigationally and risky in the sense if it gets impounded (for a lack of a better word) or worse destroyed. It’s a $3.5B asset that would take 6-8+ years to replace, if ever. I imagine there are much safer and cheaper ways to collect the same information and complete the same tasks. At the very least, use a smaller, stealthier AIP powered submarine from another country. And actually Turkey has some fairly new subs that are halfway decent- I’m sure they’re already out there monitoring. 

I was going to say, when it comes to planes and satellites are probably responsible for much of the collection. 

It’s kind of amazing how much satellite imagery has changed war. It’s pretty easy to see what your enemy is doing, even without military grade satellites using commercial services.


----------



## Citysnaps

Ivy Bells was an astonishing achievement; in concept, engineering development, and execution. Imagine the Soviets (back then) doing something similar in San Francisco Bay!

A great deal of credit goes to Navy scientist Dr. John Craven who foresaw the need for transforming the Halibut (and other follow ons) into a special programs submarine. That was roughly 50+ years ago and was instrumental in locating the sunken K-129 Russian submarine near Hawaii, which the US subsequently (partially) recovered with the Glomar Explorer and Hughes Mining Barge (outfitted in Redwood City, CA) through Project Azorian - at a depth of 17,000 feet.  And Ivy Bells with the collection pod installation and repeated tape recovery missions - all undetected. Right near the Kamchatka Peninsula, a highly strategic and sensitive area - and supposedly well-defended. 

Imagine what could be done now with the tech we have today.

Coincidentally, this morning I woke up to an NPR interview with Ret. Adm. James Foggo, who talked about Russian maritime operations in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov. He said there are six Kilo Class submarines currently on patrol in the Black Sea.  I'd be shocked if  we didn't know the precise location of every one of them, in real time.

He also had a lot to say about the Moskva. A huge embarrassment, considering it was named after the Russian capitol.   Personally, I would love to learn that the secondary explosions were really the result of a shoulder-fired Javelin a half mile away.


----------



## AG_PhamD

citypix said:


> Ivy Bells was an astonishing achievement; in concept, engineering development, and execution. Imagine the Soviets (back then) doing something similar in San Francisco Bay!
> 
> A great deal of credit goes to Navy scientist Dr. John Craven who foresaw the need for transforming the Halibut (and other follow ons) into a special programs submarine. That was roughly 50+ years ago and was instrumental in locating the sunken K-129 Russian submarine near Hawaii, which the US subsequently (partially) recovered with the Glomar Explorer and Hughes Mining Barge (outfitted in Redwood City, CA) through Project Azorian - at a depth of 17,000 feet.  And Ivy Bells with the collection pod installation and repeated tape recovery missions - all undetected. Right near the Kamchatka Peninsula, a highly strategic and sensitive area - and supposedly well-defended.
> 
> Imagine what could be done now with the tech we have today.
> 
> Coincidentally, this morning I woke up to an NPR interview with Ret. Adm. James Foggo, who talked about Russian maritime operations in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov. He said there are six Kilo Class submarines currently on patrol in the Black Sea.  I'd be shocked if  we didn't know the precise location of every one of them, in real time.
> 
> He also had a lot to say about the Moskva. A huge embarrassment, considering it was named after the Russian capitol.   Personally, I would love to learn that the secondary explosions were really the result of a shoulder-fired Javelin a half mile away.




Ivy Bells is incredible that they got away with it for years and years and probably would have continued to do so had it not been for the whistle blower. Azorian is incredible because they actually executed such an insane idea and they were very close to being  entirely successful, had it not been for the oversight regarding the tensile strength of the claw metal. There have been some rumors that although they lost the more valuable half of the sub, they actually obtained more valuable information than they they’ve let on.  

It’s also quite amusing to learn Robert Ballard’s quest to find the Titanic was actually a cover story to find the sunken US Thresher and Scorpion submarines. He was lucky enough to have found the subs and be ahead of schedule. So had less than two weeks to actually search for, find (which he did in like 3 days), and explore the Titanic wreckage. And this was a secret until 4-5 years ago. 

The loss of the Moskova is a huge hit- probably in terms of optics more than anything but also their defense strategies. Alternatively, if we buy the Russian narrative, having random uncontrolled fires that blow up your ammunition and sink your ship isn’t exactly flattering either.  

Reportedly the ship was not traveling in a fleet with other ships for defense as is typically done and was traveling in repeated, predictable patterns- which would indicate a sense of hubris that they cannot be attacked. 

There are also rumors the captain of the ship was killed in the explosion- but that does not seem confirmed. The Russians made it sound like everyone evacuated, but I’m skeptical that if you have an explosion big enough to sink one of the largest warships that no one was killed. And certainly people would be injured too.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> The loss of the Moskova is a huge hit- probably in terms of optics more than anything *but also their defense strategies.*




Admiral Foggo spoke about that during the NPR interview I referenced, saying the Moskva had integrated defensive systems that could have countered the attack, but the captain was unprofessional in not having the ship on full battle stations status while docked in potentially hostile waters.  He also referenced the crew's level of unprofessionalism comparing it to western navies where chief petty officers are the real backbone making sure things are done right. 

In a similar vein, Project Azorian tapping undersea cables that carried a lot of  *unencrypted* military and other strategic communications around the Kamchatka Peninsula, the impact zone for most Soviet ICBM testing, is bewildering.

Azorian and Ivy Bells operations going back 40-50 years, and no doubt hundreds more similar high risk operations now utilizing far superior tech since then, is what leads me to believe we have collection/reconnaissance assets in the Black Sea.  That could be anything from Seawolf/Virginia class subs or other specialized undersea vehicles, or specialized collection packages resting/tethered to the seabed. There's just no way we're going to leave that area uncovered. 

As an aside, here's a great story about the R-360 cruise missile and system that took out the Moskva.  This appears to be a Ukraine news source.

Best line: "We can only thank the soldiers of the Naval Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, *who **showed the Russian ship the correct direction*, and wish them new successful shots."  









						R-360 Neptune: a cruise missle which burnt Moskva • Mezha.Media
					

As it turned out, we have not yet talked about the R-360 Neptune, the missile that sank the Russian missile cruiser Moscow on April 13, 2022. Let's fix it!




					mezha.media


----------



## Citysnaps

For aviation/aerospace junkies, here's a tweet from the Antonov Company, who created the AN-225, the largest plane in the world,  that was lost in the war with Russia. Best to unmute the sound (if muted).

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1516031180470112259/


----------



## hulugu

AG_PhamD said:


> ...
> Back to @SuperMatt’s comment about what do you do with all these radicalized neo-nazis after the war after empowering them… in this case things might just work themselves out. I believe the majority of the Azov are in Mariupol which suggests many/most of their members will be dead within a short amount of time.
> @hulugu, It’s not clear to me your comment about neo-nazi’s as scared dimwits- I would generally agree that often applies to most Neo-Nazi Americans hiding behind their keyboard while polishing their AR-15, but the Azov Battallion has proven themselves quite formidable holding out Mariupol for weeks despite all odds. That said, they’ve actually had legit combat/tactical training and have been perfecting their art of battle daily since 2014.
> 
> I think this war if anything the benefit of morale when inspired by the conviction of defending your homeland makes a monumental difference. With a United country and commitment, even the least trained, poorly equipped armies/militias/etc can be profoundly capable, at least in holding off the offender.




I was referring to the American far-right. 

The Azov Battalion's efforts are part of the defense of Mariupol, not the whole of it. Nonetheless they've been very successful at grinding up the Russian advance, which has kept Ukrainian in the fight in the southern part of the country. 

And, to be clear, I'm not dismissing the Azov battalion's grotesqueries, but there was a lot of focus on minor part of Ukraine's defenses early to make it seem more complex than it is.


----------



## Yoused

Vlad is looking none too good





maybe he is not used to sitting so close to another person


----------



## Cmaier

Seven die in fire at Russia defence institute – reports — Guardian US
					

Fire at a weapons research facility in Tver was followed hours later by reports of a blaze at key chemical plant in Kineshma




					apple.news
				




Coincidence?
Two coincidences?
Sabotage?
Drone attack?


----------



## Yoused

Every country has operatives roaming about. They are sly folk who do sly things for whoever they are working on behalf of. Russia, no doubt, has foreign-employed operatives operating inside their vast borders, possibly even a few they are not aware of. War happens also not in combat zones.


----------



## Cmaier

Cmaier said:


> Seven die in fire at Russia defence institute – reports — Guardian US
> 
> 
> Fire at a weapons research facility in Tver was followed hours later by reports of a blaze at key chemical plant in Kineshma
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coincidence?
> Two coincidences?
> Sabotage?
> Drone attack?












						Two Russian oligarchs and their families found dead within 24 hours — CNN
					

Investigators say it's unclear whether two Russian gas executives were in contact before they, along with their families, were found dead within 24 hours. CNN's Brian Todd reports.




					apple.news
				




hmmm….


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Two Russian oligarchs and their families found dead within 24 hours — CNN
> 
> 
> Investigators say it's unclear whether two Russian gas executives were in contact before they, along with their families, were found dead within 24 hours. CNN's Brian Todd reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm….



One, in Moscow, apparently shot his wife and 18-y/o daughter before shooting himself. The other was found hanged outside his Spanish villa, his wife and 13-y/o daughter stabbed to death inside. It would seem that the prospect of living without immense wealth and power was just too much for them to imagine coping with.


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> One, in Moscow, apparently shot his wife and 18-y/o daughter before shooting himself. The other was found hanged outside his Spanish villa, his wife and 13-y/o daughter stabbed to death inside. It would seem that the prospect of living without immense wealth and power was just too much for them to imagine coping with.




That’s certainly one possibility.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Cmaier said:


> That’s certainly one possibility.




the potentially disloyal proactively vanishing?


----------



## Cmaier

Macky-Mac said:


> the potentially disloyal proactively vanishing?




That’s certainly another possibility.


----------



## lizkat

Also interesting:   not everyone in Belarus just lay down for Putin's forces to use the country for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.    Saboteurs worked on disrupting railway signal boxes and forced use of trucks rather than trains for Russia's logistics.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/23/ukraine-belarus-railway-saboteurs-russia/
		




> The attacks also bought time for Ukrainian troops to formulate an effective response to the Russian invasion, said Yury Ravavoi, a Belarusian activist and trade unionist who escaped to Poland under threat of arrest during the anti-government protests that rocked Belarus in 2020.
> 
> “I can’t say we were the most important factor, but we were an important brick in the wall,” he said.
> The saboteurs drew inspiration from an earlier episode in Belarusian history, during World War II, when Belarusians opposed to the Nazi occupation blew up railway lines and train stations to disrupt German supply lines. The Rail War, as it is known, is venerated as a moment of triumph for Belarus, taught in schools as the most successful of the tactics deployed by resistance fighters that eased the way for Soviet troops to drive the Germans out.


----------



## Yoused

meanwhile, the motherland is on fire





__





						Large fire reported at oil storage depot in Russia's city of Bryansk - agencies
					

A large fire was reported early on Monday at an oil storage facility in the Russian city of Bryansk, Russian news agencies reported, citing the emergency…




					financialpost.com
				




not in a good way


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> meanwhile, the motherland is on fire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Large fire reported at oil storage depot in Russia's city of Bryansk - agencies
> 
> 
> A large fire was reported early on Monday at an oil storage facility in the Russian city of Bryansk, Russian news agencies reported, citing the emergency…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> financialpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not in a good way



Lies. Report for reeducation, comrade.


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Lies. Report for reeducation, comrade.




Милый Товарищ, нельзя нас увидите, потому что находимся везде


----------



## Yoused

Senator Tribblehead rants at Secretary Blinken about how  Joe the President's support for Ukraine joining NATO provoked Vlad into attacking the former part of the Soviet Union and we should not be interfering in the war, but, oh, he is impressed by their mettle and supports their cause (although, preferably not materially).


----------



## Eric

It's just a matter of time before the rest of the world is dragged into this war, it won't end until someone cuts the head of the snake.

Russia threatens strikes on UK territory: "We can strike military targets on the territory of those Nato countries that supply arms to Ukraine"





__





						Will Russia attack the UK? What Putin has said about Nato countries supplying weapons to Ukraine
					





					www.msn.com
				






> Russia has threatened to strike military targets in the UK in retaliation for sending weapons to Ukraine.
> 
> Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said: “Do we understand correctly that for the sake of disrupting the logistics of military supplies, Russia can strike military targets on the territory of those Nato countries that supply arms to the Kyiv regime?
> 
> “After all, this directly leads to deaths and bloodshed on Ukrainian territory. As far as I understand, Britain is one of those countries.”
> 
> Russia has stepped up its threats against Nato this week. Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov warned the risk of nuclear war is now “considerable” due to Western nations continuing to supply Ukrainian forces with weapons.


----------



## Cmaier

Eric said:


> It's just a matter of time before the rest of the world is dragged into this war, it won't end until someone cuts the head of the snake.
> 
> Russia threatens strikes on UK territory: "We can strike military targets on the territory of those Nato countries that supply arms to Ukraine"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Russia attack the UK? What Putin has said about Nato countries supplying weapons to Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msn.com




I’m boycotting vodka, starting tomorrow.


----------



## Pumbaa

Cmaier said:


> I’m boycotting vodka, starting tomorrow.




Better yet: buy Absolut Vodka and piss off the Russians even more!


----------



## Cmaier

Surely just coincidences.









						Mysterious explosions throughout Russia, Belgorod ammunition depot on fire — Newsweek
					

April 27, 2022




					apple.news


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Surely just coincidences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mysterious explosions throughout Russia, Belgorod ammunition depot on fire — Newsweek
> 
> 
> April 27, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news





Yoused said:


> нельзя нас увидите, потому что находимся везде



"_You can't see us, for we are everywhere_"


----------



## SuperMatt

Sergey Lavrov (Russia’s foreign minister) tried to explain how he could call Zelensky (who is Jewish) a Nazi. He claimed Hitler had Jewish blood. What a .



> Mr Lavrov made the remarks in an interview on Italian TV programme Zona Bianca on Sunday, days after Israel marked Holocaust Remembrance Day, one of the most solemn occasions in the Israeli calendar.
> When asked how Russia can claim that it is fighting to "de-Nazify" Ukraine when President Volodymyr Zelensky is himself Jewish, Mr Lavrov said: "I could be wrong, but Hitler also had Jewish blood. [That Zelensky is Jewish] means absolutely nothing. Wise Jewish people say that the most ardent anti-Semites are usually Jews."



Jewish people themselves are the biggest source of anti-Semitism? WTF? We all knew this guy was a disgusting puke before, but this takes it to another level… and on Holocaust Remembrance Day.









						Israel outrage at Sergei Lavrov's claim that Hitler was part Jewish
					

The Russian foreign minister's claim that Hitler "had Jewish blood" is denounced as unforgiveable.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Yoused

Republican methodology: when someone points out your stupidity, step forward and double-down on it. The question is, did they learn it from the Kremlin or did the Kremlin get it from them?









						Russia says Israel supports Ukraine ‘neo-Nazis’ as row escalates
					

Russian foreign ministry says Israel supports ‘neo-Nazi regime in Kyiv’, escalating a diplomatic dispute.




					www.aljazeera.com


----------



## Yoused

A Russian reporter wandered about talking to fellow Russians about the thingy. About half of them did not want to talk. The ones that did, though, it will hurt your head to read about it. The country seems to be full of befuddled MRGAts who refer to their czar as "Uncle Vova".

*I’d heard that word already, from my mother. On the third day of the war, I went over to her house and she suddenly started talking about targeted strikes and “where were we looking for the past eight years.” I started telling her about the bombings, about a girl I knew in Kharkiv who’d called me, terrified, during a break in the shelling. I explained that there was a real war going on and that I didn’t understand how people refused to see this monstrous thing. My mother sat there stupefied, staring down at the floor. 

“People are tired of negativity,” she sighed. 

That phrase explained something. In the past 20 years, every time I’ve happened to overhear what’s being said on television, they were frightening people with something: migrants, “Gayropa,” Banderites — the main thing is that these people are just “others.” I suppose that the audience itself had wanted this. Having something specific to fear was more manageable than the free-floating terror of the unknown that people were forced to live with during the 1990s.*​
This bit got my attention. Pound the people with relentless ugly, wear them down with it, and you can get (most of) them into a space where they can be easily manipulated. I cannot imagine anywhere else where this might have been tried …


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> A Russian reporter wandered about talking to fellow Russians about the thingy. About half of them did not want to talk. The ones that did, though, it will hurt your head to read about it. The country seems to be full of befuddled MRGAts who refer to their czar as "Uncle Vova".
> 
> *I’d heard that word already, from my mother. On the third day of the war, I went over to her house and she suddenly started talking about targeted strikes and “where were we looking for the past eight years.” I started telling her about the bombings, about a girl I knew in Kharkiv who’d called me, terrified, during a break in the shelling. I explained that there was a real war going on and that I didn’t understand how people refused to see this monstrous thing. My mother sat there stupefied, staring down at the floor. *​​*“People are tired of negativity,” she sighed. *​​*That phrase explained something. In the past 20 years, every time I’ve happened to overhear what’s being said on television, they were frightening people with something: migrants, “Gayropa,” Banderites — the main thing is that these people are just “others.” I suppose that the audience itself had wanted this. Having something specific to fear was more manageable than the free-floating terror of the unknown that people were forced to live with during the 1990s.*​
> This bit got my attention. Pound the people with relentless ugly, wear them down with it, and you can get (most of) them into a space where they can be easily manipulated. I cannot imagine anywhere else where this might have been tried …




I think it's going to be difficult to find a loved one of a dead Russian soldier who feels the sacrifice was worth it.  A landbridge to a port city is exciting stuff for sure, but I don't know if I want somebody I love to die over it.   Maybe my bar for labeling somebody a hero is a little high.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I think it's going to be difficult to find a loved one of a dead Russian soldier who feels the sacrifice was worth it.  A landbridge to a port city is exciting stuff for sure, but I don't know if I want somebody I love to die over it.   Maybe my bar for labeling somebody a hero is a little high.




Yeah. There have apparently been some outspoken parents of presumed dead Moskva sailors… though apparently the Russian government has only indicated sailors as “missing”. Understandably their families are upset about this as they know their loved ones are dead and the government won’t admit it. Russia had initially claimed everyone had been rescued. 

Interestingly, the Russians had some ceremony awarding survivors of the Moskva. There were far, far, far less than 500 sailors there, something closer to a quarter of that. 

I would hope between dying sons and husbands and painful sanctions will create public pushback. I don’t believe 83% of the population supports the war, but I do believe most people are not willing to voice their true opinion for obvious reasons.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Wait.  So Morgan Freeman is no longer welcome in Russia, because of Ukraine.  What ever will he do now?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1528064099111694337/

Go home.  Stay home Vlad, you're desperate.


----------



## Agent47

Well… the fact that Trump isn‘t on the list is to be expected. He wouldn‘d put his vasalle on it, would he?


----------



## DT

JayMysteri0 said:


> Wait.  So Morgan Freeman is no longer welcome in Russia, because of Ukraine.  What ever will he do now?





Hahaha, yes, here he is, giving exactly no fucks ...


----------



## Yoused

The full list includes Perjury Traitor Greene, no Russian teenagers for Matt Gaetz, and no travel to Russia for the corpses of John McCain or Orrin Hatch.


----------



## Deleted member 215

The conflict seems to have taken a turn for the worse recently. Attacks on Kiev are starting up again, Sievierodonetsk has been lost. This war could go on for many years to come. I do not see Ukraine ever regaining the Donbas.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Russian oil products are likely ending up in the US after being refined in India, report says
					

"It does look like there's a trade where Russian crude is refined in India and then some of it is sold to the US," an energy analyst told the WSJ.




					www.businessinsider.in
				




It seems the Russia oil embargo is about as effective at stopping Putin's war as a southern border wall would be against stopping all illegal immigrants in the US.  

Can't say I blame them for trying, but I think this should be acknowledged.  The world is getting punished while Putin is doing just fine, some would even say great.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> ....... while Putin is doing just fine, some would even say great.




That seems like an overly generous assessment of how things are going for Putin......if things were "doing just fine for Putin", this would have been over long ago. Instead his forces are still slogging along slowly making relatively small gains. 

This isn't to say that things are going "fine" for the Ukrainians, far from it.......instead it's a bloody mess for both sides.

When it comes to "some would even say great", well, no doubt Putin would tell you things are going great......and probably some of his advisors would too, so I guess it's true that "some would even say great"


----------



## Alli

On the bright side, the financial efforts are working well. Russia has defaulted on all its loans and is pretty much bankrupt (financially as well as morally). When their supplies run out…that’s it.


----------



## SuperMatt

How other world leaders treat you after you expose the fact that your supposed strength was just bluster:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1549487286966009858/

Putin has greatly diminished himself.


----------



## SuperMatt

Just hours after agreeing to a deal brokered by Turkey and the UN to ensure grain shipments and prevent mass starvation in other countries…









						Russia strikes Ukraine's Black Sea port of Odesa hours after grain deals signed
					

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry denounced Saturday's strike as "spitting in the face" of Turkey and the United Nations, which brokered the grain export agreements.




					www.npr.org
				




When the Kremlin is up in flames, Putin will only have himself to blame.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Daughter of ultra-nationalist Putin ally killed in car bomb attack in Moscow:









						The daughter of 'Putin's brain' ideologist was killed in a car explosion
					

Daria Dugina was driving a Toyota Land Cruiser in the outskirts of Moscow when the blast happened. Several of her father's allies say he was the likely target.




					www.npr.org
				




So who do we think did this? Could it have been Ukraine?


----------



## Cmaier

TBL said:


> Daughter of ultra-nationalist Putin ally killed in car bomb attack in Moscow:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The daughter of 'Putin's brain' ideologist was killed in a car explosion
> 
> 
> Daria Dugina was driving a Toyota Land Cruiser in the outskirts of Moscow when the blast happened. Several of her father's allies say he was the likely target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So who do we think did this? Could it have been Ukraine?




I don’t think it was Ukraine.  It doesn’t really benefit them.  They were already bringing the war to the Russians by arranging for weapons and fuel depots to explode.  No reason to make martyrs.


----------



## Alli

Cmaier said:


> I don’t think it was Ukraine.  It doesn’t really benefit them.  They were already bringing the war to the Russians by arranging for weapons and fuel depots to explode.  No reason to make martyrs.



Russia is taking a(nother) page from the GOP playbook and eating itself.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Cmaier said:


> I don’t think it was Ukraine.  It doesn’t really benefit them.  They were already bringing the war to the Russians by arranging for weapons and fuel depots to explode.  No reason to make martyrs.




Myabe....maybe not.

The actual target seems to have been the father of the woman who died, and he's apparently been a major promoter of Russian seizing Ukraine. 

Given the recent flurry of Ukrainian attacks on Russian facilities in supposedly safe occupied Crimea, killing a major advocate of the war could be part of making it clear to Russians that their scheme hasn't been the success that their government claims.....although certainly the Ukrainians will deny any involvement


----------



## Cmaier

Macky-Mac said:


> Myabe....maybe not.
> 
> The actual target seems to have been the father of the woman who died, and he's apparently been a major promoter of Russian seizing Ukraine.
> 
> Given the recent flurry of Ukrainian attacks on Russian facilities in supposedly safe occupied Crimea, killing a major advocate of the war could be part of making it clear to Russians that their scheme hasn't been the success that their government claims.....although certainly the Ukrainians will deny any involvement



if you’re ukraine you want the Russians on your side - you want them to think it’s an unjust war.  Assassinations do nothing other than galvanize the population.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Cmaier said:


> if you’re ukraine you want the Russians on your side - you want them to think it’s an unjust war.  Assassinations do nothing other than galvanize the population.




I agree. If Ukraine is responsible for this attack it seems like it would be a very unwise move. You don’t want Russian civilians to feel threatened in their homeland and therefore be more likely to support the “special military operation” of not push for all out war. 

I don’t like to push conspiracy theories of false flag attacks, but it seems entirely possible that this attack is indeed one. Russia has a history of doing this and what better way to drum up public support than to make civilians feel threatened and support further military action?Especially when Russia’s invasion hasn’t exactly gone to plan and Ukraine has been scoring significant hits against Russia in occupied territory and Russia proper…

Though probably less likely, it’s not impossible that the Ukrainians are responsible, wanting to send a message no one is safe. Or a Ukrainian soft unit within Russia independently what I would see as a poor decision. Or it could be the work of anti-war Russians. 

Regardless of who is responsible, this will surely be used by Russia to escalate things and I expect to see brutal retaliation on their part.


----------



## GermanSuplex

GOP should take notes here. They are in an echo chamber. One of the hardest things for people in a cult to do is admit they’re in a cult. Many never do and go down for the ride. And just like Putin surrounded himself with people who tell him what he wanted to hear which resulted in him greatly underestimating the will and capabilities of the Ukrainians, MAGAts are only listening to themselves and underestimating Americans as a whole.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Cmaier said:


> if you’re ukraine you want the Russians on your side - you want them to think it’s an unjust war.  Assassinations do nothing other than galvanize the population.




I'm inclined to disagree with the idea that there's anything like helpful sympathy for Ukraine among Russians, and to the extent that there might be some, I suspect Putin won't hesitate to repress it effectively.

Having said that, it's also entirely possible that it wasn't the Ukrainians who are responsible for the car bomb.


----------



## MEJHarrison

GermanSuplex said:


> GOP should take notes here. They are in an echo chamber. One of the hardest things for people in a cult to do is admit they’re in a cult. Many never do and go down for the ride. And just like Putin surrounded himself with people who tell him what he wanted to hear which resulted in him greatly underestimating the will and capabilities of the Ukrainians, MAGAts are only listening to themselves and underestimating Americans as a whole.




I came across a quote tonight from Demosthenes: "What we wish, that we readily believe."

I had to look up who the hell Demosthenes was, but I thought the quote was quite fitting.  If someone is telling you things you want to hear, you're far more likely to listen to what they have to say.


----------



## AG_PhamD

The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense posted this meme the other day.  What is interesting is that the fighter jet depicted is an F-16 (as well as the “fighting falcon” monicker, which refers to the F-16) … perhaps suggesting they are procuring F-16’s in the future?





There was previous talk of sending Ukraine A-10 Warthogs to which even Ukraine said would be useless given the current environment. The F-16 would probably be the best and most reasonable fighter jet in the US stockpile to send.

That said, reasonable is a relative term. Training pilots and integrating systems is one challenge but certainly achievable given time and resources. The real problem is how Ukraine would service, maintain, and repair these planes as well as the complicated logistics of supporting these planes. They’re too complicated to be supported by relatively unskilled maintainers.

Furthermore, F-16’s are designed to operate from well maintained airbases and otherwise can easily be damaged. They aren’t designed to fly in/out of improvised runways ie highways. 

The Saab Gripen seems like it would be the ideal plane for Ukraine given it’s combat similarities to the F-16 while also being designed to for use in environments where you don’t have pristine highways and sophisticated service facilities. There’s a lot more F-16’s in the world though.

Perhaps this is just a trolling campaign against the Russians though.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense posted this meme the other day.  What is interesting is that the fighter jet depicted is an F-16 (as well as the “fighting falcon” monicker, which refers to the F-16) … perhaps suggesting they are procuring F-16’s in the future?
> 
> View attachment 16953
> 
> There was previous talk of sending Ukraine A-10 Warthogs to which even Ukraine said would be useless given the current environment. The F-16 would probably be the best and most reasonable fighter jet in the US stockpile to send.
> 
> That said, reasonable is a relative term. Training pilots and integrating systems is one challenge but certainly achievable given time and resources. The real problem is how Ukraine would service, maintain, and repair these planes as well as the complicated logistics of supporting these planes. They’re too complicated to be supported by relatively unskilled maintainers.
> 
> Furthermore, F-16’s are designed to operate from well maintained airbases and otherwise can easily be damaged. They aren’t designed to fly in/out of improvised runways ie highways.
> 
> The Saab Gripen seems like it would be the ideal plane for Ukraine given it’s combat similarities to the F-16 while also being designed to for use in environments where you don’t have pristine highways and sophisticated service facilities. There’s a lot more F-16’s in the world though.
> 
> Perhaps this is just a trolling campaign against the Russians though.




Interesting.

I don't see the US directly supplying them. But could see Poland, Netherlands, Greece, or Belgium providing/lending some to Ukraine, and being resupplied by the US.

Also... I wouldn't be shocked if there are currently Ukraine pilots in the US or other NATO countries already being trained on the F-16.


----------



## Macky-Mac

AG_PhamD said:


> ... don’t like to push conspiracy theories of false flag attacks, but it seems entirely possible that this attack is indeed one. Russia has a history of doing this and what better way to drum up public support than to make civilians feel threatened and support further military action?Especially when Russia’s invasion hasn’t exactly gone to plan and Ukraine has been scoring significant hits against Russia in occupied territory and Russia proper…




That's an entirely plausible "conspiracy theory".....which is the best kind of conspiracy theory! 

Recently there have been numerous reports about Russia having substantial difficulty getting new volunteers to enlist to replace those who've been killed or wounded, so certainly it's plausible that Putin's team might hope to create a wave of heightened patriotic support to help boost enlistment.

Given how poorly Russia's military has performed, it's surprising that Putin hasn't already escalated things......but maybe he doesn't have a lot of options left


----------



## shadow puppet

If this means what I think it means, then this is scary AF.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1562879308640952320/


----------



## Colstan

I thought we could use a new update on the UKR-RU conflict.

Ukrainian Forces have retaken the villages of Oleksandrivka and Pravdyne in Kherson Oblast, marking the beginning of Ukraine's Southern offensive.





Kyselivka and Snihurivka are still fully under Russian control. The reason the war has slowed is because Ukraine is softening Russian defenses, and destroying massive numbers of RU ammo depots, along with bridges and railways, to cripple Russian supply lines. Without ammunition, food, and maintenance parts, Russian forces will find it difficult to adequately defend their positions.

Ukraine's air force is alive and well, with MiG-29s shown firing newly supplied U.S. AGM-88 anti-radiation missiles.






Russian-appointed deputy for Kherson region, Stremousov, issued videos in which he reiterated that "Kherson is forever Russian".

The videos were filmed at a Marriott hotel in Voronezh, Russia.





Russians are fleeing Belgorod, heading for Moscow. This is on the border where the RU military is shelling Ukraine from. When your government keeps telling you that the Ukrainians are "Nazis", they will eventually believe it, to the point where they expect retribution when Ukraine's counteroffensive begins, resulting in a mass evacuation. Meanwhile, President Zelenskyy has assured a safe route for civilian occupiers of Crimea back to Russian territory.





In summation, we've gone from "Kyiv will fall in 72hrs" to "Ukraine has broken Russian defenses", in a campaign to liberate occupied territories.


----------



## Citysnaps

America's Got Talent.....Featuring....HIMARS!


----------



## Yoused

I think this belongs in this thread









						Chaos In Moscow After Hackers Route Dozens Of Taxis To Single Spot
					

The hack resulted in almost an hour of standstill traffic.




					www.iflscience.com


----------



## Yoused

Our contingent of photographers ought to appreciate this image:




link​


----------



## Macky-Mac

Ukraine having some significant success in recent days.

From the BBC's ongoing coverage:



> *Russian forces have withdrawn from key eastern towns, as a rapid Ukrainian counter-attack makes further gains. *
> 
> Ukrainian officials said troops entered Kupiansk, a vital eastern supply hub for Russian forces, on Saturday.
> 
> Russia's defence ministry then said its troops have retreated from nearby Izyum to allow them "to regroup".
> 
> The ministry also confirmed the withdrawal of troops from a third key town, Balaklyia, in order to "bolster efforts" on the Donetsk front.
> 
> The Ukrainian advances - if held - would be the most significant since Russia withdrew from areas around Kyiv in April.
> 
> Izyum was a major military hub for the Russians, and was subject to intense fighting in the early stages of the invasion....





Izium was  a major target of the Russians months ago......and now they've been forced to retreat to "regroup"


----------



## Alli

I think Ukraine should keep it up and liberate Moscow for the good of the world.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> Ukraine having some significant success in recent days.
> 
> From the BBC's ongoing coverage:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Izium was  a major target of the Russians months ago......and now they've been forced to retreat to "regroup"




I was guessing the Russians were either going to “regroup” or withdraw as a “gesture of goodwill”. Regardless it appears Russia is extremely competent and has everything under control (sarcasm). 

If the Ukrainians weren’t motivated enough having their country invaded, citizens murdered in cold blood, and friends killed in battle in their homeland, I can only imagine how inspiring it must to be so warmly greeted by the civilians they have freed from Russian occupation. I can’t think of a more emotionally rewarding experience for a solider. Incredible stuff. 

On the other hand, this has got to be incredibly humiliating to the Russian soldiers. They already have low morale issues. The Ukrainians have conquered more land in the past few days than Russia gained in months. And apparently the Russians have left behind a bunch of vehicles, weapons, and their own people. The Ukrainians are taking back land faster than they can supply their front lines. Things seem to be have falling apart very quickly, the Russian incompetence is on display for all to see. Let’s hope this trend continues and the Russian deterioration cascades further. 

I’m not sure this is a turning point and is unlikely to be anything close to the end of the war, but it doesn’t bode well for Russia’s future in Ukraine.


----------



## Citysnaps

I think what we're seeing is the result of the US providing Ukraine with very accurate real time intelligence and targeting information. And a large number of HIMARS systems with M31 GMLRS rockets that can send a 200 pound warhead out to 70 - 150 km with a CEP (circular error probable, half in/half out) of 2-3 meters. Almost every shot will be a winner.


----------



## Alli

I think while Ukraine is doing this well, they may as well go help the poor people of Moscow and free Navalny.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Alli said:


> I think while Ukraine is doing this well, they may as well go help the poor people of Moscow and free Navalny.




Haha. 

Sadly I think it’s entirely possible if Putin was ever overthrown, Russia could end up with an even more authoritarian nationalist leader. There are a lot of powerful Russians who are angry at Putin, thinking he should be doing more to ensure victory. 



Citysnaps said:


> I think what we're seeing is the result of the US providing Ukraine with very accurate real time intelligence and targeting information. And a large number of HIMARS systems with M31 GMLRS rockets that can send a 200 pound warhead out to 70 - 150 km with a CEP (circular error probable, half in/half out) of 2-3 meters. Almost every shot will be a winner.




HARM anti-radiation missiles too. The Ukrainians claim they recently took out two Russian S-400 systems recently (not sure what part(s) as they’re distributed), generally considered the most advanced air defense system in the world. They also claim to have taken out another S-300 radar in addition to Tor and Buk systems. The Russians will probably be thinking twice before turning on their radars. 

It will be interesting to see how Russia responds to this. I think Russia is smart enough to know if they use nukes they will piss off the world and likely get NATO directly involved and that the fallout could very possibly blow into their country. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t other terrible actions they can take. I don’t see an easy off-ramp for Putin at the moment. 

Thinking further down the line, if Ukraine is able to rid themselves of Russian occupation on land, Russia could still blockade their ports with their navy. Ukraine essentially has no navy to speak of as it was mainly parked in Crimea in 2014 and was captured by the Russians. The one legitimate warship they had at the beginning of this war was scuttled due to fears Russia would take it. Ukraine does have land based anti-ship weapons (as demonstrated with the sinking of the Moskova) but can easily avoid them if they just maintain their distance. Plus, they won’t be effective against submarines. So I’m not entirely sure how Ukraine would manage that potential problem.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> HARM anti-radiation missiles too.




What I like most about the HARM story are the optics.  US made HARMs attached to Soviet/Russian made SU-27 and MiG-29 combat aircraft, piloted by Ukrainian pilots.  See... this proves we can all come together in the spirit of international cooperation!

Regarding naval forces in the Black Sea... There's no doubt in my mind we have assets there, in the form of autonomous naval drones and small-crew mini subs.  Either brought in with a wink from Turkey through the Bosporus, or flown into a neighboring friendly country and submerged. Wouldn't be shocked if Ukrainian sailors have been undergoing training in Groton, CT to man/control those subs/naval-drones and deal with the Russian ship/sub problem.


----------



## Macky-Mac

AG_PhamD said:


> ....Thinking further down the line, if Ukraine is able to rid themselves of Russian occupation on land, Russia could still blockade their ports with their navy. Ukraine essentially has no navy to speak of as it was mainly parked in Crimea in 2014 and was captured by the Russians. The one legitimate warship they had at the beginning of this war was scuttled due to fears Russia would take it. Ukraine does have land based anti-ship weapons (as demonstrated with the sinking of the Moskova) but can easily avoid them if they just maintain their distance. Plus, they won’t be effective against submarines. So I’m not entirely sure how Ukraine would manage that potential problem.






Citysnaps said:


> ....Regarding naval forces in the Black Sea... There's no doubt in my mind we have assets there, in the form of autonomous naval drones and small-crew mini subs.  Either brought in with a wink from Turkey through the Bosporus, or flown into a neighboring friendly country and submerged. Wouldn't be shocked if Ukrainian sailors have been undergoing training in Groton, CT to man/control those subs/naval-drones and deal with the Russian ship/sub problem.




I'm recalling that in August there was a fair bit of commentary about Ukraine's success in negating the effectiveness of Russia's Black Sea fleet.

This article from Politico for example;


> Ukraine has hobbled Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Could it turn the tide of the war?​The fleet and its air wing have been battered by Ukrainian missile and drone attacks, turning the once-feared force into something of an afterthought....




I assume that military planners are looking at how the use of advanced weapon systems has played out in Ukraine and are seriously reconsidering the risks for large warships.

Russia might be able to lay mines but ships trying to enforce a blockade, their fleet could just be sitting ducks for Ukraine. And when Russia loses ships in the Black Sea, they have a problem replacing them with the passage through Turkey closed to war ships


----------



## Citysnaps

Macky-Mac said:


> And when Russia loses ships in the Black Sea, they have a problem replacing them with the passage through Turkey closed to war ships




The world looking on with Russia losing a billion dollar pride of the Russian Navy warship is nice, too!


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> I'm recalling that in August there was a fair bit of commentary about Ukraine's success in negating the effectiveness of Russia's Black Sea fleet.
> 
> This article from Politico for example;
> 
> 
> I assume that military planners are looking at how the use of advanced weapon systems has played out in Ukraine and are seriously reconsidering the risks for large warships.
> 
> Russia might be able to lay mines but ships trying to enforce a blockade, their fleet could just be sitting ducks for Ukraine. And when Russia loses ships in the Black Sea, they have a problem replacing them with the passage through Turkey closed to war ships




Well it’s certainly true the Black Sea Fleet had an awful lot of hubris in the beginning of the war. I suppose that’s true across the board for the Russian military. I wouldn’t assume however because Russia has been lightly using their naval fleet in the war suggests they are “weak”. I would imagine it’s far more costly and logistically problemic to launch submarine launched cruise missiles vs. launching them from land. 

Harpoon missiles, which we have provided, only have a range of about 75 miles. The Neptune missiles allegedly used to sink the Moskova are said to have a range of 170 miles (and are said to be a combination of the harpoon and a Soviet era missile).   Both are subsonic which makes them easier to defend (though they skim the surface greatly reducing detection time). Russia should have the technology to defend such attacks- why they failed with the Moskova has been assumed to be human error since evidently no attempt was made. The Black Sea is a big place and all Russia really has to do is hang a couple hundred miles off the coast. 

I’m don’t think the US has long range anti-ship missiles- though someone in NATO might. The effectiveness of these in general are a bit questionable since to achieve long range they follow a ballistic trajectory- making them susceptible to interception. And they have to be able to know roughly where the ship is, reach that area, identify and track the ship locally, and redirect themselves since the ship is moving. 

If we assume one way or another the ships are defeated, Russia has at least 6 submarines in the Black Sea which could easily disrupt commercial shipping. I would assume at least 2/6 are not operational at any given point given how maintenance typically works. They are Kilo-class diesel electric subs- they are not the most cutting edge machines but still extremely capable and have been updated. And while they don’t have the endurance of a nuclear submarine, they don’t really need it given the location and being electric means they are exceptionally quiet. Technologically Russia has extremely capable submarines these days- maintenance and training however very well could be a different story. 

Given Ukraine has no significant navy to speak of and therefore little to no anti-submarine capabilities, I’m not sure how they would address this. I suppose NATO could use their ASW aircraft to detect the submarines and relay their location to Ukraine. That could certainly cause a conflict with Russia. Perhaps Ukraines planes could be provided with anti-submarine missiles, though I’m not sure that’s a technology we’d necessarily want to hand over. 

Autonomous boats is a possibility but I’m not sure we have a mature product and would be susceptible to detection and jamming. Autonomous attack submersibles I highly doubt are mature since underwater communication is a problem and would need to heavily rely on AI which I’m not sure has been ironed out yet. Most (if not all) marine drones at this point are reconnaissance drones. Though who knows what NATO navies have up their sleeve. 

I suppose Ukraine could target the Russian’s submarine bases directly, but that of course could cause severe problems. Hopefully if Russia is kicked out of Ukraine on land they will just call it quits. 

Fun fact: during WWII the Nazis actually transported U-boats over land to put them in the Black Sea. I doubt Russia would go to these lengths and submarines tend to be much larger and heavier today then the 1940’s making such a task pretty difficult.


----------



## lizkat

Meanwhile some effort to confront the Russians over thieving misconduct towards Ukrainians...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1569453802939453440/


----------



## Eric

Putin's key man in the Artic found dead after falling overboard
					

The death of an energy executive follows other mysterious deaths of businessmen across Russia the past few years.




					www.newsweek.com
				




Putin's Key Man in the Artic Found Dead After Falling Overboard​


----------



## Macky-Mac

AG_PhamD said:


> Well it’s certainly true the Black Sea Fleet had an awful lot of hubris in the beginning of the war. I suppose that’s true across the board for the Russian military. I wouldn’t assume however because Russia has been lightly using their naval fleet in the war suggests they are “weak”. I would imagine it’s far more costly and logistically problemic to launch submarine launched cruise missiles vs. launching them from land.
> 
> Harpoon missiles, which we have provided, only have a range of about 75 miles. The Neptune missiles allegedly used to sink the Moskova are said to have a range of 170 miles (and are said to be a combination of the harpoon and a Soviet era missile).   Both are subsonic which makes them easier to defend (though they skim the surface greatly reducing detection time). Russia should have the technology to defend such attacks- why they failed with the Moskova has been assumed to be human error since evidently no attempt was made. The Black Sea is a big place and all Russia really has to do is hang a couple hundred miles off the coast.
> 
> I’m don’t think the US has long range anti-ship missiles- though someone in NATO might. The effectiveness of these in general are a bit questionable since to achieve long range they follow a ballistic trajectory- making them susceptible to interception. And they have to be able to know roughly where the ship is, reach that area, identify and track the ship locally, and redirect themselves since the ship is moving.
> 
> If we assume one way or another the ships are defeated, Russia has at least 6 submarines in the Black Sea which could easily disrupt commercial shipping. I would assume at least 2/6 are not operational at any given point given how maintenance typically works. They are Kilo-class diesel electric subs- they are not the most cutting edge machines but still extremely capable and have been updated. And while they don’t have the endurance of a nuclear submarine, they don’t really need it given the location and being electric means they are exceptionally quiet. Technologically Russia has extremely capable submarines these days- maintenance and training however very well could be a different story.
> 
> Given Ukraine has no significant navy to speak of and therefore little to no anti-submarine capabilities, I’m not sure how they would address this. I suppose NATO could use their ASW aircraft to detect the submarines and relay their location to Ukraine. That could certainly cause a conflict with Russia. Perhaps Ukraines planes could be provided with anti-submarine missiles, though I’m not sure that’s a technology we’d necessarily want to hand over.
> 
> Autonomous boats is a possibility but I’m not sure we have a mature product and would be susceptible to detection and jamming. Autonomous attack submersibles I highly doubt are mature since underwater communication is a problem and would need to heavily rely on AI which I’m not sure has been ironed out yet. Most (if not all) marine drones at this point are reconnaissance drones. Though who knows what NATO navies have up their sleeve.
> 
> I suppose Ukraine could target the Russian’s submarine bases directly, but that of course could cause severe problems. Hopefully if Russia is kicked out of Ukraine on land they will just call it quits.
> 
> Fun fact: during WWII the Nazis actually transported U-boats over land to put them in the Black Sea. I doubt Russia would go to these lengths and submarines tend to be much larger and heavier today then the 1940’s making such a task pretty difficult.




Perhaps the Black Sea Fleet has also "regrouped" and been "redeployed" to other duties......like not getting sunk? It's a lot easier and cheaper for Putin to replace dead foot soldiers than it is to replace war ships.  

In any event, It's been reported in a number of places that the fleet has been staying close to their land based air defense support and not venturing far out into the Black Sea.

I remember reading over the years that Russia has not been spending money to modernize the Black Sea fleet, so perhaps their ships aren't actually outfitted with all the latest protective systems and weapons that one might expect.  If that's true, then positioning the ships further out to sea might leave them without the protection they need from missiles launched from Ukraine's aircraft.


----------



## Huntn

AG_PhamD said:


> Well it’s certainly true the Black Sea Fleet had an awful lot of hubris in the beginning of the war. I suppose that’s true across the board for the Russian military. I wouldn’t assume however because Russia has been lightly using their naval fleet in the war suggests they are “weak”. I would imagine it’s far more costly and logistically problemic to launch submarine launched cruise missiles vs. launching them from land.
> 
> Harpoon missiles, which we have provided, only have a range of about 75 miles. The Neptune missiles allegedly used to sink the Moskova are said to have a range of 170 miles (and are said to be a combination of the harpoon and a Soviet era missile).   Both are subsonic which makes them easier to defend (though they skim the surface greatly reducing detection time). Russia should have the technology to defend such attacks- why they failed with the Moskova has been assumed to be human error since evidently no attempt was made. The Black Sea is a big place and all Russia really has to do is hang a couple hundred miles off the coast.
> 
> I’m don’t think the US has long range anti-ship missiles- though someone in NATO might. The effectiveness of these in general are a bit questionable since to achieve long range they follow a ballistic trajectory- making them susceptible to interception. And they have to be able to know roughly where the ship is, reach that area, identify and track the ship locally, and redirect themselves since the ship is moving.
> 
> If we assume one way or another the ships are defeated, Russia has at least 6 submarines in the Black Sea which could easily disrupt commercial shipping. I would assume at least 2/6 are not operational at any given point given how maintenance typically works. They are Kilo-class diesel electric subs- they are not the most cutting edge machines but still extremely capable and have been updated. And while they don’t have the endurance of a nuclear submarine, they don’t really need it given the location and being electric means they are exceptionally quiet. Technologically Russia has extremely capable submarines these days- maintenance and training however very well could be a different story.
> 
> Given Ukraine has no significant navy to speak of and therefore little to no anti-submarine capabilities, I’m not sure how they would address this. I suppose NATO could use their ASW aircraft to detect the submarines and relay their location to Ukraine. That could certainly cause a conflict with Russia. Perhaps Ukraines planes could be provided with anti-submarine missiles, though I’m not sure that’s a technology we’d necessarily want to hand over.
> 
> Autonomous boats is a possibility but I’m not sure we have a mature product and would be susceptible to detection and jamming. Autonomous attack submersibles I highly doubt are mature since underwater communication is a problem and would need to heavily rely on AI which I’m not sure has been ironed out yet. Most (if not all) marine drones at this point are reconnaissance drones. Though who knows what NATO navies have up their sleeve.
> 
> I suppose Ukraine could target the Russian’s submarine bases directly, but that of course could cause severe problems. Hopefully if Russia is kicked out of Ukraine on land they will just call it quits.
> 
> Fun fact: during WWII the Nazis actually transported U-boats over land to put them in the Black Sea. I doubt Russia would go to these lengths and submarines tend to be much larger and heavier today then the 1940’s making such a task pretty difficult.



A quick search- Tomahawk anti-ship missiles have a range of 200-1000 miles depending on configuration. Not saying Ukrainians have them.


----------



## Huntn

If not already posted, good news:








						'Situation more difficult by the hour': Ukrainian forces break through to Russian border. Updates
					

Ukraine making major gains as a Russian-installed official said Ukrainian forces outnumbered Russian troops by 8-to-1. Live updates.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## Yoused

Rumors I have been hearing say that some generals (as many as 3) are withdrawing their troops from Ukraine. Primarily because the Russian army has largely lost interest in prosecuting this action.

The other rumor I heard (ETA: cite) was that Vlad is taking a hiatus at his dacha in Sochi – it is not clear whether the Sochi dacha has a bunker. (Also, possibly of note, Sochi is less than 400 miles from Ukraine-controlled territory, more like 200 if they retake Crimea.)


----------



## Yoused

US accuses financial website of spreading Russian propaganda
					

U.S. intelligence officials allege a conservative financial website with a significant American readership is amplifying Kremlin propaganda




					abcnews.go.com
				




Zero Hedge has a lot of twitter followers.


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> Rumors I have been hearing say that some generals (as many as 3) are withdrawing their troops from Ukraine. Primarily because the Russian army has largely lost interest in prosecuting this action.
> 
> The other rumor I heard (ETA: cite) was that Vlad is taking a hiatus at his dacha in Sochi – it is not clear whether the Sochi dacha has a bunker. (Also, possibly of note, Sochi is less than 400 miles from Ukraine-controlled territory, more like 200 if they retake Crimea.)



The dynamics between military leadership and civilian leadership is always interesting. I wonder and assume that in Russia’s case this can be done with impunity as a general if your army backs you. I am fairly certain that Mr Shit POTUS before he left his position in 2020, solicited support of the Joint Chiefs for a martial law _prop up the dictator_ scenario, but they told him to stuff it.  The head of the Joint Chiefs made a public statement prior to the election that the US Military was not getting involved in management of the election, which I thought was an unusual thing to be saying.


----------



## Citysnaps

A nice find. Likely now in the US and being examined.  









						Ukraine Just Captured One Of Russia’s Most Capable Aerial Electronic Warfare Pods
					

Russia’s lost Khibiny-U electronic warfare pod that flies of its advanced Flanker fighters will be a prize for foreign intelligence agencies.




					www.thedrive.com


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> Rumors I have been hearing say that some generals (as many as 3) are withdrawing their troops from Ukraine. Primarily because the Russian army has largely lost interest in prosecuting this action.
> 
> The other rumor I heard (ETA: cite) was that Vlad is taking a hiatus at his dacha in Sochi – it is not clear whether the Sochi dacha has a bunker. (Also, possibly of note, Sochi is less than 400 miles from Ukraine-controlled territory, more like 200 if they retake Crimea.)



Was vlad seen at the golf course with Donny by any chance?


----------



## lizkat

Cmaier said:


> Was vlad seen at the golf course with Donny by any chance?




Well, and some Republican parks and museum directors in the US south,  no doubt.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> Perhaps the Black Sea Fleet has also "regrouped" and been "redeployed" to other duties......like not getting sunk? It's a lot easier and cheaper for Putin to replace dead foot soldiers than it is to replace war ships.
> 
> In any event, It's been reported in a number of places that the fleet has been staying close to their land based air defense support and not venturing far out into the Black Sea.
> 
> I remember reading over the years that Russia has not been spending money to modernize the Black Sea fleet, so perhaps their ships aren't actually outfitted with all the latest protective systems and weapons that one might expect.  If that's true, then positioning the ships further out to sea might leave them without the protection they need from missiles launched from Ukraine's aircraft.




I just read a thing that cites a Russian report that lots of the Moskova’s systems as of late 2021 were not functional or fully functional- none of the defense systems worked, one of the radars required for some of the defense systems was not used because it interfered with their communications, most of the fire extinguishers were missing, water tight doors didn’t work, the gas turbine for extra speed didn’t work properly and could basically only be used in emergencies, the rudder system was screwed up inhibiting it’s ability to maneuver, the engines and generators were nearing their of their service life, etc etc etc but was considered to be in “satisfactory” condition. I can’t imagine the US would ever send a ship out to active duty in that condition.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Huntn said:


> A quick search- Tomahawk anti-ship missiles have a range of 200-1000 miles depending on configuration. Not saying Ukrainians have them.




There is an anti-ship version of the Tomahawk but as you said the Ukranians don’t have it- not to say they couldn’t. The Tomahawk itself isn’t exactly novel technology at this point and I would think if we’re giving them the Harpoon then anti-ship Tomahawks don’t necessarily seem out of the question. It might be more of a matter of having a viable platform to launch it from and the age old concern of the Ukrainians hitting targets in Russia and the subsequent political ramifications. 

That said, Tomahawks would be easier to intercept than Harpoons as they’re not sea skimming. They can be detected much earlier. But of course if you shoot enough of them statistics will win out in the end. 

Many of the ships remaining have air defense capabilities though lack the long range ability that the Moskova provided. That’s why Snake Island was so important- to act as a location to place S-300’s to defend their ships. 

As it remains dealing with the Submarines will be the greatest challenge if indeed that becomes an issue. That said the Russian subs are diesel-electric and do have to surface roughly every 2 weeks. If you look at my previous post of the alleged condition of the Moskova it does call into question the condition of their navy. But I wouldn’t necessarily rely assumption.


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> I can’t imagine the US would ever send a ship out to active duty in that condition.




I can imagine, if the US were under imminent-threat/immediate attack by a hostile adversary and that was what was available at the point of attack. The Russians were kind of in exactly the opposite position – not to mention the heavy money-skimming going on in Russia's MIC.


----------



## Yoused

Ukrainian army is firing missiles at Russian lines, full of dangerous shrapnel:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1569739324781993987/


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> Ukrainian army is firing missiles at Russian lines, full of dangerous shrapnel:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1569739324781993987/



I wonder what they say?


----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> I wonder what they say?



 In the blue: Your ticket to a peaceful life
yellow: show this card to a Ukrainian soldier – it will save your life and help you return home
white (back): for detailed advice (QR codes, phone number)


----------



## Yoused

Georgia proposes to hold a referendum and ask if Georgians want war with Russia | odessa-journal.com
					

The leadership of Georgia is discussing about organising a nationwide referendum and ask the question: do the Georgians want a war with Russia? Giorgi




					odessa-journal.com
				




Given that the Russian army has shown what a juggernaut it is ...


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> Georgia proposes to hold a referendum and ask if Georgians want war with Russia | odessa-journal.com
> 
> 
> The leadership of Georgia is discussing about organising a nationwide referendum and ask the question: do the Georgians want a war with Russia? Giorgi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> odessa-journal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given that the Russian army has shown what a juggernaut it is ...




I was wondering about this would happen. 

Personally I’m not so sure this is a good idea. Georgia is a tiny country with very few military resources, especially in the offensive department. I don’t think NATO would support an (at this point years later an unprovoked) offensive war at this point and supplying Ukraine with arms and aid is already a challenge. Maybe Russian defenses would just crumble and cede the territory, but they could also mobilize their entire military considering it an invasion and then also siphon those troops over to Ukraine. Seems like a risky move that could easily end very poorly for Georgia and possibly Ukraine as well

If they are going to do it, now would be the time while Russia is distracted, sanctioned, and in limited supply of arms. But that still doesn’t make it a wise plan.


----------



## Yoused

‘They ran away’: Ukrainians recount hasty Russian withdrawal
					

Residents of villages retaken by Ukrainian army describe the retreat of Russian forces in Ukraine’ counteroffensive.




					www.aljazeera.com
				




_When danger reared its ugly head
He bravely turned his tail and fled
Brave, brave sir Russian_​


----------



## NT1440

I’m keeping an eye on this thread, purely to see how the narrative survives the winter…


----------



## Yoused

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1570824858401116161/

It says "the man who was perpetually late to meetings now always arrives early, what happened?"


----------



## Yoused

Ukraine pays tribute to Russian woman who fought on its side
					

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — An honor guard fired a three-gun salute toward cloudy skies as friends and comrades-in-arms gathered in Kyiv to bid farewell to a Russian woman who was killed while fighting on Ukraine’s side in the war with her native country.




					apnews.com


----------



## Colstan

Here's my latest update on the Ukraine-Russia conflict, I thought we could have some fun with charts:





The Russian retreat has left so much military equipment behind that Russia is now unintentionally the second largest contributor to the Ukrainian military's war effort. The offensive in Kharkiv Oblast has yielded tremendous resupply of vehicles and ammunition. Keep in mind that these are primarily Soviet or Soviet-derived munitions, and therefore require little to no training for the Ukrainians to operate.





The Ukrainian Ministry of Defence plans to return the ammunition to Russia, written in blood.





As part of the deal for U.S. weapons systems, Ukraine agreed not to hit Russian territory using that weaponry, such as HIMARS, which Ukraine has used to great effect. Now, thanks to fleeing Russian soldiers, Ukraine can strike Belgorod while keeping their word on that agreement.

To be fair, not everything is roses and sunshine for Ukraine. Russia is starting to use drones made by the Iranian regime, with some measure of results.





Still, if my choice is between being desperate enough to purchase weapons from Iran and North Korea, or receiving aid from NATO, I think I'd chose the latter.

At least COVID has been good for something:





The Kharkiv offensive has been fruitful, not just in quantity, but quality.





You can bet that Western intelligence agencies are going to want to get their hands on this thing, and I'm sure Ukraine would be happy to trade it for additional weapon systems...so they can go score more proprietary, top-secret Russian military technology. Seems like a win-win, in this situation. It'll also be interesting to see how much of this tech is home-grown in the Motherland, or imported from companies that shouldn't be doing business with Moscow. They aren't exactly known for using the latest process nodes.

The Ukrainian military has established three beachheads for future operations in Kharkiv Oblast.





This operation will be studied by militaries for generations. (Except for Russia.)

It's also been a bad day to be a Russian collaborator.





Cue cartoon pianos falling on Russian occupier's heads simultaneously.





Maybe these people should reconsider their employment plans, because Ukraine keeps giving both political puppets and Russian military generals a permanent early retirement.

Referendum results:


----------



## lizkat

New York Daily News cartoonist Bill Bramhall's current take on the Ukraine situation:


​


----------



## lizkat

Colstan said:


> The Russian retreat has left so much military equipment behind that Russia is now unintentionally the second largest contributor to the Ukrainian military's war effort. The offensive in Kharkiv Oblast has yielded tremendous resupply of vehicles and ammunition. Keep in mind that these are primarily Soviet or Soviet-derived munitions, and therefore require little to no training for the Ukrainians to operate.




Problem now is that no serving Russian general  likely has the nerve to tell Putin "I told you so" --  but heads are going to roll anyway after this debacle,  so someone might as well speak up before "falling out of a window."    Maybe hearing it from a formerly trusted senior military officer might make more of an impression on Putin than seeing it scroll by on social media.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Looks like Russia is on track to annex Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia: 









						Russia holds annexation votes; Ukraine says residents coerced
					

The referendums are aimed at annexing four occupied regions of Ukraine, drawing condemnation from Kyiv and Western nations which dismissed the votes as a sham and pledged not to recognize the results.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## quagmire

TBL said:


> Looks like Russia is on track to annex Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia holds annexation votes; Ukraine says residents coerced
> 
> 
> The referendums are aimed at annexing four occupied regions of Ukraine, drawing condemnation from Kyiv and Western nations which dismissed the votes as a sham and pledged not to recognize the results.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com




Wonder if this is a pre-text to further increase mobilization and justify it at home. As these places are under attack by Ukraine, the "referendum" passes, Russia now claims those regions as their own, now Ukraine is invading Russia.


----------



## Colstan

Russia can hold all of the fake referendums it wants, which are getting their puppets killed, but what's happening on the battlefield matters long-term.









Ukraine has an advantage in training, equipment, command and control leadership, morale, partisans behind Russian lines, clear strategic goals, and allied support.

Now, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has upped its game to include trolling.





The only advantage Russia has is quantity. The willingness to toss as many soldiers into the meat grinder as needed to achieve their goals. For example, they are offering prisoners a deal where they can serve six months on the front line in exchange for having their sentences revoked. The Russian military isn't so much of an armed force, but multiple mercenary groups with different objectives, including the willingness to kill each other.





General mobilization carries with it huge political risks, but it may be the last card that Vlad has left in his already empty deck. Meanwhile, according to recent polling data, 98% of Ukrainians believe that they will win the war, and Volodymyr Zelenskyy has a 91% approval rating.

Winning a war isn't simply about arms, equipment, and territory. It's also about the will of the people to fight. After the war crimes massacre in Bucha, which is being multiplied as new areas are liberated, Ukrainians fully understand what is at stake. If Putin stops fighting, then the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, then Ukraine ends.


----------



## GermanSuplex

To hear Fox News and Tuckems tell it the last few weeks, Russia had already won this very legitimate war that was waged by Joe Biden and the radical left on Ukraine.

Glad to see they were wrong, as is usually the case.


----------



## Yoused

This sounds like a smart move

_Anti-war protests in 38 Russian cities saw more than 1,300 people arrested on Wednesday, a monitoring group said. *Some had been served summons to report to enlistment offices on Thursday*, the first full day of conscription, independent news outlets said._​
Send anti-war protesters to the front. I bet Army officers really love the idea of built-in mutiny.


----------



## Yoused

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1572534423601696769/


----------



## Alli

Nobody of fighting age is allowed to leave Russia unless they’re in uniform. I recommend they all go and ask for asylum when they get to Ukraine. Putin will be left with a country filled with old people and children.


----------



## NT1440

Alli said:


> Nobody of fighting age is allowed to leave Russia unless they’re in uniform. I recommend they all go and ask for asylum when they get to Ukraine. Putin will be left with a country filled with old people and children.



Wasn’t that the case in Ukraine too?


----------



## GermanSuplex

I guess it’s easy to be deceived by Russia’s military capabilities by looking at a map and seeing its size, as well as it’s bluster and nuclear arsenal.

This war with Ukraine - no matter how it plays out - should really give pause to future leaders of Russia when it comes to believing their own bluster.


----------



## Macky-Mac

GermanSuplex said:


> ....This war with Ukraine - no matter how it plays out - should really give pause to future leaders of Russia when it comes to believing their own bluster.




it certainly hasn't gone as they expected and probably won't end as they hoped......but they're currently positioned with territorial gains and if things grind on and on until a ceasefire, they'll have overrun and annexed a significant part of the Donbas and also perhaps the area south of the Dnieper river in southeastern Ukraine.

Not Putin's best case scenario, but perhaps enough to meet his goal for minimum acceptable results


----------



## Macky-Mac

NT1440 said:


> Wasn’t that the case in Ukraine too?




I think you're right, for men anyway


----------



## AG_PhamD

lizkat said:


> Problem now is that no serving Russian general  likely has the nerve to tell Putin "I told you so" --  but heads are going to roll anyway after this debacle,  so someone might as well speak up before "falling out of a window."    Maybe hearing it from a formerly trusted senior military officer might make more of an impression on Putin than seeing it scroll by on social media.




I was listening to a rather fascinating analysis on the radio this morning in regards to the competency and coherence of the army on the ground. 

We all remember that many of the troops were not informed they were going to be invading Ukraine until they were in Ukraine and being shot at. Apparently what has been happening since is that the soldiers being recruited are being told they will be moving boxes or driving a logistics truck… only to go to a week of riffle training being told “that’s what everyone does”… and then finding themselves on the front line. 

It’s also clear Russia has expensed many of their best soldiers- either being killed, wounded, or having been fighting since the war began without a break. So you have tired, frustrated, professional military soldiers and Russian self defense forces having to coordinate with each other along mercenary groups like The Wagner Group, the Chechen Mercenaries- now also criminals they just pulled out of prison, along with several pro-Russian resistance militias, conscripts with no desire to fight, captured Ukrainian men being forced to fight, and rumor has it now Russian men arrested in recent anti-war protests are being forced to sign up to fight. All these groups obviously have their own interests and have little to no cooperation with each other. Imagine trying to wage a cohesive war with so many factions of people. I can only imagine…

It’s a rather obvious observation but an interesting one I had not heard discussed. 

I have no sympathy for the actions of the Russian government, but you have to have a degree of sympathy knowing hundreds of thousands of men (likely young men and fathers) who are being forced to go to war- and go to war with virtually no resources and insufficient training. And a war they clearly don’t want to fight (if they did they probably would have signed up already). It’s not like they are even getting a fair chance from their government. Talk about being sent into a meat grinder. 

I can’t imagine Russia will be able to change the tide of this war in the bear to moderate term and the Russian people will eventually tire of their loved ones returning in body bags with nothing to show for it. The scary thing is that I don’t see an east off-ramp for Putin at this point. And that’s a dangerous situation for everyone.


----------



## lizkat

AG_PhamD said:


> I can’t imagine Russia will be able to change the tide of this war in the bear to moderate term and the Russian people will eventually tire of their loved ones returning in body bags with nothing to show for it. The scary thing is that I don’t see an east off-ramp for Putin at this point. And that’s a dangerous situation for everyone.




Well yes it can be dangerous if Putin cannot be creative enough to talk his way out of this mess to a negotiation that should end up "ok like I said y'all need to quit threatening us, I think you get ti."

I mean hell he can just take a page from Nxon and Kissinger:   sit down at a table, tell Zelensky and puppet administrators from the eastern provinces "enough fighting already, like I have said all along you must learn to live with each other in harmony" and then just declare peace with honor and go home.   Let the dumbstruck people back home wonder wtf happened there for a little while.  They'll just be happy to not have their sons and brothers being sent into battle any more.

Anyway the people already complain _sotto voce_ about the leadership of both the military and Putin 24/7 -- if they're like we were about Presidents Johnson and then Nixon and their respective secretaries of defense and state while the Vietnam War chewed up our classmates and brothers.  Even if we didn't object to the war itself or to presence of our kin "over there",  we grumbled about how it was going.

The leaders do know this habit of plain citizens.  Nothing they can do about it will benefit them.  If they look back at history of trying to suppress grumbling about the government, they will realize that overlooking (semi-)private criticism is preferable to what eventually happens in the streets when suppression of such commentary occurs.  

But see Russia blew it by already having criminalized criticism of the state. It was already not even ok to bitch about the government in a pub...  It's why protest escalated instantly to streets when the draft was announced.  In for a penny, in for a pound.


----------



## Colstan

AG_PhamD said:


> I can’t imagine Russia will be able to change the tide of this war in the bear to moderate term and the Russian people will eventually tire of their loved ones returning in body bags with nothing to show for it. The scary thing is that I don’t see an east off-ramp for Putin at this point. And that’s a dangerous situation for everyone.



All good points, @AG_PhamD. I don't see an easy resolution to this, not that there has been one since the "special military operation" began. The de-escalation crowd in Brussels and D.C. have lost another of their cards, because Putin just cashed in one of his last chips by announcing general mobilization, nearly the last that he still held in the deck. Threatening to strand astronauts on the ISS feels like ages ago. Cutting off Russian natural gas exports to Europe through Gazprom has already been played. I think Putin thought that Europe would buckle because of his perception that they are addicted to cheap Russian energy. It's going to be painful throughout the Winter months, but this is something that needed to be dealt with eventually. It's often been said that the United States is the "Saudi Arabia of natural gas". If that is indeed the case, then in the near-term, perhaps the U.S. should do everything possible reduce that pressure in any way possible, without taking on that role permanently.

The only remaining card is threats of total nuclear war between the Russian Federation and NATO and its allies. While Putin definitely believed the lies that he was being told about the imminent collapse of the Ukrainian government, seeing how it is being run by "Nazis and drug addicts", I don't see him as being irrational to the point of thinking that Russia can win a nuclear exchange, especially considering the failure rate of Russia's long-range artillery. On top of that, Ukraine's cyberwar division has outclassed the much vaunted Russian hacker army. There's no telling what wiill happen if the full capability of NATO and allied cyber divisions are brought to the virtual front. Even stalwartly neutral countries such as Israel, which have maintained relatively open relations with Moscow are now turning on them, considering that Iranian drones are being deployed on the battlefield. With Russia resorting to purchasing arms from pariah states like North Korea and Iran, that shows even greater desperation.

There's the old observation that the Russian bear is never as weak as she seems, nor as strong as she appears. Moscow's historical strategy has always been to make up for quality with quantity. In this case, that involves depleting Ukrainian bullets using the chests of Russian men of fighting age. That's quite a dilemma: fight on the front lines and die at the hands of a well-trained, competent Ukrainian military; or die at the hands of your countrymen who have been tasked with shooting anyone who attempts to retreat.

I don't know what is going to happen, perhaps Russia's play to overwhelm Ukraine with a pure numerical advantage will succeed, that history is yet to be written. What I am certain of is that notions such as French President Emmanuel Macron's belief that Ukraine must not humiliate Vladimir Putin are long since past. I think Ukraine's government has the right notion and appeasement never works. At this point, it's impossible for Putin to save face, because he's already lost it. Attempting to give Russia an easy out, when they've already proven to have a corrupt chain of command, vastly over-estimated military capabilities, and the evaporation of the notion that Putin has never lost a war, has resulted in Russia becoming an international laughing stock.

I don't know what turns this around for Russia, if there is an excuse for Putin to declare victory and bring his troops back home, but I am absolutely certain that nobody will ever take Russia's conventional forces seriously, not for at least another generation.


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1572534423601696769/



Mysterious accidents/deaths seem to be common place in good ole Russia.


----------



## Nycturne

NT1440 said:


> Wasn’t that the case in Ukraine too?



It is, but two opponents can make the same move, and have it be a mistake for one and important for the other. 

Russian military morale is not doing great, their supplies are allegedly not in great shape either. Folks being brought in to fight for Russia have to have some inkling of what awaits them. Ukraine with Zelenskyy’s government standing strong in the face of an aggressor, along with support from the west to keep the troops supplied paints a very different picture in terms of how the fighters will act and respond to “we need you here to fight”.

Doing this is a sign of desperation for both sides for sure. But when you have a large nation invading you, I think it’s reasonable to expect the defenders to act in desperation.



Colstan said:


> The only remaining card is threats of total nuclear war between the Russian Federation and NATO and its allies. While Putin definitely believed the lies that he was being told about the imminent collapse of the Ukrainian government, seeing how it is being run by "Nazis and drug addicts", I don't see him as being irrational to the point of thinking that Russia can win a nuclear exchange.




We can only hope he isn’t that irrational. Anyone who begins thinking that it is even possible for a nuclear exchange to be “won” is extremely dangerous.



Colstan said:


> I think Ukraine's government has the right notion and appeasement never works. At this point, it's impossible for Putin to save face, because he's already lost it. Attempting to give Russia an easy out, when they've already proven to have a corrupt chain of command, vastly over-estimated military capabilities, and the evaporation of the notion that Putin has never lost a war, has resulted in Russia becoming an international laughing stock.




And this is the trouble. Putin lost face by his own hand. And he’s never struck me as the type who will just walk away after losing face. And that’s partly what worries me. He won’t leave Ukraine until he’s forced out of Ukraine, and appeasement will just mean he will try again later. And if the people of Russia cannot move against him, it means he will continue to menace his neighbors with ideas of a new “USSR”. It’s not like NATO will be dumb enough to try a “regime change” on a major nuclear power.

It’s also why I worry about authoritarianism in the US. Can you imagine the same sort of regime in charge of the US military and nuclear arsenal? That would be bad for everyone.



Colstan said:


> I don't know what turns this around for Russia, if there is an excuse for Putin to declare victory and bring his troops back home, but I am absolutely certain that nobody will ever take Russia's conventional forces seriously, not for at least another generation.




Agreed.


----------



## Citysnaps

Colstan said:


> but I am absolutely certain that nobody will ever take Russia's conventional forces seriously, not for at least another generation.




I think the whole Russia-Ukraine mess has been an outstanding opportunity for western intelligence agencies to scoop up gobs of realtime information/data with respect to Russian leadership decision making, preparations, strategy, tactics, command structure, weaknesses/strengths, capabilities, failures, protocols, logistics, weapons systems capabilities, communications systems, combat operations, (lack of) professionalism, and on and on, all being stressed tested.

What a bonanza of information, useful for dealing with future Russian adventurism.


----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> Mysterious accidents/deaths seem to be common place in good ole Russia.




_In Soviet Russia, accidents have you_


----------



## AG_PhamD

Colstan said:


> I don't know what turns this around for Russia, if there is an excuse for Putin to declare victory and bring his troops back home, but I am absolutely certain that nobody will ever take Russia's conventional forces seriously, not for at least another generation




I think their plan is to throw as much cannon fodder at the problem as possible between now and the winter to hold the line until the weather improves and then do what they had been doing- relentless pounding until there’s nothing left to conquer and therefore no “risk” exists. Meanwhile they can hope energy costs and inflation will force the Western public to demand our leaders stop supplying arms to Ukraine. I think that’s a very optimistic goal though.

Perhaps the best possible outcome is for Putin to die naturally or with some assistance, and his replacement can back Russia out of this mess blaming Putin. There’s no guarantee his replacement would be better though. In any sense, Putin winning the war seems synonymous with his own survival, making this situation all the more dangerous. I don’t see someone so power hungry and narcissistic ending the war after taking so many losses. 

After all the destruction and heinous war crimes committed by Russia, I see little opportunity for a peace deal- why would Ukraine take a deal? Especially so long as they have western support. And frankly, I believe NATO is using this opportunity to put a death nail in the dream of a new Soviet Union or Russia has a true global superpower. With that goal in mind they will make this as long and painful for Russia as possible, even at the expense of Ukraine.


----------



## Nycturne

Ukraine doesn’t seem to be suffering much war fatigue at the moment. They’ll take everything NATO will offer and ask for more right now in terms of military aid.

If Ukraine is willing to hold the line, and agrees on the philosophy of not giving this mouse a cookie, do we really tell them no? Is it better to help them while they die on their feet or hold back in the hope of saving lives but letting Putin wage wars of aggression without pushing back?

No good answers, but my vote is that as long as Ukraine wants to fight, I say we help them.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Here’s an interesting report of some of the solders being called up for service: 








						Russia drafted an old man with diabetes, a 17-year-old, and people with no training to fight in Ukraine, reports say — a sign of desperation
					

Russian officials are calling up people who do not fall under the criteria of its partial military mobilization, multiple reports said.




					www.businessinsider.com
				




For example, a 63 year old man wtith diabetes and cerebral ischemia. There’s a number of other examples of people who should not have been drafted but have been anyways. 

They say these people won’t be sent to the front line but I’m not sure anyone believes that. As it is most front line combat soldiers haven’t had a break. There are also rumors they’re actually going to try to mobilize 1 million, only saying 300,000 because it’s more palatable. 

Another point of analysis I heard was even training 300,000 men will be logistically extremely difficult. Russia lacks enough trainers, training facilities, many trainers are already busy training others, etc. Presumably these people drafted should have military experience but even irked that’s true, many probably haven’t served in 10-5+ years. 

Those drafted have already reported not having beds, being treated like crap by their superiors, etc. The moral is likely quite low considering they don’t want to be there to begin with.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> Here’s an interesting report of some of the solders being called up for service:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia drafted an old man with diabetes, a 17-year-old, and people with no training to fight in Ukraine, reports say — a sign of desperation
> 
> 
> Russian officials are calling up people who do not fall under the criteria of its partial military mobilization, multiple reports said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For example, a 63 year old man wtith diabetes and cerebral ischemia. There’s a number of other examples of people who should not have been drafted but have been anyways.
> 
> They say these people won’t be sent to the front line but I’m not sure anyone believes that. As it is most front line combat soldiers haven’t had a break. There are also rumors they’re actually going to try to mobilize 1 million, only saying 300,000 because it’s more palatable.
> 
> Another point of analysis I heard was even training 300,000 men will be logistically extremely difficult. Russia lacks enough trainers, training facilities, many trainers are already busy training others, etc. Presumably these people drafted should have military experience but even irked that’s true, many probably haven’t served in 10-5+ years.
> 
> Those drafted have already reported not having beds, being treated like crap by their superiors, etc. The moral is likely quite low considering they don’t want to be there to begin with.




As I was waking up this morning I heard a story on NPR that Germany is welcoming all escaping Russian conscriptees looking for a new life and liberal democracy.  Very generous, imo.


----------



## Colstan

For a bit of levity, whoever is running the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense's Twitter account deserves a pay increase. This time, they provide a helpful video on the new Lend-Lease program. Here's a glimpse at the rifles being supplied to new Russian recruits that I'm sure will serve them well.

Finally, props to Mark Summer at Daily Kos for doing some actual reporting on what is happening on the ground in the war. So much of the media relies upon emotional anecdotes that get clicks and ratings, which is lazy coverage that doesn't inform, instead of actual reporting with verified information. Most of what we know is from partisan sources on social media, which aren't always the most reliable.









						Ukraine update: Ukraine is across the Oskil, and across the Oskil, and across the Oskil, and ...
					

On Friday, the majority of the action when it comes to a counteroffensive by Ukrainian forces is along the Oskil River. But while attention has lately been focused on the city of Lyman and Ukrainian forces maneuvering to encircle the Russian forces...




					www.dailykos.com


----------



## AG_PhamD

Citysnaps said:


> As I was waking up this morning I heard a story on NPR that Germany is welcoming all escaping Russian conscriptees looking for a new life and liberal democracy.  Very generous, imo.




I am very suspicious of how that would work in practice. I’m not sure if that’s something typical of countries to offer during times of war- certainly nothing I have heard of during any major war, but it seems a little problematic and hard to execute. There also seems something ethically problematic about offering asylum to Ukrainians and then also offering the same limited resources to Russians. With Russia having a massive pool of conscripts to chose from and limited resources for Germany to provide, I’m not sure Ukraine would benefit that much. Especially considering evading the draft in Russia very well may ensure you are never able to return to your homeland and family/friends ever again. 

I suppose there are also the logistical problems of how these people would get to Germany. Many cannot afford to leave the country as it is and Russia could easily restrict international travel to men in the demographic of conscripts- and this already may be happening. 

What’s most baffling is Germany already lacks sufficient energy to provide enough energy for its people, let alone at an affordable cost. Their economy is in serious trouble. Is taking on perhaps tens of thousands more people and providing them aid really that feasible? 

Or is this just another way for Germany to signal support for Ukraine  and the West in this war without providing military aid (especially offensive weapons) and offering something that can never be delivered upon. Germany is getting screwed by the Russians on energy but continuously fails to follow through on commitments (or at least in any sense of a timely manner), as if if they do follow through they will be punished further- which I’m not sure is anymore possible at this point. 

Germany needs to stop pretending they can appear to support Ukraine while also appeasing Russia enough so they can get their gas back. It’s not happening- Russia couldn’t care less whether they sell Germany gas or not and have made that very clear. As much as I empathize with Germany’s difficult situation, they are paying the consequences for making bad decisions and deals with the devil so to speak.  (And sadly the US and world are doing the same when it comes to green technologies like batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, etc when it comes to China).


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

There really needs to be a world revolution to stop cowering to the fragile egos of billionaires who can’t give less of a shit about anybody other than themself. They’ve clearly grown bored in their ivory towers and have turned to destabilizing the world for sport. So few of them and so overwhelming many of us and yet we’re the ones who feel helpless.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> There really needs to be a world revolution to stop cowering to the fragile egos of billionaires who can’t give less of a shit about anybody other than themself. They’ve clearly grown bored in their ivory towers and have turned to destabilizing the world for sport. So few of them and so overwhelming many of us and yet we’re the ones who feel helpless.



There should be no billionaires. In the terms of the Bible, it is an example of greed and glutany. As a billionaire, what you have takes away from thousands. Now as you know I’m not a Bible fan, but it’s curious with this example in their rulebook held up as a standard, how many politicians on the Right claim to be Christians and regard or aspire to be wealthy as the ultimate goal, and I’m not referencing being comfortable, but dreaming about being stinking rich as in this would _solve all MY problem_s. Or am I confusing this with power? They seem to go hand in hand. You? We? _You and we are not my problem. My problem is controlling you. _

Then there is the Head Mentally Ill, Insecure broken little boy, who claims he is rich, while  lamenting that nobody loves him, except for the pack of SUCKERS he has to fool into servicing his malfunctioning ego. There is absolutely no one who is respected on the world’s stage who respects poor little Donny.


​


----------



## Eric

Wondering where Putin's true allies are? Look no further than Fox News, just wow.

Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows​








						Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows
					

At least 745 people were arrested on Saturday for protesting Russia's mobilization, according to a human rights group.




					www.newsweek.com
				






> Russian state TV is using clips of Fox News host Tucker Carlson to promote the country's war against Ukraine amid protests against Vladimir Putin's partial mobilization.
> 
> Clips of Carlson chastising the U.S. over its continued backing of Kyiv were broadcast to millions of Russians this week as the Russian president ramped up the country's war effort, according to Russian Media Monitor creator Julia Davis.
> 
> Protests against the mobilization in Russia continued on Saturday with at least 745 people detained, according to OVD-Info, a human rights watchdog that monitors police activity.
> 
> An ally of Putin has also threatened to send relatives of anti-war protesters to the front line in Ukraine.


----------



## Nycturne

Huntn said:


> There should be no billionaires. In the terms of the Bible, it is an example of greed and glutany. As a billionaire, what you have takes away from thousands. Now as you know I’m not a Bible fan, but it’s curious with this example in their rulebook held up as a standard, how many politicians on the Right claim to be Christians and regard or aspire to be wealthy as the ultimate goal, and I’m not referencing being comfortable, but dreaming about being stinking rich as in this would _solve all MY problem_s.




They see it as a reward from God: 





__





						Prosperity theology - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Huntn

Nycturne said:


> They see it as a reward from God:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prosperity theology - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Achieved in a way that undermines humanity as a species and  undercuts the teachings of Christianity, an achievement in persuasive hypocrisy..


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Wondering where Putin's true allies are? Look no further than Fox News, just wow.
> 
> Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows
> 
> 
> At least 745 people were arrested on Saturday for protesting Russia's mobilization, according to a human rights group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Such a MoFo.


----------



## Edd

Eric said:


> Wondering where Putin's true allies are? Look no further than Fox News, just wow.
> 
> Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows
> 
> 
> At least 745 people were arrested on Saturday for protesting Russia's mobilization, according to a human rights group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I searched for some response/reaction from TC about this stuff and found nothing. You’d think Fox or him would have something to say, however disingenuous it’s guaranteed to be.


----------



## lizkat

Edd said:


> I searched for some response/reaction from TC about this stuff and found nothing. You’d think Fox or him would have something to say, however disingenuous it’s guaranteed to be.




Waiting for Rupert to text a suggestion from wherever the ol' coot is vacationing today.


----------



## Yoused

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1573650479799799809/


----------



## Deleted member 215

Heh. Remember when the leftists here were getting accused of being pro-Putin? The right straight up says exactly what they think: Putin is a Trump-like strong man fighting for national identity and traditional values. Zelensky is a Jewish globalist fighting for progressivism. Which side do you think they're going to support?


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1573650479799799809/




How terrible for these Russian conscripts and their families.  The instinct is to suggest that they surrender to the nearest Ukrainian when they set foot over the border, but one of the replies in that thread said that Putin has increased the penalty for voluntary surrender to 10 years in prison.   The Daily Beast mentioned that in a piece on September 20 when describing Putin's legislative measures that preceded what was soon thereafter the mobilization announcement.









						Kremlin’s New Hail Mary Shows Putin Is More Panicked Than Ever
					

Moscow is frantically pushing through an “incoherent” plan to curb the onslaught of humiliating Russian losses in the war.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				







> The double whammy began with the announcement early Tuesday that Russia’s State Duma passed legislation introducing stricter punishments for any troops who “voluntarily” surrender on the frontline or refuse to follow orders.
> 
> Deserters would get up to 15 years behind bars, while those who surrender face a 10-year sentence. Those who refuse to follow the orders of their commanders face three years.
> 
> The legislation, which for the first time also adds the concepts of “mobilization, martial law and wartime” to the Russian Criminal Code, has widely been seen as the first step to launching full-scale mobilization.
> 
> After unanimous approval by the State Duma, the legislation will be sent to the Federation Council on Wednesday, according to state media. With the Federation Council also expected to get on board, the new prison terms will come into force as soon as Putin signs the bill–which could happen as soon as Wednesday.
> 
> Bizarrely, the legislation was already marked as having been approved at all stages in the government portal as of Wednesday afternoon.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Wondering where Putin's true allies are? Look no further than Fox News, just wow.
> 
> Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian State TV Using Tucker Carlson Clips to Promote War as Unrest Grows
> 
> 
> At least 745 people were arrested on Saturday for protesting Russia's mobilization, according to a human rights group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com




I saw this clip floating around before it was picked up by Russian state TV. I find his analysis baffling, granted Tucker in some respects has always been anti-interventionist and not particularly a fan of Europe. His opinion doesn’t seem to be at all in line with what the rest of Fox hosts seem to be saying. While I don’t agree with his analysis, I don’t think anti-war can necessarily be conflated with being pro-Putin.

I’m not sure if he made the remark in this segment about how the US has spent far more than every other country by far, it is one he has made and is a common talking point from anti-interventionists on the right and far left. It’s definitely true we have provided far more aid, we have far more to give and by percentage of GDP given, I believe we actually fall into the middle of the pack. The Baltic nations have given far more per percentage of the their GDP, but obviously these are tiny countries with tiny economies.



TBL said:


> Heh. Remember when the leftists here were getting accused of being pro-Putin? The right straight up says exactly what they think: Putin is a Trump-like strong man fighting for national identity and traditional values. Zelensky is a Jewish globalist fighting for progressivism. Which side do you think they're going to support?




This is quite hyperbolic. I don’t think he or anyone in the mainstream Republican Party, including Tucker Carlson, think Putin is somehow the good guy here and Zelenskyy is part of some Eldens of Zion conspiracy.  

We can both agree people who think we shouldn’t be funding this war have a bad opinion. Tucker has a lot of other bad opinions too. But declaring anyone who opposes the war as in bed with Putin is a tired trope. Like when Tulsi Gabbard was accused of “promoting Russian propoganda of Ukrainian Bioweapons labs” for simply for making the comment Ukraine needed to secure their high security bioresearch labs- which exist in just about every modern country in the world including Ukraine. 

The argument against the war is that it’s hurting Europe economy and energy security, costing us billions, killing thousands on both sides, destabilizing the world, and all over some land in a country that’s incredibly corrupt and rates very poorly in the freedom index (Ukraine). Where I think this argument fails is that the Ukrainian people have a right to defend their land accept the help being offered. Furthermore, Russia has demonstrated it will keep taking and taking from ex-Soviet countries- either physical land or by installing puppet regimes. And despite Ukraines faults, it’s by far the lesser of two evils. 

I’m not sure is anyone in mainstream American politics that supports Russia. But it Russia never stops being a boogeyman for each side to attack the other with and it just looks ridiculous every time.


----------



## Edd

AG_PhamD said:


> The argument against the war is that it’s hurting Europe economy and energy security, costing us billions, killing thousands on both sides, destabilizing the world, and all over some land in a country that’s incredibly corrupt and rates very poorly in the freedom index (Ukraine). Where I think this argument fails is that the Ukrainian people have a right to defend their land accept the help being offered. Furthermore, Russia has demonstrated it will keep taking and taking from ex-Soviet countries- either physical land or by installing puppet regimes. And despite Ukraines faults, it’s by far the lesser of two evils.



There’s also the small matter of Putin *threatening nuclear war*. He’s a fucking Bond villain at this point.


----------



## Deleted member 215

AG_PhamD said:


> This is quite hyperbolic. I don’t think he or anyone in the mainstream Republican Party, including Tucker Carlson, think Putin is somehow the good guy here and Zelenskyy is part of some Eldens of Zion conspiracy.




I've never claimed that anyone who is anti-war is pro-Putin. I've been pretty firmly against direct intervention from the very beginning and I was one of the people on this forum criticizing the hasty labels of "pro-Putin" (and the absurd jingoistic "let's cancel Russian culture" nonsense). What I do see as being pro-Putin is claiming that the fault of the war is on Ukraine and the U.S., not on Putin *who invaded a sovereign nation*. In fact, my point about leftists being accused of being pro-Putin is that they were accused of that because they were against intervention. Yet the only people I see who are _actually_ pro-Putin are on the right. 

And no, I doubt anyone in mainstream Republican politics is going to come out and say they support Putin, but I come across plenty of American Putin-supporters online, all of whom happen to be conservatives and Trump supporters. I don't think it's a coincidence. It isn't just opposition to arming Ukraine either.


----------



## Eric

I thought these guys were pro-life, Putin is responsible for the rape, murder and torture of hundreds of women and children. He should be hung on live TV IMO. It's. the MAGA faction, I don't believe all Republicans feel the same way.


----------



## AG_PhamD

TBL said:


> I've never claimed that anyone who is anti-war is pro-Putin. I've been pretty firmly against direct intervention from the very beginning and I was one of the people on this forum criticizing the hasty labels of "pro-Putin" (and the absurd jingoistic "let's cancel Russian culture" nonsense). What I do see as being pro-Putin is claiming that the fault of the war is on Ukraine and the U.S., not on Putin *who invaded a sovereign nation*. In fact, my point about leftists being accused of being pro-Putin is that they were accused of that because they were against intervention. Yet the only people I see who are _actually_ pro-Putin are on the right.
> 
> And no, I doubt anyone in mainstream Republican politics is going to come out and say they support Putin, but I come across plenty of American Putin-supporters online, all of whom happen to be conservatives and Trump supporters. I don't think it's a coincidence. It isn't just opposition to arming Ukraine either.




I’m not sure Tucker’s stance has been that the west is at fault for provoking Putin into the war, rather we have no interest in getting involved in the matter- What I understand his point to be is that if Russia was arming Cuba with weapons we might take that as a threat. It’s a bad argument IMO, but I don’t think he’s going as far to say we are blame for starting the war, but we are perpetuating it into a messier problem. 

I think there is truth that at some point Ukraine and Russia could have negotiated a political deal to prevent the escalation of the war into the deaths casualties of tens, soon perhaps hundreds of thousands. But Ukraine is a sovereign nation and can decide who they wish to partner with, how to run their nation, whether or not to defend themselves, etc. I do think it’s true we are trying to bleed Russia as much as possible at the cost of Ukrainian suffering- but that is consequence they overwhelmingly are willing to endure. 

I think his argument is largely just doubling down on the old assumption Ukraine has no chance of winning this war, which has continuously been proven wrong time and time again, each time to a greater extent. 

It’s also rather incoherent given what I presume is his take on our chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Iran nuclear deal, the expansion of China as a global power, etc that the world is a less safe place when authoritarian regimes have unchallenged power.


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> I don’t think he or anyone in the mainstream Republican Party, including Tucker Carlson, think Putin is somehow the good guy here and Zelenskyy is part of some Eldens of Zion conspiracy.




But many Rs see Ukraine as the bad guys, for failing to properly tar Hunter Biden, thus depriving America of four more years of Individual-ONE (because a R is _one of us'ns and therefore preferable to any D in the WH_. They are asqared of the White-wing and wish to mollify them lest they break out their guns. Really, if the R party plays host to the stupid and the insane and fails to try to rein them in, anyone who continues to be a R cannot escape being soiled by that connection.



Eric said:


> I thought these guys were pro-life, Putin is responsible for the rape, murder and torture of hundreds of women and children.




Well, women and children are not fetuses.


----------



## Roller

13 dead and 21 wounded in Russia school shooting
					

A gunman killed 13 people, including seven children, and wounded 21 other people in a school in central Russia on Monday, authorities said.




					www.npr.org
				




According to the article, the gunman was wearing a shirt with "Nazi symbols." Watch Putin et al spin this as being perpetrated by a Ukrainian Nazi to further justify their invasion.


----------



## Colstan

Yoused said:


> But many Rs see Ukraine as the bad guys, for failing to properly tar Hunter Biden, thus depriving America of four more years of Individual-ONE (because a R is _one of us'ns and therefore preferable to any D in the WH_. They are asqared of the White-wing and wish to mollify them lest they break out their guns. Really, if the R party plays host to the stupid and the insane and fails to try to rein them in, anyone who continues to be a R cannot escape being soiled by that connection.



I rarely discuss my personal politics here, and mainly stick to factual news. I think it might be a bit useful to see where @AG_PhamD and I are coming from, simply for perspective. Both us of are more or less in the middle, holding both conservative and liberal viewpoints. Most of the folks here are left-leaning, which I am not criticizing, just pointing out. What I think @AG_PhamD is getting at is the sunk cost fallacy on the part of many on the right. They committed to the notion that supplying weapons to Ukraine was bad policy at a time when it was questionable whether it was wise to do so. That wasn't an extreme position at the time, a notion which I had considered, but have now rejected. They haven't changed their position, but that's not something that only the right does, every human on the planet finds ways to justify hardened beliefs. So, I'm not going to tar and feather them over it, even though I strongly disagree with it. I don't have to, because everyone else here except me and @AG_PhamD will do it anyway.

I posted a link in this thread to Daily Kos about an article written by Mark Summer, because he did an excellent job at explaining the situation on the ground in Ukraine, without resorting to emotional anecdotes or social media rumors. However, I would have no qualms about posting such news if it came from MSNBC, Fox News, the New York Times, or the Washington Times, as long as the reporting is factual. All of those organizations have opinion sections, which I honestly ignore, but they also have hard news reporters, which I value. I think it's best to cast a wide net when looking for information, and the more corroborating sources, the better.

I don't expect what I have just said to be well-received. I'm not a heavily partisan person, I just don't have the energy for it, which is why I stick to less controversial subjects. The UKR/RU conflict is new and interesting (if tragic), and there aren't many Kremlin boot lickers around here, while other subjects in the news and politics section feature less discussion, and more hardened opinion. These are my thoughts on the matter, take it for what it is.


----------



## Alli

lizkat said:


> How terrible for these Russian conscripts and their families. The instinct is to suggest that they surrender to the nearest Ukrainian when they set foot over the border, but one of the replies in that thread said that Putin has increased the penalty for voluntary surrender to 10 years in prison. The Daily Beast mentioned that in a piece on September 20 when describing Putin's legislative measures that preceded what was soon thereafter the mobilization announcement.



Good thing Zelensky has said he will not return Russian soldiers in an exchange if they don’t want to go.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Edd said:


> I searched for some response/reaction from TC about this stuff and found nothing. You’d think Fox or him would have something to say, however disingenuous it’s guaranteed to be.




Their allegiance is first and foremost to the global fascism movement because I guess to them there's nothing more patriotic than worshipping other countries who are crushing "others".


----------



## Deleted member 215

Colstan said:


> I rarely discuss my personal politics here, and mainly stick to factual news. I think it might be a bit useful to see where @AG_PhamD and I are coming from, simply for perspective. Both us of are more or less in the middle, holding both conservative and liberal viewpoints. Most of the folks here are left-leaning, which I am not criticizing, just pointing out. What I think @AG_PhamD is getting at is the sunk cost fallacy on the part of many on the right. They committed to the notion that supplying weapons to Ukraine was bad policy at a time when it was questionable whether it was wise to do so. That wasn't an extreme position at the time, a notion which I had considered, but have now rejected. They haven't changed their position, but that's not something that only the right does, every human on the planet finds ways to justify hardened beliefs. So, I'm not going to tar and feather them over it, even though I strongly disagree with it. I don't have to, because everyone else here except me and @AG_PhamD will do it anyway.
> 
> I posted a link in this thread to Daily Kos about an article written by Mark Summer, because he did an excellent job at explaining the situation on the ground in Ukraine, without resorting to emotional anecdotes or social media rumors. However, I would have no qualms about posting such news if it came from MSNBC, Fox News, the New York Times, or the Washington Times, as long as the reporting is factual. All of those organizations have opinion sections, which I honestly ignore, but they also have hard news reporters, which I value. I think it's best to cast a wide net when looking for information, and the more corroborating sources, the better.
> 
> I don't expect what I have just said to be well-received. I'm not a heavily partisan person, I just don't have the energy for it, which is why I stick to less controversial subjects. The UKR/RU conflict is new and interesting (if tragic), and there aren't many Kremlin boot lickers around here, while other subjects in the news and politics section feature less discussion, and more hardened opinion. These are my thoughts on the matter, take it for what it is.




I don't know if you have read through the early pages of this thread, but in it, leftists like me were absolutely hammered by the moderates and more traditional Democrats in this thread for suggesting that we should be cautious about provoking a nuclear war or that this war somehow could've been prevented by Ukraine vowing to not join NATO (don't even get me started on what happened when I pointed out that Ukrainians were often being racist in their refusal to help African students stuck in their nation). Many leftists regard NATO as an evil institution and while I don't know enough about it to have that opinion, I certainly did not think NATO membership was worth fighting a war over. That said, the more I've read about this conflict, the more I'm convinced this was not just about Ukraine joining NATO but about Russia's desire for Ukraine's natural resources, namely its mostly untapped gas reserves in the East. So to me, this is nothing more than an imperialist power seeking to do what imperial powers always do: undermine sovereignty of nations to maintain control over their resources (as well as in this case, the cultural value that Ukraine represents--there's a mix of imperialism and revanchism here). So my problem is not with these more "cautious" takes since those were my own takes at the beginning of this conflict. I also had that stance because I believed that even with U.S. support Ukraine would still lose. I'm no longer convinced of that, though I'm still broadly "cautious".

But I also spend a lot of time on the internet, outside of forums like these where most users are left-leaning. And on those sites, I see the unapologetic support for Putin from the right (they see Ukraine as Biden's war, they see Zelensky as fundamentally globalist and progressive and admire Putin for standing up to the "deep state") and it's difficult for me to see the likes of Tucker as anything more than a softened mainstream-palatable version of this position. He has to concede "yeah, Putin is bad", but that's not what they're saying on less mainstream platforms. It's certainly not the case that the American right broadly supports Putin, but the more far-right elements do and the more far-right elements are gaining more power so I can't pretend they're just lunatics on the internet. Again, my problem is not with the cautious stance, my problem is with the admiration of Putin and Viktor Orban and the fascist sympathies I see gaining ground in the right as they become increasingly disenchanted with Reaganesque libertarianism. Maybe I'm wrong to see hints of it in Tucker's position (though Tucker's other positions on "replacement theory" and other insidious ideas preclude me from being generous to Tucker), but I think it should be clear by now that I do not think anyone who thought this war was a bad idea was pro-Putin as that was the whole point of my argument in the early pages of this thread. In general I am very anti-interventionist, though less because of "America first" than because I am opposed to American imperialism. But I've become more pro-Ukraine the more I've seen proto-fascists oppose Ukraine. I am still 100% opposed to provoking anything nuclear or sending troops to Ukraine.

I also find a lot of the anti-Ukraine stance disingenuous, like the focus on Ukraine's "Nazi problem" when Russia has huge numbers of Nazis. If the position is that Russia somehow represents an admirable anti-deep state position in the face of global progressivism, why is the Nazi problem in Russia going unaddressed? I'm not denying that there are Nazis in Ukraine, as Nazis always come out of the fray when nationalism comes into play, as it tends to do when a nation is invaded.

And I do wonder how much of it is simply anti-Biden as the same people who are opposed supporting Ukraine in any meaningful way think we were weak to leave Afghanistan. I still run across some Republicans who think Biden was weak for not preventing the war in Ukraine! So what is "weak"? I have no clue.


----------



## Yoused

Upset that his friend with no military experience was being drafted, a 25-y/o Siberian man in BFNowhere took up arms against the army.



			Russia: Man shoots official at draft office amid military call-up
		


*Irkutsk Regional Governor Igor Kobzev said that the draft office head was hospitalized and in critical condition. He added that the detained shooter "will absolutely be punished … I'm ashamed that this is happening at a time when, on the contrary, we should be united. We must not fight with each but against real threats,"*​


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Russia: Man shoots official at draft office amid military call-up
> 
> 
> 
> *Irkutsk Regional Governor Igor Kobzev said that the draft office head was hospitalized and in critical condition. He added that the detained shooter "will absolutely be punished … I'm ashamed that this is happening at a time when, on the contrary, we should be united. We must not fight with each but against real threats,"*​




When you think back to how Putin was presenting this as a several day "special military operation" it really boggles the mind how it has unspooled over all this time, and arriving at this state of affairs where it sounds like they may be able to conscript citizens but can't trust them with a functional gun.

It does grow alarming to realize that Putin can't even find a way to declare "peace with honor" and walk away.   He has still insisted on having those four sham referenda in eastern provinces.    It's like a deadly no man's land there really,  thanks to all the shelling.  So the gain at best looks  to be a disputed wasteland, lost or expended arms,  a lot of dead Russians and their angry families back home...   plus the wrath of families of all the displaced and dead or injured Ukrainians as well. 

What a price to be paying for tenuous accessions:  the UN will not recognize those referenda as freely voted upon.   The votes are occurring at gunpoint, house to house.   



			https://wapo.st/3xTBuHs
		




> Ukrainians who are in contact with friends and relatives in the occupied territories describe groups of men armed with Kalashnikov rifles, accompanied by a person with a portable ballot box, going door-to-door in apartment buildings and houses.
> 
> “The referendum is taking place in the occupied city of Kherson under the muzzle of an automatic rifle,” said Galina Luhova, head of the Kherson City Military Administration, who now lives in Ukrainian-controlled territory. “They ring the doorbell of apartments, knock down the doors of those who don’t open them and demand that people come out and put a mark that they agree to join the Russian Federation.”


----------



## Yoused

Colstan said:


> I rarely discuss my personal politics here, and mainly stick to factual news.




I understand that TA can seem hostile to genuine conservative types who have some measure of flexibility. Most of us, I think, do try to make an effort to avoid alienating/punishing people for disagreeing with us, but it can be difficult. The leadership of the R party has spent four+ decades poisoning the marketplace of ideas, to the point that it has become burdensome to have meaningful exchanges of ideas on subjects relating to the national/world stage. I remember when they strove mightily to turn "Liberal" into a viscious slur, and gained some traction.

Really, I think most of us would like to hear your thoughts on some of these issues, and it is indeed unfortunate that you find the atmosphere so hostile that you feel loath to post freely.


----------



## Eric

Putin grants Russian citizenship to U.S. whistleblower Snowden​








						Putin grants Russian citizenship to U.S. whistleblower Snowden
					

Snowden fled the United States and was given asylum in Russia after leaking secret files in 2013.




					www.reuters.com
				






> Sept 26 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin on Monday granted Russian citizenship to former U.S. intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, nine years after he exposed the scale of secret surveillance operations by the National Security Agency (NSA).
> 
> Snowden, 39, fled the United States and was given asylum in Russia after leaking secret files in 2013 that revealed vast domestic and international surveillance operations carried out by the NSA, where he worked.
> 
> 
> U.S. authorities have for years wanted him returned to the United States to face a criminal trial on espionage charges.
> 
> There was no immediate reaction from Snowden, whose name appeared without Kremlin comment in a Putin decree conferring citizenship on a list of 72 foreign-born people.
> 
> The news prompted some Russians to jokingly ask whether Snowden would be called up for military service, five days after Putin announced Russia's first public mobilization since World War Two to shore up its faltering invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> "Will Snowden be drafted?" Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of the state media outlet RT and a vocal Putin supporter, wrote with dark humour on her Telegram channel.
> 
> Snowden's lawyer, Anatoly Kucherena, told RIA news agency that his client could not be called up because he had not previously served in the Russian army.




Wonder if he'll be able to make a beeline for a border now.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> Wonder if he'll be able to make a beeline for a border now.



… with Ukraine … in a uniform ?


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> … with Ukraine … in a uniform ?



That's how it's looking, free ride is over from the sounds of it.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Read that Russians are calling Ukraine to tell them they will surrender before they've even been drafted. 

Seems to me there are going to be a lot of temporary Russian expats looking to take their country back from Putin.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Gee, the referendum results are starting to pour in and almost 100% of voters support joining Russia.


----------



## Yoused

Drone video shows massive traffic jam as Russians try to flee mobilization order - CNN Video
					

Protests against President Vladimir Putin's partial mobilization order are spreading across Russia, including to the far east, as many young men are fleeing the country.




					www.cnn.com
				




Traffic jam footage starts about a minute in. I found no real need to hear the audio.


----------



## Colstan

While this this ambush is a big win for Ukraine on the battlefield, it's the unmistakable initial sound effects that make the video.


----------



## lizkat

TBL said:


> Gee, the referendum results are starting to pour in and almost 100% of voters support joining Russia.




 Yeah, gee... what a surprise.   _Vote yes or eat ammo from an assault weapon._..

So once "everyone" in those areas has voted to join the Russian Federation, I guess Putin will sign formal annexation papers,  proclaim "mission accomplished," cancel the mobilization, pull troops out and declare to Zelensky something like "We'll be back to reorganize a proper government in the spring,  please clean up the mess meanwhile." ??? 

It's just mind boggling that Putin thinks he can just do this in a 21st century world.   Amazing for him to figure that a sovereign Ukrainian central government has no say over the value of a phony and illegal referendum forced upon its citizens by a maurading neighbor.


----------



## Yoused

Imagine that the US were to (_Canadian Bacon_) attempt to outright conquer, say, Nicaragua, the situation were to become  very difficult, and someone like Hannity were to receive an induction notice. It would probably play a little like

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1574865224108220423/


----------



## Nycturne

And just to be clear, the subtitles aren't an actual translation of what was said, apparently.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

It's now being put out there that Putin could cut Europe's undersea internet and communications lines that would cause a catastrophe.  Nobody seems to know how to protect this from happening or how to counter it, but I'm sure at minimum and in the immediate it will involve more tax cuts for the rich.   That pretty much solves everything.


----------



## NT1440

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> It's now being put out there that Putin could cut Europe's undersea internet and communications lines that would cause a catastrophe.  Nobody seems to know how to protect this from happening or how to counter it, but I'm sure at minimum and in the immediate it will involve more tax cuts for the rich.   That pretty much solves everything.



This is all pretending that we don’t have monitoring capabilities for submarines and the like on critical infrastructure of course.

They want us to believe that they needed trillions after 9/11 for these exact things…and didn’t do it?


----------



## Cmaier

`


NT1440 said:


> This is all pretending that we don’t have monitoring capabilities for submarines and the like on critical infrastructure of course.
> 
> They want us to believe that they needed trillions after 9/11 for these exact things…and didn’t do it?




defending against terrorists is a very different thing from defending against a nation-state.


----------



## lizkat

Meanwhile whatever Putin is or is not doing underwater and offshore,  his ratings are apparently underwater right there at home.    A Washington Post piece has maps and videos of where dozens of protests and attacks on recruitment centers have erupted in large cities as well as more rural areas.

*Russians rebel as Putin drafts more people in battle for Ukraine * WaPo, paywall removed

Attempts at exodus continued, with unusual traffic jams observed in routes towards Mongolia and Kazakhstan.



> Satellite imagery captured by Maxar Technologies on Friday showed a line of vehicles nearly a half-mile long waiting to cross from the Russian republic of Buryatia into Mongolia.
> “There are definitely more vehicles trying to leave,” Wood said. Images from Aug. 15, which he said were typical of traffic volumes before the mobilization, contained only a handful of trucks on the Russian side of the border.






> Satellite imagery taken in the week since Russia’s announcement also indicated extensive delays at several land crossings into Kazakhstan.
> 
> Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev estimated Tuesday some 98,000 Russians had entered the country since Sept. 21. “Most of them are forced to leave because of the current hopeless situation,” he said in a speech. “We must take care of them and ensure their safety.”




Some near neighbors to Russia had earlier already closed their borders to would-be immigrants from Russia, with others lengthening the time for processing visa requests, but some making exceptions for "dissidents."









						Russian Neighbors—Now Including Finland—Close Borders To Those Fleeing Putin’s Draft
					

Russians frantically trying to escape the country to avoid fighting in Ukraine are finding far fewer countries willing to take them than before the war.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Yoused

I was looking at a map of the front east of the Dneiper when a name jumped out at me as odd. A town a ways north of Donetsk named "Нью-Йорк", which is not a typical way to write words in Cyrillic. It is a transliteration of a foreign name. And it all became clear to me, why Vlad is so intent upon gaining control of the Donbas: he wants the prestige of being able to rule over New-York. Sadly for him, Нью-Йорк is across the front lines, just out of reach.


----------



## AG_PhamD

NT1440 said:


> This is all pretending that we don’t have monitoring capabilities for submarines and the like on critical infrastructure of course.
> 
> They want us to believe that they needed trillions after 9/11 for these exact things…and didn’t do it?




Look up operation Ivy Bells. From 1971 to 1981 we tapped an undersea cable off the western coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula used for Soviet military communications. This was done without the Russians knowing anything despite being right under their noses and without the wire being physically cut. And it required regular changing of recording tapes. The operation was only compromised due to an idiot in the pentagon selling secrets to the Soviets for a negligible amount of money. 

It’ll be interesting to see what will happen with this Nordstream pipeline explosion. There’s reasonable explanations for almost everyone involved (Russians, Ukrainians, Americans, the Baltic nations, etc) to have done this. What everyone seems to agree on was it was sabotage. I do find strange how quiet the US has been on this. I’m curious see what the investigations will yield once the gas stops flowing.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

it seems Russia has a nice long history of turning their citizens into forced cannon fodder ending in disaster.  The possible exceptions are the 2 world wars but they also didn’t fight those alone and it was still after a massive body count of thier own people.  Along with that has been a history of way overestimating their power from the world and themselves.  Drunken rebellion and soldiers also seems to be a historical constant. The nuclear threat is probably the only thing keeping them afloat.  I feel bad for the citizens who have only had a short blip in history of not living with this shit.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Furious Russian conscripts beat up commander who called them 'meat for the slaughter'








						Angry Russian squaddies beat up officer who called them 'meat for the slaughter'
					

In yet more evidence of the low morale amongst Russian troops stationed in Ukraine, a video shared on a pro-Ukraine Telegram channel shows a vicious barrack room brawl




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Huntn

Easy peasey, as their military seems to be weakened, people are fleeing the country, protests in their own streets, Russia claims new Ukrainian territory, says they will defend it with Nukes…  
How will the screw turn?









						Russia vows "full protection" to territories annexed from Ukraine
					

The referendums could lead to the annexation of nearly 15% of Ukraine.




					www.axios.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> Easy peasey, as their military seems to be weakened, people are fleeing the country, protests in their own streets, Russia claims new Ukrainian territory, says they will defend it with Nukes…
> How will the screw turn?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia vows "full protection" to territories annexed from Ukraine
> 
> 
> The referendums could lead to the annexation of nearly 15% of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.axios.com




Full protection of the newly annexed territories is on par with the absurdity that the US isn't engaged in the war simply because Americans aren't pulling the triggers on American weapons.  The loopholes available to the rich and powerful are endless while the majority of the populace sits around with their thumb up their ass waiting for the economic or military bomb to drop on their head.  

But I don't entirely blame the general population for not rising up because they know before they can get to the puppet masters they'd first have to break through the defensive line of morons who think foreigners and gays are the real problem.


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Full protection of the newly annexed territories is on par with the absurdity that the US isn't engaged in the war simply because Americans aren't pulling the triggers on American weapons.  The loopholes available to the rich and powerful are endless while the majority of the populace sits around with their thumb up their ass waiting for the economic or military bomb to drop on their head.
> 
> But I don't entirely blame the general population for not rising up because they know before they can get to the puppet masters they'd first have to break through the defensive line of morons who think foreigners and gays are the real problem.



Russias statement changes nothing really, It’s not the first time Russia has threatened “dire consequences”,  Ukraine is still on the offensive, the West is still funneling billions to Ukraine. It is debatable how delusional Putin is, if he fears for his survival, resorting  to using a Nuke in Ukraine, would  make his issues much worse. I’m not saying that this is an impossibility.


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Full protection of the newly annexed territories is on par with the absurdity that the US isn't engaged in the war simply because Americans aren't pulling the triggers




There is another important aspect at play here. The West has told Ukraine to refrain from launching missile attacks (or, for that matter, troop incursions) into Russian territory (presumably to try to inspire Russians to fight to defend Mother Russia). Now Russia (or at least Vlad) asserts that Donbas is Russian territory, which is not really recognized by the rest of the world. But the "annexation" has now blurred the border. Ukraine is now attacking "into Russia", at least according to Russia, so, do they stop at the original border (lines on a map), or should they take more land, form a truly defensible land? Take back Crimea?

Vlad has dug hisself into a deep corner.


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> There is another important aspect at play here. The West has told Ukraine to refrain from launching missile attacks (or, for that matter, troop incursions) into Russian territory (presumably to try to inspire Russians to fight to defend Mother Russia). Now Russia (or at least Vlad) asserts that Donbas is Russian territory, which is not really recognized by the rest of the world. But the "annexation" has now blurred the border. Ukraine is now attacking "into Russia", at least according to Russia, so, do they stop at the original border (lines on a map), or should they take more land, form a truly defensible land? Take back Crimea?
> 
> Vlad has dug hisself into a deep corner.



I’d say getting back to their original borders is reasonable and expected, attacking the edge of Russia to undermine Russia’s efforts in Ukraine is acceptable, taking Russian land would be problematic Imo. Even though they’d have a right to do it Imo, based on what they have experienced at the hands of Russia, it would change the dynamics, and might gain Russian citizens’ support for the Ukraine War.

Crimea, I have no idea what the sentiment is there. would they like to be liberated? I’ll assume there is not a clear cut answer.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Well, Ukrainian troops are in Lyman, which is in annexed territory. Still waiting for those nukes...


----------



## Yoused

How to paint a big target,
*Pope Francis on Sunday made an impassioned appeal to Putin to stop "this spiral of violence and death" in Ukraine and also called on Zelenskiy to be open to any "serious peace proposal". Zelenskiy said on Friday … "We are ready for a dialogue with Russia, but with another president of Russia."*​
IOW: _Putin or Peace, you decide_.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> There is another important aspect at play here. The West has told Ukraine to refrain from launching missile attacks (or, for that matter, troop incursions) into Russian territory (presumably to try to inspire Russians to fight to defend Mother Russia). Now Russia (or at least Vlad) asserts that Donbas is Russian territory, which is not really recognized by the rest of the world. But the "annexation" has now blurred the border. Ukraine is now attacking "into Russia", at least according to Russia, so, do they stop at the original border (lines on a map), or should they take more land, form a truly defensible land? Take back Crimea?
> 
> Vlad has dug hisself into a deep corner.




Exactly, and is he going to consprict these new "Russians" to fight against Ukranians which they themselves were a week ago?  

Reminds me of Saddam's infamous meeting of party members where he accused random members of being traitors and then rewarded the remaining members with the honor of killing them.


----------



## leman

And now Elon joined the clown team… what a loser


----------



## Nycturne

leman said:


> And now Elon joined the clown team… what a loser




This is my surprised face…


----------



## Cmaier

leman said:


> And now Elon joined the clown team… what a loser




Survey:

Elon should buy back my Model S at full purchase price, give me $50k toward the purchase of a competing car, and feed me peeled grapes. 

Yes [.   ]
No  [.   ]

This is going to be the end result, anyway. It’s just a question of how much his reputation will die before then.


----------



## Edd

leman said:


> And now Elon joined the clown team… what a loser



He proposes Ukraine remain neutral. What a fucking joke. He should be punched in the mouth for suggesting it.


----------



## lizkat

Huntn said:


> Easy peasey, as their military seems to be weakened, people are fleeing the country, protests in their own streets, Russia claims new Ukrainian territory, says they will defend it with Nukes…
> How will the screw turn?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia vows "full protection" to territories annexed from Ukraine
> 
> 
> The referendums could lead to the annexation of nearly 15% of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.axios.com




Well there's a new journalistic + service endeavor doing reporting and also trying to help people get sorted out on how to avoid ending up cannon fodder or doing time in Russia for desertion...









						The Russian language news startup Helpdesk offers service journalism for times of war
					

Founder Ilya Krasilshchik doesn't know the average age or gender or location of the people seeking help through Helpdesk's chat — he just knows many are terrified.



					www.niemanlab.org
				






> “We are joint team of Russian and Ukrainian journalists — a unique situation in current circumstances,” points out founder Ilya Krasilshchik.
> 
> Ben Smith, co-founder of Semafor and former media columnist for The New York Times, described Helpdesk as “service journalism for people in a conflict zone” and dubbed the news startup “one of the most interesting media projects to grow out of the Ukraine conflict.”






> In addition to operating the hotline, Helpdesk publishes stories about the war in Ukraine on Telegram and Instagram. The number of people turning to the independent news org for information is staggering. Krasilshchik said the Helpdesk Instagram account is reaching 2.5 million users per month, while its Telegram reaches 3 million per day. (Telegram is one of the few platforms where Russians can access independent news sources and has been the most downloaded app in Russia in recent months.)






> Krasilshchik started what has become Helpdesk soon after the war in Ukraine broke out. (The English version of the outlet was previously called War.evidence.) Krasilshchik is the former publisher of Meduza, one of the leading independent Russian language news outlets and had taken a break from journalism to work for the Russian tech corporation Yandex.
> 
> “I understood that the only thing I can do now is to come back to the media,” Krasilshchik said.
> 
> But, Krasilshchik continued, he also wanted to help people directly.
> 
> “And this is an eternal conflict: you can’t combine journalism and activism,” he said. “Suddenly we came up with an idea: we can launch a 2-in-1 project. First part will be media on social platforms (and we have 15 years of experience in the best Russian media to do it well). And the second part will be the Helpdesk, launched by professional support specialists which I know from my Yandex years. The second part is pure activism. But in such a scheme these two parts help each other.”






> The Helpdesk team sees its journalism — which has included first-person stories about being unwillingly drafted and graphic evidence of torture in Russian-occupied cities — as a funnel for financial support to the Helpdesk.
> 
> “Support gives us the ability to understand what is really happening with Russians and Ukrainians, which is really important because almost no Russian journalists are still in the country,” Krasilshchik said.
> 
> Fundraising has been difficult because Visa and Mastercard have suspended operations in Russia. The organization can receive money from the West, however, and has raised some funds through the Maryland-based VC firm North Base Media. It’s raised $1.6 million so far, and Krasilshchik expects its annual budget will run about $3 million.


----------



## leman

Edd said:


> He proposes Ukraine remain neutral. What a fucking joke. He should be punched in the mouth for suggesting it.




He also proposes that a new “referendum” is held… after thousands of people have been murdered and millions have been displaced. It’s literally a new Munich agreement, which worked so well in the past. And this clown even dares to speak about “lessons in history”.

There was an internationally recognized referendum in 1991 where every single region, Crimea included, has voted to be a part of an independent Ukraine. Russia has recognized this vote and pledged in 1994 to respect and protect Ukrainian border as it was. That’s all one needs to know.


----------



## Yoused

The Russian army is "missing" 1.5 million uniforms.

("missing" almost certainly means they were marked purchased, manufactured and delivered on some ledgers but do not exist and never did exist except for about a thousand that turned up in several random army surplus stores around the world)


----------



## Yoused

There was a kerfuffle. Russian army regulars attempted to relieve fresh conscripts of personal items, including *phones*. Surprisingly, the new guys were not onboard with this idea and set upon the regulars, who had to resort to locking themselves in a room to evade the thrashing.


----------



## Macky-Mac

TBL said:


> Well, Ukrainian troops are in Lyman, which is in annexed territory. Still waiting for those nukes...




Perhaps he's still hung over and moving slowly after the big all weekend long annexation party....

In the meantime, things aren't going well for Russia and while it's satisfying to see the Ukrainians have some successes, doesn't it seem likely that the worse things go for Russia, the more likely it becomes that Putin will actually end up doing something with all those nukes that he has?


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> Perhaps he's still hung over and moving slowly after the big all weekend long annexation party....
> 
> In the meantime, things aren't going well for Russia and while it's satisfying to see the Ukrainians have some successes, doesn't it seem likely that the worse things go for Russia, the more likely it becomes that Putin will actually end up doing something with all those nukes that he has?




Hope not.  Given some recent issues with trying to fuel a certain rocket, the USA might not be able to ship a crew to the moon again to let the dust settle on a mutually assured destruction scenario.  And even if we could...  there's nothing up there to sustain human life.

Shame to leave the last barrol of petrol in the ground, right?  Hope Putin thinks like that!

Honestly one would wish scientists of the 1940s had had the spine to say _F this we know how to split the atom but it would be such a spoiler to write the equation for the end of human history on the blackboard so soon.   Let's have a coffee or two first..._

We know what Einstein said, right?

*"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought,*​* but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."*​
Even that could be an unlikely scenario today,  if a country with nuclear warfare options decides to call another "nukes club" member's possible bluff.  The planet could end up uninhabitable way before climate change gets to try for the last word.

Such a dangerous option that it's hard for sane people to wrap their minds around the possibility that someone would chose it.  That leaves the insane,  and accidents, and "accidents."


----------



## Macky-Mac

lizkat said:


> Hope not....




Yes, I hope not too.

I'm more inclined to think it would be one of the "low yield" battlefield nukes used in Ukraine and not something directed at a NATO country.......and who knows, maybe the Russian military will decide they don't feel like taking the punishment for Putin's continuing errors, maybe they'll step in and change the situation.

Meanwhile, things continue to go in Ukraine's favor. Today's briefing from The Institute for the Study of War starts;



> Ukrainian forces continued to make substantial gains around Lyman and in Kherson Oblast in the last 48 hours. Ukrainian and Russian sources reported that Ukrainian troops made significant breakthroughs in northern Kherson Oblast between October 2 and 3. Geolocated footage corroborates Russian claims that Ukrainian troops are continuing to push east of Lyman and may have broken through the Luhansk Oblast border in the direction of Kreminna....


----------



## Citysnaps

On tonight's news... Zelensky is applying for accelerated ascension into NATO.  That poses an interesting dynamic in getting all 30 members to approve with Putin claiming parts of Ukraine now being Russian territory.

EDIT:  Perhaps that possibility drove Putin's move to claim that area as Russian territory.


----------



## Yoused

Citysnaps said:


> Perhaps that possibility drove Putin's move to claim that area as Russian territory.




No, NATO membership hinges in part on a member having a lack of disputed territory: Crimea has effectively disqualified Ukraine.


(And, has anyone noticed that it is now The Ukraine?)


----------



## Deleted member 215

Yep. "The Ukraine" was terminology used when Ukraine was not a sovereign nation and was part of the Soviet Union. Apparently also Lebanon was called "the Lebanon" when it was a colony of France. Putting "the" in front of the name implies it's a territory rather than a country.

Being born post-Cold War, I didn't grow up with "the Ukraine", but I guess it was pretty widespread for a long time.


----------



## AG_PhamD

leman said:


> And now Elon joined the clown team… what a loser




I’ve never been much of a Musk fan, even before it became popular.

His ideas might have worked 6 months ago, but many of his ideas are just infeasible at this point such as holding another referendum in an area that’s ever changing, with a population most of whom have fled or killed or relocated to Siberia or whatever. Handing over Crimea is however a likely outcome of this at some point. If there was ever a chance for nuclear weapons, Crimea would be it. Russia has also built up defenses for years and it will be the last territory they will give up. Taking it back will likely incur massive losses and serious consequences.

Calling Musk a Putin puppet is ridiculous though considering the amount of aid he has personally given Ukraine. I think it’s important to consider any call for peace as anti-Ukrainian. Ukraine has the right to determine when and where they decide to stop fighting, but the west also has the right when to stop supplying arms. But at the end of the day peace is the reasonable outcome everyone should want. It’s understandable Zelensky wants to conquer all territory back, but at what cost?


----------



## Edd

Yoused said:


> No, NATO membership hinges in part on a member having a lack of disputed territory: Crimea has effectively disqualified Ukraine.
> 
> 
> (And, has anyone noticed that it is now The Ukraine?)



When the war started, there was frequent grammar correction on social media when ever anyone used “The”. It became pretty difficult to get away with using it.


----------



## leman

AG_PhamD said:


> Calling Musk a Putin puppet is ridiculous though considering the amount of aid he has personally given Ukraine.




He’s not a Putin puppet, he’s just an idiot who read two blog posts and now believes he understands the intricate history of the region. 



AG_PhamD said:


> I think it’s important to consider any call for peace as anti-Ukrainian.




Thank you for saying this. The one-sided nature of this aggression makes any call for a “compromise“ hypocrisy at best and supporting the aggressor at worst. 



AG_PhamD said:


> Ukraine has the right to determine when and where they decide to stop fighting, but the west also has the right when to stop supplying arms.




String agree to both. 



AG_PhamD said:


> But at the end of the day peace is the reasonable outcome everyone should want. It’s understandable Zelensky wants to conquer all territory back, but at what cost?




That’s why Zelenskyy has been repeatedly pointing out that decoupaging of Crimea using military means is less likely. Again, Ukraine is not Russia. They value lives and dignity. They will not start a meaningless costly campaign. But the thing is, you never know. The level of incompetence Russia has showed until now makes me hope that there might be a path into Crimea.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

So it seems not to be outdone by Hitler’s claim of a 1,000 year reich that fell short of about 988 years, a good chunk of Putin’s new “forever” territories are back in Ukrainian hands in under a week. I wouldn’t be surprised if they end up accidentally nuking themselves at some point. In fact I find it suspect that it's mostly our military-industrial complex that is touting what an impressive adversary Russia is. It certainly helps them increase their budget. Historically it seems their biggest military asset is the ability to throw an endless line of bodies at it. I don’t think that’s where we are anymore but clearly that’s the tactic they are relying on and it ain’t going great.


----------



## Huntn

Citysnaps said:


> On tonight's news... Zelensky is applying for accelerated ascension into NATO.  That poses an interesting dynamic in getting all 30 members to approve with Putin claiming parts of Ukraine now being Russian territory.
> 
> EDIT:  Perhaps that possibility drove Putin's move to claim that area as Russian territory.



He’s like Shit Head Drumph, if he says it, it’s so, as he thinks that is all it takes, but as reported Ukraine troops are occupying one of those areas, and assaulting others.


----------



## Yoused

Saw this account elsewhere


Spoiler: retreating










and it bothered me. I do not sympathize with what the person writing it wants to do, but it paints a picture that is disturbing. This is a person, after all.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> Saw this account elsewhere
> 
> 
> Spoiler: retreating
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it bothered me. I do not sympathize with what the person writing it wants to do, but it paints a picture that is disturbing. This is a person, after all.




I don’t think it’s right in the slightest to have sympathy as a political entity. I for one do have sympathy for some (perhaps many) of these Russian soldiers. A lot of them are 17, 18, 19 years old and had little serious understanding of what they were getting into in terms of actually fighting a war. There are then those who signed up expecting to be handling boxes but then find themselves on the front lines firing guns. Then you also have some, many of whom are probably dead at this point, who didn’t even know they were invading a country until they were doing so. Similarly there were those lead to believe they were fighting for a legitimate cause and would be warmly welcomed- in the context of coming from a poor community and being offered a once in a lifetime salary. If they abandon their post they’ll likely suffer severe punishment- in fact at this point if they even retreat without permission they will be shot on the spot (much like WWII) or jailed for IIRC 10-15 years. So they’re effectively imprisoned into war and have little feasible alternatives that are positive. And in a sense they are having to fight for their very survival- a very different existential crisis Putin speaks of. Oh yeah, I forgot now to mention now you have people being drafted with zero desire to get involved. 

In short, I feel bad for those on the Russian side who do not want to be there but really have no other option other than death or years imprisonment and separation from their families for whom they are providing. 

On a weird moral sense, I find it quite troublesome you have these Russian guys going to war (willingly or not) who are under the impression they’re in the #2 military in the world- only to arrive and be given old or defective equipment- or often none at all. Plus training is either laughably minimal or nonexistent. It’s like they’re not even being given a fair opportunity. And I can only imagine the feeling that sinks in once they get thrown on the front line with no armor and an unreliable weapon with 2 weeks of training- the feeling that they are clearly just being used as cannon fodder and that your government has zero regard for your life. And you realize you have zero interest in being part of this silly war based on BS pretext.  

That said, there are plenty of Russian soldiers who deserve none- such as those who commit war crimes, especially the killing of civilians. 

Again, to be clear, I have no sympathy for what Russia has done to Ukraine. But I do have some sympathy and humanity for the young Russian soldiers who have become wrapped up with this- particularly those who had no option to really choose. While it’s technically true everyone always has a choice, I think the fact they are in such a position deserves sympathy in itself- because the alternatives would also be life destroying for themselves and potentially their families. That said, Ukraine is clearly the victim here and their suffering deserves the attention.


----------



## lizkat

To quote a piece of one of my own previous posts...  I may not have been that far off.   Still it could be a long slog to ending the war since Ukraine will not negotiate while Putin's pretense of annexation persists on paper but is not proving defensible on the ground.



lizkat said:


> So once "everyone" in those areas has voted to join the Russian Federation, I guess Putin will sign formal annexation papers, proclaim "mission accomplished," cancel the mobilization, pull troops out and declare to Zelensky something like "We'll be back to reorganize a proper government in the spring, please clean up the mess meanwhile."




 I mean Putin  hasn't cancelled the mobilization yet nor actually said "we'll be back in the spring, please clean up the mess meanwhile"..  but the Guardian is reporting that Putin has acknowledged losses in some "annexed" provinces and "assumes" things will "stabilize"...









						Putin appears to admit severe Russian losses in Ukraine
					

Ukrainian army making ‘fast and powerful progress’ in south, says Volodymyr Zelenskiy




					www.theguardian.com
				






> The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has appeared to concede the severity of the Kremlin’s recent military reversals in Ukraine, insisting Russia would “stabilise” the situation in four Ukrainian regions it illegally claimed as its own territory last week.
> 
> Russia has suffered significant losses in two of the four regions since Friday, when Putin signed treaties to incorporate them into Russia by force, with Russian officials saying their forces were “regrouping”.
> 
> “We are working on the assumption that the situation in the new territories will stabilise,” Putin told Russian teachers during a televised video call.






> Phillips O’Brien, a professor of strategic studies at St Andrews University, added that Ukraine’s recent progress had been a product of a process, not a turning point.
> 
> “For months now, Russia has been getting weaker, it has been bleeding its army on the field, it’s been losing a huge amount of equipment. On the other hand, the Ukrainians have been getting stronger; they have better-trained forces and better military equipment.”
> 
> He added: “This hasn’t happened overnight, this has been the way the war has been trending but now we can say it reached the tipping point in September.”






> In the short term there is nothing Russia can do because they waited too long to mobilise, O’Brien said.
> 
> “It’s more of a question of, can they just hold on and hope that they can get a trained and re-equipped force back in the spring, but even then there’s a question about whether they can do that,” said O’Brien. He said Russia would need to produce more equipment and properly train troops but its system of mobilisation appeared “chaotic”.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I’m wondering if Putin can take advantage of the proxy blaming to back out. “None of it is Putin’s fault.  He is perfect.  It’s everybody under him!” *wink* Dictators really love to surround themselves by the best/worst people.  He can blame and punish them instead of blowing up the planet.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I’m wondering if Putin can take advantage of the proxy blaming to back out. “None of it is Putin’s fault.  He is perfect.  It’s everybody under him!” *wink* Dictators really love to surround themselves by the best/worst people.  He can blame and punish them instead of blowing up the planet.




Hell just give him 500 bucks and point him to Steam and let him blow stuff up 24/7 in virtual reality.

Someone should have given Putin a nice board game version of Risk while he was still in the KGB in East Germany.  I mean a guy who just wants to win can get hooked on any game as long as he sees himself winning. Dictators are all narcissists and do figure themselves winners.

Maybe he'd have got really engrossed in world domination right there on his kitchen table in Dresden.  He might never have returned to shattered realities of the old USSR, nor attempted to restore an empire from nations meanwhile saying "uh... no thanks, been there, done that."


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

lizkat said:


> Hell just give him 500 bucks and point him to Steam and let him blow stuff up 24/7 in virtual reality.
> 
> Someone should have given Putin a nice board game version of Risk while he was still in the KGB in East Germany.  I mean a guy who just wants to win can get hooked on any game as long as he sees himself winning. Dictators are all narcissists and do figure themselves winners.
> 
> Maybe he'd have got really engrossed in world domination right there on his kitchen table in Dresden.  He might never have returned to shattered realities of the old USSR, nor attempted to restore an empire from nations meanwhile saying "uh... no thanks, been there, done that."




Speaking of best people, the US has the really nasty habit of backing the best people in a region, largely being responsible for their ungodly wealth and unquestioned violent rule over their people, who eventually get bored and try to crush or take over their neighbors and then call us the assholes because we say mean things. At this point I see no downside to turning Saudi Arabia into an Afghanistan style cat litter box.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Speaking of best people, the US has the really nasty habit of backing the best people in a region, largely being responsible for their ungodly wealth and unquestioned violent rule over their people, who eventually get bored and try to crush or take over their neighbors and then call us the assholes because we say mean things. At this point I see no downside to turning Saudi Arabia into an Afghanistan style cat litter box.




The other side of "Saudi oil" though is weapons purchases from the USA.  So it's hardly ever just about the oil when talk turns to relationships between the two countries.    Every time we are tempted to holler _take yer oil and stick it_ (for whatever reason),  a raft of voices from K street rise up anew to lobby hard for the defense sector.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Putin's 70th birthday today.......I wonder if his birthday wish is to avoid having to scapegoat some of his closest supporters for the failures of the special operation.


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> Putin's 70th birthday today.......I wonder if his birthday wish is to avoid having to scapegoat some of his closest supporters for the failures of the special operation.




Let's hope someone gave him one of these as a hint.

​


----------



## Huntn

*Russian Soldiers Calling Ukraine Surrender Hotline By The Thousands:*


			Russian soldiers calling Ukrainian surrender hotline by the thousands - GUR
		




lizkat said:


> Let's hope someone gave him one of these as a hint.
> 
> View attachment 18262​



My mug version:  
_Don’t worry about getting older. You still get to do stupid, immoral, murderous things, only slower. _


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Since things work a bit differently in Russia, I think it's time for somebody to put the bullet of no confidence in his head.  Kind of the only choice left when you remove or rig voting somebody out of office.  Maybe they can give him an honorable death by letting him set out to sea on his yacht and then dropping a tactical nuke on it.  If I knew the writing was on the wall for me I'd think that's a pretty badass and near-painless way to go.


----------



## Yoused

Macky-Mac said:


> Putin's 70th birthday today....



Vlad's White Russia pal Puppetdent Luchansky gave him


Spoiler: a large toy






BBC link​


for his birthday.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Yoused said:


> Vlad's White Russia pal Puppetdent Luchansky gave him
> 
> 
> Spoiler: a large toy
> 
> 
> 
> ​




"puppetdent"....!

now there's a title to aspire to!


----------



## leman

Yoused said:


> Saw this account elsewhere
> and it bothered me. I do not sympathize with what the person writing it wants to do, but it paints a picture that is disturbing. This is a person, after all.




I fully understand how you feel. The individual tragedy caused by this idiotic war is staggering. Unfortunately, the Ukrainians cannot allow themselves leniency. If they ease up or let the Russians retreat they will come back and bring more misery. The unfortunate reality of the situation is that if you stop to take pity of the enemy you will likely die and your close ones will be effectively enslaved. What’s doubly tragic that many of the individual enemy soldiers are merely caught in the situation. Which of course doesn’t mean that they are innocent or blameless.

Anyhow, Russian soldiers always have the option to surrender.

By the way, it’s not like the situation inside Russia itself is much better. Have you seen this video of the conscripts locked inside the Covid-infected train, without any care or support? Or Russian boys sleeping in the open fields because the army has no accommodation or equipment for them? This is so absurd. But then again, Russian history is a history of exploitation, corruption and dehumanization. It’s not in the Russian culture to care about the population. 



Yoused said:


> Vlad's White Russia pal Puppetdent Luchansky gave him a large toy
> for his birthday.




I hope he can use it to clear up the present Ukrainians gave him for his birthday


----------



## Yoused

leman said:


> I hope he can use it to clear up the present Ukrainians gave him for his birthday



Interesting thing about that is that it is generally thought to have been a truck bomb. Which was traveling _westward_. Meaning it was going _from Russia_, into Crimea. Clearly the Ukrainians have operatives working in Krasnodar Oblast.


----------



## leman

Yoused said:


> Interesting thing about that is that it is generally thought to have been a truck bomb. Which was traveling _westward_. Meaning it was going _from Russia_, into Crimea. Clearly the Ukrainians have operatives working in Krasnodar Oblast.




I very much doubt it was the truck. The explosion seem to come from below the bridge. Here is a frame by frame breakdown:









						War Zone ✙ Мобилизация
					

?




					t.me


----------



## Alli

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1578645820093890560/

I trust Malcolm Nance.


----------



## Yoused

Intelligence announces numerous arrests of military personnel in Moscow
					

KATERYNA TYSHCHENKO - SATURDAY, 8 OCTOBER 2022, 17:47 According to Ukrainian Intelligence, numerous arrests of servicemen have started in Moscow, with traffic in the city centre blocked, although Russian media are failing to report this.




					www.yahoo.com
				




Yes, it did look promising at first, but, you know _who else_ fooled himself into thinking that he could win on the Russian Front?


----------



## fooferdoggie

but did the gift certificate include a manure spreader? 
Leader of Belarus gifts Putin a tractor for 70th birthday​


----------



## lizkat

fooferdoggie said:


> but did the gift certificate include a manure spreader?
> Leader of Belarus gifts Putin a tractor for 70th birthday​




Probably a hint he wouldn't mind if Vlad quit abusing the 'hospitality' of Belarus and just hitched up that tractor to a wagon full of any stuff Putin's army still has parked there and hauled it back home.


----------



## Cmaier

fooferdoggie said:


> but did the gift certificate include a manure spreader?
> Leader of Belarus gifts Putin a tractor for 70th birthday​




Wonder if it’s one of those John Deere’s that can be remotely disabled.


----------



## Yoused

With a breath-taking amputation of self-awareness, Vlad accuses Ukraine of terrorism.

_Three people died! It was my birthday, FFS! Have you no mercy?_


----------



## Yoused

because, _freedom!_

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1579098470350479362/

(or something)


----------



## sgtaylor5

And now Russia has dropped and is still dropping cruise missles on Ukrainian energy production facilities and dense civilian concentrations in retaliation for the Kerch Strait Bridge.


----------



## sgtaylor5

Yoused said:


> because, _freedom!_
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1579098470350479362/
> 
> (or something)



That tweet, from the Libertarian Party, was an unthinking callous remark divorced from reality. and to think I once supported them. I was wrong.


----------



## Eric

sgtaylor5 said:


> That tweet, from the Libertarian Party, was an unthinking callous remark divorced from reality. and to think I once supported them. I was wrong.



I mean if Ukraine could just sit back and let Russia continue to target and murder all their civilians that would be just great. But no, they've had to go and upset the likes of Rand Paul and the Libertarians by launching a counter-offensive.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Even if some kind of settlement was reached today where Putin got to keep all the annexed territories, or even all of Ukraine for that matter, I don’t see how this is going to end well for Putin with all the human and economic carnage caused, and for what exactly? I can’t imagine anybody under the age of 60 getting all pumped about the rebuilding of the USSR when they look at the actual cost. There are countless dead soldiers with family and friends and I can’t imagine the ones that do return are going to be doing so with tales of glory and a righteous war.

It’s no small irony that Putin blames the west for everything now when it’s the influence of the west that is the exact reason for his current wealth and power.


----------



## Yoused

U.S. states that wish to join Russia will be considered, says Duma member
					

A legal expert told Newsweek that state secession is unconstitutional in the U.S.




					www.newsweek.com
				




I imagine there _are_ states that – @Alli might have to move …


----------



## fooferdoggie

Yoused said:


> U.S. states that wish to join Russia will be considered, says Duma member
> 
> 
> A legal expert told Newsweek that state secession is unconstitutional in the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine there _are_ states that – @Alli might have to move …



man Texas just emailed.


----------



## Cmaier

Elon Musk Spoke to Putin Before Tweeting Ukraine Peace Plan: Report
					

The world’s richest man spoke directly with Vladimir Putin, Eurasia Group’s Ian Bremmer reported. Musk denied the report in a tweet.




					www.vice.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Everybody make sure you "strongly condemn" whatever it is Putin does today.  Putin, as most world leaders, fears a strong condemnation more than anything else.  It's the Yelp review of elites.  Throw in a smattering of "war crime".  A few more and I'm sure he'll reverse course.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Everybody make sure you "strongly condemn" whatever it is Putin does today.  Putin, as most world leaders, fears a strong condemnation more than anything else.  It's the Yelp review of elites.  Throw in a smattering of "war crime".  A few more and I'm sure he'll reverse course.




Yeah Putin is in transmit only mode by now for sure.  I hope there are a few generals or aides who can still catch his attention and divert him from thinking he has only destructive options left.

All this human tragedy...  fed by a petulant guy who was running a country with a GDP lower than that of the US state of Florida,  when he first announced a "special military operation" into Ukraine.

Too bad The Don didn't try harder to buy Greenland, he could have given it to Vladimir with the promise that just the annual fish and crustacean harvest might help propel the Russian Federation into competitiveness with New York State or at least Illinois.

Starting to wonder how long it could take Russia to climb out of the hole Putin made worse.  The problem is that a country with its back to the wall but also in possession of nuclear arms is perhaps more dangerous than a well functioning superpower.  Also starting to wonder how many of the latter are actually left on the planet.

So far I am relieved that tfg is not still in the WH, and grateful that the current administration values diverse input, expertise, political negotiations here and offshore...  and has started to emphasize that it expects agencies to function in service to the people, not to dismantle ability to do so.   I wonder though how much lasting damage to effective governance has occurred that we are not even aware of.


----------



## Yoused

lizkat said:


> … more dangerous than a well functioning superpower. Also starting to wonder how many of the latter are actually left on the planet.




If there ever were (in the bigger picture). But I did see a link posted on another site (by an apparent Vladapologist) that suggested US fancy weapon stocks such as can be shipped to Ukraine are dwindling. Russia may be burning through their inventory, but we may also. Imagine two hostile superpowers with little left but apocalypsowers.


----------



## Citysnaps

Yoused said:


> If there ever were (in the bigger picture). But I did see a link posted on another site (by an apparent Vladapologist) that suggested US fancy weapon stocks such as can be shipped to Ukraine are dwindling. Russia may be burning through their inventory, but we may also. Imagine two hostile superpowers with little left but apocalypsowers.




The good news is that the US is not alone in supplying weapons to Ukraine.  Many European countries, along with Australia and Canada, have been as well.  I suspect other European countries such as the UK and Poland will be stepping up further.

After the recent missile attacks, Germany announced they'll be sending four of its IRIS air defense systems to Ukraine.   I wouldn't be surprised if the US soon starts supplying Patriot and Avenger air defense systems to counter Russian missile attacks.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> If there ever were (in the bigger picture). But I did see a link posted on another site (by an apparent Vladapologist) that suggested US fancy weapon stocks such as can be shipped to Ukraine are dwindling. Russia may be burning through their inventory, but we may also. Imagine two hostile superpowers with little left but apocalypsowers.




Also imagine the money being spent on both sides that would better serve improving the conditions in their country for their citizens.  Instead, those making these decisions suffer zero loss to their wealth or lifestyle.  It's only when the welfare of their citizens comes into question that they suddenly start looking at how that could negatively impact their bank account.


----------



## Huntn

Insightful as usual from Atlantic Magazine









						Russia Just Showed Why It’s Floundering in Ukraine
					

Indiscriminate violence reveals Putin’s powerlessness to overcome Ukrainian resistance.




					www.theatlantic.com
				




_On Saturday, Ukraine showed why it is winning its war against Russia. On Monday, Russia showed why it is losing. Those two days revealed sharp contrasts between the two militaries. One is clever, well prepared, willing to undertake complex operations, and focused on maximally damaging its enemy’s ability to fight. The other is prone to bursts of rage and is open to committing any crime possible, but its actions are ultimately self-defeating._


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Huntn said:


> Insightful as usual from Atlantic Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia Just Showed Why It’s Floundering in Ukraine
> 
> 
> Indiscriminate violence reveals Putin’s powerlessness to overcome Ukrainian resistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _On Saturday, Ukraine showed why it is winning its war against Russia. On Monday, Russia showed why it is losing. Those two days revealed sharp contrasts between the two militaries. One is clever, well prepared, willing to undertake complex operations, and focused on maximally damaging its enemy’s ability to fight. The other is prone to bursts of rage and is open to committing any crime possible, but its actions are ultimately self-defeating._




Like I said in another post, Russia seems to have a nice long history of having the main military tactic of throwing as many bodies as possible at a situation that statistically hasn’t ended in their favor while the world has consistently overestimated their ability. It’s like they need this mythical evenly matched bad guy.

To be fair it’s not like the US has definitively won a lot of wars either. Blew up a lot of shit and killed a massive amount of people, sure. But positively changed or stabilized a region for the long term, or even medium term? Fuck no. Same thing can be said about our CIA meddling. Most of their efforts fail and the ones that succeed cause a huge blowback that is worse than whatever it was they were trying to change or control.

I think the main difference between Russia’s failed wars and the US failed wars, is the restraint of escalating things further. The US stops well short of our total war capabilities. Russia takes it right up to the porch of their maximum capabilities. Pitted directly against each other the US maximum, short of nukes, would go well beyond where Russia’s ended.


----------



## Cmaier

Shooting down a cruise missile with a javelin.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1579433935075147777/


Also: russia tried to hack my synology the other day.  Didn’t go well for them


----------



## Yoused

The bridge fiasco has caused backups at the ferry terminal

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1580319320458276864/

Curiously, the tweet says the backup is at the _Kerch_ ferry terminal – Kerch is in Crimea, so those would have to be trucks waiting to depart from Crimea, not carrying stuff _to_ the Russ army. (Not to mention, that does not look to me like the nomal Kerch terminal, which is in the city.)


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Biden suggested Putin could just redraw from the region and tell the Russian people he accomplished whatever it was he set out to accomplish.  I'm curious to find out what he or Putin thinks the accomplishment is that will satisfy the friends and family of the mountains of dead on both sides.


----------



## lizkat

Sickening: Russia resorts to killing a cultural leader who was resisting occupation of Ukraine.









						Russian troops kill Ukrainian musician for refusing role in Kherson concert
					

International condemnation swift after conductor Yuriy Kerpatenko shot dead in his home




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> Sickening: Russia resorts to killing a cultural leader who was resisting occupation of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian troops kill Ukrainian musician for refusing role in Kherson concert
> 
> 
> International condemnation swift after conductor Yuriy Kerpatenko shot dead in his home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



Earlier today, I read with dawning horror about the appalling murder of Yuriy Kerpatenko; for these people, - and I used to teach Russian and Soviet history and politics - slaughtering and murdering (dissenting and courageous) artists - and taking a depraved pleasure in this - are simply a painful but predictable page from their sanguinary, sometimes disgusting, and occasionally horribly blood-soaked history.  Even their victories come drenched in blood (usually, though not always, of their own people).

They treat those whom they rule atrociously badly, not just because they view them with contempt, but also because they have never learned to treat themselves well, when ruling themselves.

And they have never learned the concept of ruling with the consent of the governed, or with the respect of the governed (a respect and consent which are conferred through genuine elections and sustained by decent and ethical governance, where the rulers respect themselves and those whom they govern, neither of which are - or ever have been - the case in Russia).

Above all, they choose not to learn from their own awful history, instead preferring nihilistic destruction and savage slaughter.  Some legacy.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> Sickening: Russia resorts to killing a cultural leader who was resisting occupation of Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian troops kill Ukrainian musician for refusing role in Kherson concert
> 
> 
> International condemnation swift after conductor Yuriy Kerpatenko shot dead in his home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



This mob’s modus operandi, eliminate resistance, instill fear. I don’t know if Orange Cheeto ever had a contract on someone, but I can easily imagine with his love of “strong murderous” leaders falling into this pattern if he ever finds the needed support.


----------



## lizkat

Huntn said:


> This mob’s modus operandi, eliminate resistance, instill fear. I don’t know if Orange Cheeto ever had a contract on someone, but I can easily imagine with his love of “strong murderous” leaders falling into this pattern if he ever finds the needed support.




Well Trump has long been modeling his playbook on the same tack most fascists take, so there's no reason to expect him to be different if he regained political office.

I mean it's not like Ukraine expects Putin to change his stripes at this point.  He's old school USSR and they know it.  So what we see of these guys is what there is and who they are...  and as far as what just happened in Ukraine,  with the assassination of that conductor who would not help Putin make it look like Kherson welcomed the "annexation",   all that did was stiffen Ukraine's resolve to repel the occupiers. 

Will that change how Putin operates?  No.  Who knows how the conflict in Ukraine will end. 

This stupid move though is another straw in the pile that will finally tell Russians they need a different leader.   Russians have an unfortunately long history of tolerance for abuse from their own government.  Still, they're all aware now that the so-called "special military operation" has gone horribly wrong.  Coffins coming home and conscription were not in that recipe floated by Putin back in late winter.   Neither was the blatant murder of a Ukrainian orchestra conductor.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> Well Trump has long been modeling his playbook on the same tack most fascists take, so there's no reason to expect him to be different if he regained political office.
> 
> I mean it's not like Ukraine expects Putin to change his stripes at this point.  He's old school USSR and they know it.  So what we see of these guys is what there is and who they are...  and as far as what just happened in Ukraine,  with the assassination of that conductor who would not help Putin make it look like Kherson welcomed the "annexation",   all that did was stiffen Ukraine's resolve to repel the occupiers.
> 
> Will that change how Putin operates?  No.  Who knows how the conflict in Ukraine will end.
> 
> This stupid move though is another straw in the pile that will finally tell Russians they need a different leader.   Russians have an unfortunately long history of tolerance for abuse from their own government.  Still, they're all aware now that the so-called "special military operation" has gone horribly wrong.  Coffins coming home and conscription were not in that recipe floated by Putin back in late winter.   Neither was the blatant murder of a Ukrainian orchestra conductor.



My guess is that changing how Putin operates involves a bullet, or the threat of a bullet if there is such authority over him in the shadows.


----------



## lizkat

Maybe time for something radical.  Make a deal with the richest five Russian oligarchs to take the sanctions off them if they just buy the f'g Russian army (which will then be put to work restoring the damage to Ukraine before being allowed to go back to their families and raise wheat or build solar panels or whatever).  And meanwhile guarantee Putin safe passage to oh I dunno how about one of the 17,000 islands of the Indonesian Archipelago.  He gets to relax under casual surveillance of a drone and a once-monthly drop of re-ups on food and drink of his choice.

One of those isles must be for sale by now, all things climate-related taken into consideration.


----------



## Nycturne

lizkat said:


> Maybe time for something radical.  Make a deal with the richest five Russian oligarchs to take the sanctions off them if they just buy the f'g Russian army (which will then be put to work restoring the damage to Ukraine before being allowed to go back to their families and raise wheat or build solar panels or whatever).  And meanwhile guarantee Putin safe passage to oh I dunno how about one of the 17,000 islands of the Indonesian Archipelago.  He gets to relax under casual surveillance of a drone and a once-monthly drop of re-ups on food and drink of his choice.
> 
> One of those isles must be for sale by now, all things climate-related taken into consideration.




Not having to live out of a Soyuez capsule, piling up cans of tinned food?


----------



## Yoused

lizkat said:


> guarantee Putin safe passage to oh I dunno how about one of the 17,000 islands of the Indonesian Archipelago




Maybe the Aussies would be kind enough to set him up on Heard Island. That would be the kind of climate he would be more familiar with, and also a lot farther from anywhere.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Maybe the Aussies would be kind enough to set him sys on Heard Island. That would be the kind of climate he would be more familiar with, and also a lot farther from anywhere.




Ya got me there, I had to go look it up!   Weird, the Wiki entry says although there's no population now,  the island even has its own top level domain (country code),  so ol' Vlad could apply to register his own domain and remain really really special, assuming he could get what's his name to give him a StarLink setup. 



Nycturne said:


> Not having to live out of a Soyuez capsule, piling up cans of tinned food?




Yeah,  living on tinned stuff plus the occasional fresh fish maybe cooked over something fired up by solar panels could get old fast, right?  Sounds perfect.


----------



## Yoused

Head of Russia's mobilization task force found dead near a fence at his home. Officials have not yet ruled out suicide. Or murder. He was 49 years old. "Recruiters" facing a push to bring in 80,000 more soldiers to finish filling the Tsar's demand have been grabbing men where ever they can. Needless to say, they are a popular lot.


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> Head of Russia's mobilization task force found dead near a fence at his home. Officials have not yet ruled out suicide. Or murder. He was 49 years old. "Recruiters" facing a push to bring in 80,000 more soldiers to finish filling the Tsar's demand have been grabbing men where ever they can. Needless to say, they are a popular lot.



Weird.  I thought the only cause of death in Russia was falling out of windows. The things you learn…


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Head of Russia's mobilization task force found dead near a fence at his home. Officials have not yet ruled out suicide. Or murder. He was 49 years old. "Recruiters" facing a push to bring in 80,000 more soldiers to finish filling the Tsar's demand have been grabbing men where ever they can. Needless to say, they are a popular lot.




When an aggressor has to grab up people off the street and stuff them onto the front lines without adequate training (or any interest whatsoever in fighting a war), things are not going to end well for that country,  even if the war itself,  wherever it is,  meanwhile drags on with indiscriminate horror visited upon everyone and everything.  

You just wish someone would hold up a flashing amber light and ask if what has already transpired has been worth it.  

But then some people did that in the USA, when we shifted up from "military advisors" to regular troops to prop up what had become the South Vietnamese government in 1955 as the French exited the colonial era in Indochina.​​Sometimes no one wants to answer that question "has it been worth it?" out of believing their country is already in too deep and cannot cut losses, and that there must be "light at the end of the tunnel" and a justification around the corner...  and of course the light in the tunnel is usually just the express train of war's hell rushing to meet the next round of troops.​
Some Americans said to the US government "Don't escalate" when it became clear that newly independent but formally divided Vietnam could not settle peacefully the matter of who should rule a reunited country.​​But the "domino theory" of multiple countries falling to communism was advanced by the movers and shakers of US foreign policy at that time, and we ended up sustaining a hellscape of war that lasted for 20 years and had not a chance in hell of being "won" by us, since we were the same as the French in the end:  oppressive occupiers.   In fact the Vietnamese still call it "the American war"  -- even the tens of thousands who fled from the south and eventually landed here or in Canada.​​Putin cannot answer that question "has it been worth it?"  for Russians right now because they will gainsay him by pointing to the graves of their sons and the fierce resistance in Ukraine. 

Unfortunately he seems to have decided that surely throwing enough conscripts and Iranian-supplied weapons will finally turn the corner on his bollixed "special military operation."

That should have a gruesome ring to any Russians who remember not only their own long stint in Afghanistan but ours as well, plus the Americans' quagmire in Vietnam.


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Weird.  I thought the only cause of death in Russia was falling out of windows. The things you learn…



There may have been a window nearby for him to fall out of. The story does not describe the area. Or maybe he fell out of an airplane window just as he was about to get home.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> There may have been a window nearby for him to fall out of. The story does not describe the area. Or maybe he fell out of an airplane window just as he was about to get home.




If you get the drift that you're definitely going to be the major scapegoat for a failed operation directed by Putin, maybe a preemptive strike against the bad luck of falling out of a window can seem like a better option.   I mean that guy knew he couldn't round up enough fit conscripts for this thing to meet the 300k quota.  Anyone fit enough to serve has already gone... "somewhere."


----------



## lizkat

This post could belong in "what are you doing today" but it's more related to this thread. 

So today at the moment I am recovering from the shock of hearing a friend say on the phone --after remarking that she loathes reading the news lately, which I'm sure anyone can understand--  that as far as the conflict in Ukraine goes, it's her opinion that Ukraine should "just give them back the land, stop the fighting already, so much suffering."

"_Give them back the land?"_

Wow.  I was speechless for long enough that she inquired if our connection had broken.  Then I reminded her that Ukraine was a sovereign nation, and that the world had already learned that appeasing a dictator does not sate his appetite for empire.

She said again that it was just her opinion and anyway everyone was tired of it.  I suggested that "being tired of war" does not mean it's time to roll over for a guy schooled in the ways of the old USSR and thinking by force to revive and cement control of neighbors.

The European Union gets that:  it just bumped support for Ukraine by another €500 million to a total of €3.1 billion.    But I decided it was time to stir the soup simmering on back of stove... and with that we agreed to "talk soon," wishing each other a good day.

Honestly I can't think what to say to her next time we speak.  Odd for a news junkie like me to hope that whatever's on our minds, the news doesn't then rise to top of the agenda.

EDIT:  EU allocation in euros, not dollars, duh.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> This post could belong in "what are you doing today" but it's more related to this thread.
> 
> So today at the moment I am recovering from the shock of hearing a friend say on the phone --after remarking that she loathes reading the news lately, which I'm sure anyone can understand--  that as far as the conflict in Ukraine goes, it's her opinion that Ukraine should "just give them back the land, stop the fighting already, so much suffering."
> 
> "_Give them back the land?"_
> 
> Wow.  I was speechless for long enough that she inquired if our connection had broken.  Then I reminded her that Ukraine was a sovereign nation, and that the world had already learned that appeasing a dictator does not sate his appetite for empire.
> 
> She said again that it was just her opinion and anyway everyone was tired of it.  I suggested that "being tired of war" does not mean it's time to roll over for a guy schooled in the ways of the old USSR and thinking by force to revive and cement control of neighbors.
> 
> The European Union gets that:  it just bumped support for Ukraine by another $500 million to a total of $3.1 billion.    But I decided it was time to stir the soup simmering on back of stove... and with that we agreed to "talk soon," wishing each other a good day.
> 
> Honestly I can't think what to say to her next time we speak.  Odd for a news junkie like me to hope that whatever's on our minds, the news doesn't then rise to top of the agenda.



An example - and a rather dismal one - of "privilege", in this sense geographic - the US is protected by its considerable power and by two large oceans - rather than a privilege derived from ethnicity, gender, or social class.

I'll wager if she lived in Europe she might hold a different opinion.

In any case, I will readily concede that I'm as much of a "champagne socialist" as you can find, I am more than partial to the good things in life, yet, to me, this is an existential struggle, and I will argue for - and strongly support - whatever (lawful) measures Europe needs to take to counter this, oppose this, resist this, and yes, help to defeat this: Conceding that principle (don't invade sovereign countries) at this stage to that moral monster (and his cronies) in the Kremlin means rewarding the aggressor, and rewarding this conduct in international affairs (invasion of a sovereign state, mass murder, bombing civilians, forcible resettlement, killing artists, destroying robbing, raping, plundering, wrecking).

It would mean traducing and utterly destroying belief in the very concept of the rule of law, and that the rule of law is above all and should be applied to all - that there exist principles that all should abide by and uphold - (which, for what it is worth, I now think is one of the major motivations behind Mr Putin's "special military operation", and is at least as important as the mad imperative to restore spaces once ruled by Russia to Russian rule).

And conceding this principle - you don't invade sovereign countries - would allow a world where the strong could invade and over-power the weak at will, a world where statecraft and diplomacy are replaced by Mafia morality at state level.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> I'll wager if she lived in Europe she might hold a different opinion




One should hope so.   Well her great grandfather is surely rolling in his grave.  He fled with family from eastern Europe in the late 19th century, helped build one of the synagogues in NYC's lower east side and celebrated not the privilege but the guarantee of freedom to worship openly in his new home.  So I was _really_ surprised at her take on Putin's aggression in Ukraine. 

She doesn't "follow the news" though, that's now entirely clear.  She has said that in the past and it's true we generally don't speak of news or politics.  But I had no idea exactly what she meant by "not following" and today came as revelation:   I had mentioned the terrible assassination of "the Ukrainian orchestra conductor" and she had said "Oh, because of the war?,  who killed him, I mean was it soldiers? so on which side?"

So when she says she doesn't follow the news, she REALLY MEANS IT.   But that also means she's exposed in the most random of ways to "the news" anyway.  So that's as it is.  But it seems inexcusable to have formed an opinion in a vacuum save for snippets heard in passing.

In some future, if and when "they" come for "us,"  I guess she'd suggest "we" just give "them" the borough of Queens or the Bronx to see if that will make "them" happy?   Maybe climate change will come for the south shore of Long Island in the meantime.  She's been complaining of no rain and then floods when the drought breaks now and again. So does she think if the USA just maybe cedes the dunes of Fire Island to the rising ocean, it will quit while it's ahead?



Scepticalscribe said:


> In any case, I will readily concede that I'm as much of a "champagne socialist" as you can find, I am more than partial to the good things in life, yet, to me, this is an existential struggle, and I will argue for - and strongly support - whatever (lawful) measures Europe needs to take to counter this, oppose this, resist this, and yes, help to defeat this




I have to check myself sometimes because (and especially in retirement) I like living in a certain orderly or only mildly surprised fashion.  Also, even if mostly due to my advancing age, it's not that often I inconvenience myself to go out and join a local protest against some national or local policy.  It's not taxing for me to sit here and utter support for Ukraine's existential struggle and to hope that western allies continue to press home to Putin the utter unacceptability of his transgressions in Ukraine.  I'm mindful though of not being in Kyiv this afternoon...  and so yes, aware of privilege to form an opinion without living through "facts on the ground."

The least I can do is keep informed on what has happened, what is happening, or so I see the minimum extent of my own duty.   It's why I was appalled that my friend could so casually have imagined that "giving _back_ the land" is even a construct in this terrible war.


----------



## Yoused

the Lithuanian Foreign Minister appears to be especially skilled in English 

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1582398988711780355/


----------



## lizkat

Vlad's houseboy Kevin pipes up

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1582433015908929537/


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> Vlad's houseboy Kevin pipes up
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1582433015908929537/



And the egregious Elon Musk - a narcissist, a nasty piece of work, someone nursing deranged delusions about their own importance, which has made him an extraordinarily compliant and complicit and unquestioning messenger for Mr Putin - strikes me as someone who falls into a similar category.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> And the egregious Elon Musk - a narcissist, a nasty piece of work, someone nursing deranged delusions about their own importance, which has made him an extraordinarily compliant and complicit and unquestioning messenger for Mr Putin - strikes me as someone who falls into a similar category.




He is such a piece of work.   He has done a 180º now on having said he'd try to get Pentagon to pay him for Starlink setups for Ukraine,  now says will resume providing them 'for free' although whines about the cost.  Well he does have a big cash bite coming up to secure his alleged purchase of Twitter else go to court in November.   Poor Elon.  But let's not look a gift horse in the mouth.









						Elon Musk Begrudgingly Says He'll Keep Helping Ukraine Through Starlink
					

As the war in Ukraine continues, Elon Musk says he'll bite the bullet to keep internet services afloat in Eastern Europe -- even though it's clear, he isn't happy about it.




					www.tmz.com
				




Maybe a tweeted poll awhile back by Zelenskyy (asking if people like the Musk who supports Ukraine better?  or the Musk who supports Russia better?) had affected ol' Elon's take on the matter. 

78.8% of the poll responders went for the "Musk who supports Ukraine..."​
Zelenskyy definitely has Elon's number.   Musk has a hole in his heart needs constant refills.  Of course he hasn't really changed his views on the Russia-Ukraine matter, as one can tell from some of his other tweets.  But in the meanwhile Ukraine will have more Starlink setups, if they can manage to keep moving the units around to avoid being pinpointed by Russian attackers.


----------



## AG_PhamD

As a secular Jew I am frustrated to see Israel is continuong to refuse military aid to Ukraine, though things might be changing. Since the outbreak of the war Israel has not really involved itself other than as a line of communication between the two nations. This is because they were hoping to remain in a favorable light with Russia given their influence over Iran. 

Now that Russia is buying and actively using Iranian drones, there is mounting pressure for Israel to start supplying Ukraine with weapons. 

Israel very much prioritizes it’s existence above everything else for obvious reasons, so I completely understand the predicament and the sensitivity of the situation. But I wouldn’t expect Russia to be a good faith actor to Israel over Iran quite frankly at this point. 

Iron Dome would do tremendous good in Ukraine. I’ve seen it in action and it’s truly an incredible feat of engineering. I imagine the US would have to agree to exporting it to Ukraine given we co-developed it. It’s disappointing though that even a 100% defensive tool like Iron Dome are currently a no go. 

If Israel isn’t going to provide weapons- offensive or defensive, it would be nice if Mossad took a trip into Iran to observe some mysterious explosions at drone and missile factories. This plausible deniability clandestine warfare is what Israel does best. 

I hope the US will be supplying Phalanx / C-RAM system to help easily take down rockets/artillery/missiles/drones. Especially these cheap Iranian drones. Truly an incredible system. 





It apparently typically costs $30,000-60,000 per engagement, which is really a bargain if you consider a Stinger is like $100k, Iron Dome $150k per interception, S-300 missile est. $300k, Patriot $3m, etc. It’s a very short range system but could protect high value assets- like power plants. 

I do very much worry about the fact Russia has destroyed or inhibited about 1/3 of Ukrainian’s power generation capabilities in just the past week. That’s a going to be serious problem period, but especially going into the winter. Hopefully the damage is manageable.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> If Israel isn’t going to provide weapons- offensive or defensive, it would be nice if Mossad took a trip into Iran to observe some mysterious explosions at drone and missile factories. This plausible deniability clandestine warfare is what Israel does best.




That would be a huge win for everyone - except Iran and Russia   Might be a little tricky with some of their underground factories.  No doubt in my mind Mossad would come up with a solution. That reminds me, it's been many years since watching Munich, an outstanding Spielberg movie based on true events. Think I'll watch it again tonight. 

C-RAM would be a perfect and relatively economical easy to use/maintain defensive weapon for Ukraine. Hope we send them at least a few dozen units.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> Vlad's houseboy Kevin pipes up
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1582433015908929537/



My god the GOP is the Walking Dead, why can’t we put it in it’s political grave? Oh yeah, I momentarily forgot about STUPID.


----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> Oh yeah, I momentarily forgot about STUPID.




Stupidity is a valuable resource. Without an abundance of it, our economic system would collapse – which would probably be a _good_ thing, _in the long run_, but the near-term issues related to a sustainable transition would be problematic.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Stupidity is a valuable resource. Without an abundance of it, our economic system would collapse – which would probably be a _good_ thing, _in the long run_, but the near-term issues related to a sustainable transition would be problematic.




Yeah, like trying to manage a "soft landing" in an economy based on consumerism.


----------



## Yoused

lizkat said:


> Yeah, like trying to manage a "soft landing" in an economy based on consumerism.




I like to imagine a gradual transition to a standards-based cottage industry ethos, but it would be a long road in the struggle to dismantle big industry/finance.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> I like to imagine a gradual transition to a standards-based cottage industry ethos, but it would be a long road in the struggle to dismantle big industry/finance.




Meanwhile speaking of big industry,  SCOTUS will hear a case in December from a company wishing to establish precedent that a company can hold union employees responsible for anything that goes wrong with the company's operations during a strike.









						Why going on strike could get much harder for American workers
					

Supreme Court will hear a case that could let employers sue workers for economic damage during strikes.




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## Yoused

on-topic,

of course:









						Russian officers take bribes from soldiers wanting to avoid front-line duty, StratCom Ukraine says
					

Business is good in Ukraine – if you’re a corrupt Russian army officer.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## lizkat

AG_PhamD said:


> I do very much worry about the fact Russia has destroyed or inhibited about 1/3 of Ukrainian’s power generation capabilities in just the past week. That’s a going to be serious problem period, but especially going into the winter. Hopefully the damage is manageable.




Norway grows more concerned about Russian sabotage of pipelines.  Finland thinking to build a border fence, having already closed border to further immigration from Russia.


----------



## lizkat

A glimpse of an attempt by a war correspondent for Russian media to prepare citizens back home to hear of ill effects in Kherson of a current 4-1 ratio of Ukrainian to Russian troops,  with the latter having difficulty getting resupplied in the coming months thanks to having to ferry stuff across the damaged Dnieper crossing by boat and on pontoons

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1582794925304729601/​​​







						Russian troops caught between retreat over Dnieper or risk being cut off
					

The British Ministry of Defense said Russia has committed its airborne forces to defending Kherson.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## AG_PhamD

lizkat said:


> Norway grows more concerned about Russian sabotage of pipelines.  Finland thinking to build a border fence, having already closed border to further immigration from Russia.




I was talking to my dad earlier today who has been in the finance side of the energy industry for decades. He was saying there are essentially mobile power plants that could easily be brought in to restore power (provided the transformer and transmission equipt isn’t damaged which is a big problem). They apparently make semi truck trailers with turbine generators that produce typically 25-50MW which is a pretty significant amount of power. They also make less mobile systems that can be quickly assembled to produce up to 100MW. 

Steam generation also appears to be negatively impacted in Ukraine, presumably for mostly heating and perhaps some industrial applications. They apparently do make mobile steam boilers as well, however these are obviously much smaller than what a steam plant would put out. 

So potentially things may not be as terrible as they seem.


----------



## Yoused

lizkat said:


> A glimpse of an attempt by a war correspondent for Russian media to prepare citizens back home to hear of ill effects in Kherson of a current 4-1 ratio of Ukrainian to Russian troops




Curious thing about that video: "Komsomolskaya Pravda" was founded in 1925, as a Soviet newspaper. The "Kom" part of the name is short for kommunist. Apparently it was a hard thing to do away with. Or useful to the oligarchy. A nice way to spread plopaganda.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Curious thing about that video: "Komsomolskaya Pravda" was founded in 1925, as a Soviet newspaper. The "Kom" part of the name is short for kommunist. Apparently it was a hard thing to do away with. Or useful to the oligarchy. A nice way to spread plopaganda.




Yes, most of the clips I've seen from there are more about justifying whatever the Russian military has most recently been doing in or to Ukraine, specifically whatever has turned up condemnatory press in the West. The host or correspondent usually is suggesting that Putin has no other choice,  because of ill considered behavior by Ukraine or its supporters in the west. A preachy tone like explaining need to discipline a naughty child.  Things are a little different at the moment,  when they're trying not to get completely overrun in areas they had "annexed." Explaining that ends up throwing in some actual facts, even if adding that "of course" it's a temporary situation, just going to be bad for a few months.  One wonders how much Russians buy any of it any more since it has become obvious things are not going well.


----------



## Yoused

I heard a scurrilous rumor that DC and Marvel have teamed up their legal teams to prepare a copyright infringement lawsuit against the Kremlin. They both put a lot of effort into development of supervillains and simply cannot tolerate this blatant theft of their product.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> I heard a scurrilous rumor that DC and Marvel have teamed up their legal teams to prepare a copyright infringement lawsuit against the Kremlin. They both put a lot of effort into development of supervillains and simply cannot tolerate this blatant theft of their product.




Hah they should expand the suit and add a new respondent:  the Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Yoused said:


> Curious thing about that video: "Komsomolskaya Pravda" was founded in 1925, as a Soviet newspaper. The "Kom" part of the name is short for kommunist. Apparently it was a hard thing to do away with. Or useful to the oligarchy. A nice way to spread plopaganda.



Worth noting is the fact that the key word here is "Komsomol" - (not "Communist") - that is, the youth organization of the (CPSU) Communist Party Soviet Union (which was a sort of a cross between Boy Scouts, Hitler Youth, First Step on Serious Career Ladder, Means of Obtaining a University Place, seriously impressive holiday club for teenagers (away from parents, opportunities to Meet People Of Other Genders And Discover Assorted Discouraged Delights - in scenic holiday settings) - not "communist" (which is a noun that still appears to have the power to send shivers up US spines, notwithstanding the fact that the Soviet Union collapsed just over thirty years ago).

Anyway, Komsomolskaya Pravda was the paper of the Komsomol, the youth wing of the CPSU.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Today's briefing from the The Institute for the Study of War says;



> *The Russian withdrawal from western Kherson Oblast has begun. Russian forces likely intend to continue that withdrawal over the next several weeks but may struggle to withdraw in good order if Ukrainian forces choose to attack.* Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command stated on October 21 that Russian forces are “quite actively” transferring ammunition, military equipment, and some unspecified units from the Dnipro River’s west bank to the east bank via ferries.[1]....




That's good news but further on it says



> *Russian forces will likely attempt to blow up the dam at the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant (HPP) to cover their withdrawal and to prevent Ukrainian forces from pursuing Russian forces deeper into Kherson Oblast. *Russian forces will almost certainly blame Ukraine for the dam attack, as ISW has previously assessed.[11]  Ukraine has no material interest in blowing the dam, which could flood 80 Ukrainian cities and displace hundreds of thousands of people while damaging Ukraine’s already-tenuous electricity supply. Russia, however, has every reason to attempt to provide cover to its retreating forces and to widen the Dnipro River, which Ukrainian forces would need to cross to continue their counteroffensive.




which will certainly be a mess for Ukraine should it happen.

October 21 briefing


----------



## Yoused

Macky-Mac said:


> which will certainly be a mess for Ukraine should it happen




There would be some significant downstream flooding. However, there is a big issue preventing the Russians from blowing Kakhovka dam: right behind it is the aqueduct that waters Crimea. If the dam goes, Crimean agriculture, in the near term, is basically toast. On the other hand, when the Ukranian Army takes control of the dam, they will inevitably also gain control of the gate for the Crimean aqueduct.

In other words, the Russians have no good choice here. They can dry up Crimea themselves, or they can let the Ukrainians do it for them, but it looks like, either way, Crimea is kind of screwed. Unless the Russians decide to return it to Ukraine.

The Russian spokespeople were saying they were concerned about the danger of the Ukrainians blowing up the dam, and/or using chemical weapons. Neither of which are things one would likely do in the process of liberating one's own territory. It seems more likely that the Russians are preparing to use those tactics, so they are accusing the Ukrainians of threatening to do those things for cover. That way, when the Russians do it, they will say "see – we told you they were going to do that".


----------



## Macky-Mac

Yoused said:


> There would be some significant downstream flooding. However, there is a big issue preventing the Russians from blowing Kakhovka dam: right behind it is the aqueduct that waters Crimea. If the dam goes, Crimean agriculture, in the near term, is basically toast. On the other hand, when the Ukranian Army takes control of the dam, they will inevitably also gain control of the gate for the Crimean aqueduct.
> 
> In other words, the Russians have no good choice here. They can dry up Crimea themselves, or they can let the Ukrainians do it for them, but it looks like, either way, Crimea is kind of screwed. Unless the Russians decide to return it to Ukraine.
> 
> The Russian spokespeople were saying they were concerned about the danger of the Ukrainians blowing up the dam, and/or using chemical weapons. Neither of which are things one would likely do in the process of liberating one's own territory. It seems more likely that the Russians are preparing to use those tactics, so they are accusing the Ukrainians of threatening to do those things for cover. That way, when the Russians do it, they will say "see – we told you they were going to do that".




The ISW briefing, which is usually fairly restrained in its wording, is uncharacteristically blunt in rejecting the argument that the need for water for Crimea will prevent Russian from blowing up the dam.



> Any claims that Russian forces would not blow the dam due to concerns for the water supply to Crimea are *absurd*.




They explain;



> Crimea survived without access to the canal flowing from the Dnipro since Russia illegally invaded and annexed it in 2014 through the restoration of access following Russia’s invasion in February 2022. Russian officials have demonstrated their ability to indefinitely supply Crimea with water without access to the canal. Russian forces will try to hold eastern Kherson Oblast not for the water, but rather to provide a buffer zone that enables the defense of Crimea and prevents Ukrainian forces from getting into artillery range of the peninsula.




So we shall have to wait to see what happens. It would be a total mess for the downstream region if the damn dam is indeed blown up


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> There would be some significant downstream flooding. However, there is a big issue preventing the Russians from blowing Kakhovka dam: right behind it is the aqueduct that waters Crimea. If the dam goes, Crimean agriculture, in the near term, is basically toast. On the other hand, when the Ukranian Army takes control of the dam, they will inevitably also gain control of the gate for the Crimean aqueduct.
> 
> In other words, the Russians have no good choice here. They can dry up Crimea themselves, or they can let the Ukrainians do it for them, but it looks like, either way, Crimea is kind of screwed. Unless the Russians decide to return it to Ukraine.
> 
> The Russian spokespeople were saying they were concerned about the danger of the Ukrainians blowing up the dam, and/or using chemical weapons. Neither of which are things one would likely do in the process of liberating one's own territory. It seems more likely that the Russians are preparing to use those tactics, so they are accusing the Ukrainians of threatening to do those things for cover. That way, when the Russians do it, they will say "see – we told you they were going to do that".




Yeah, I think it’s doubtful they will blow the dam. Or if they do, it will be a last resort of desperation, probably if it appears they will lose Crimea- scorched earth campaign on the way out. 

I would imagine destroying the dam could also be considered a war crime if such action resulted in significant civilian casualties. 

I really do wonder about some of these strikes on random apartment buildings sometimes. The usual narrative is that Russia is targeting civilians- which in some cases they clearly are. But then you consider the failure rate of their guided weapons, and the fact many of their air dropped bombs are not guided (plus likely lackluster pilot skill). And I have a feeling they necessarily consider obstacles in GPS guided weapons. They might program in a legitimate target but neglect to realize there’s tall buildings, blocking the intended flight  path. 

It just seems strange to me to use such expensive weapons, especially cruise missiles and repurposed SAMs (ie Kalibr costs $1m/missile), into some apartment block of zero military value that’s probably been largely evacuated by the time the missile strikes. One could argue it’s to instill fear, but the Ukrainians have well demonstrated they’re not going to back down and such attacks only inspire Ukrainians to fight back. 

There also seems to be a complete deficit of Russian intelligence for them to be focusing their strikes on so many targets that are not directly associated with the Ukrainian military. Apparently their surveillance satellite capabilities are very weak.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> I really do wonder about some of these strikes on random apartment buildings sometimes. The usual narrative is that Russia is targeting civilians- which in some cases they clearly are. But then you consider the failure rate of their guided weapons, and the fact many of their air dropped bombs are not guided (plus likely lackluster pilot skill). And I have a feeling they necessarily consider obstacles in GPS guided weapons. They might program in a legitimate target but neglect to realize there’s tall buildings, blocking the intended flight path.




I wouldn't be surprised if a "friendly country" or even Ukraine is spoofing (or jamming, though difficult) Russia's GLONASS GPS system that their cruise missiles and other weapons rely on for guidance. Not saying that the spoofing country is intentionally redirecting missiles to civilian apartment buildings, but there's likely error and ambiguity and perhaps some unknowns causing that to unintentionally occur.

Overall I'm very surprised how Russian/Soviet military capability/doctrine/technology/readiness/discipline/professionalism appears to have degraded so dramatically over the last 30 years. My first career was in aerospace systems, and while the US has always been top shelf in such systems and technology, everyone who was aware of what the other side's capabilities were still had a ton of respect for what they were able to accomplish with 2nd/3rd rate tech.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Citysnaps said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if a "friendly country" or even Ukraine is spoofing (or jamming, though difficult) Russia's GLONASS GPS system that their cruise missiles and other weapons rely on for guidance. Not saying that the spoofing country is intentionally redirecting missiles to civilian apartment buildings, but there's likely error and ambiguity and perhaps some unknowns causing that to unintentionally occur.
> 
> Overall I'm very surprised how Russian/Soviet military capability/doctrine/technology/readiness/discipline/professionalism appears to have degraded so dramatically over the last 30 years. My first career was in aerospace systems, and while the US has always been top shelf in such systems and technology, everyone who was aware of what the other side's capabilities were still had a ton of respect for what they were able to accomplish with 2nd/3rd rate tech.




I’d imagine there is GPS/GLONASS/Beidou/Galileo spoofing going on. I remember seeing map early on of eastern Ukraine marking where navigational system spoofing was going on- and there was a lot of it.

Given the fact there are 4 different satellite navigation constellations, I would imagine modern weapons might compare the signals of each to detect spoofing, not to mention comparing the other methods I’m about to mention.

I also remember reading Russia was relying on terrestrial radio navigation, I forget the name but it’s basically the same as LORAN (if used a boat prior to the early 2000’s when GPS became available, you’ll be familiar- basically triangulating your location using radio towers rather than satellites). I don’t believe any missiles would use this since it’s really that accurate (0.25-1.0 miles consumer/commercial maritime use). Russia’s system is said to be accurate 20-50 meters, I’m not sure how believable that is- maybe in very ideal situations. Regardless, for troops on the ground, aircraft, and boats it should be close enough. But I would also think this would be relatively easy to spoof/interfere with as it’s really the same concept as how satellite nav works, just on the ground.

A lot of missiles have inertial navigation systems as a backup or even as primary navigation (including some cruise missiles and ICBMs). INS in normal planes and boats usually has an error of 1 unit of drift per 1000 units traveled, but there are very accurate INS systems available and ways to correct drift.

Another method of navigation in missiles, for example used in the Tomahawk, is terrain contour mapping. The missile compares the ground beneath it to satellite imagery of the ground inconjunction with INS. This supposedly proved more accurate in the Gulf War than gps guidance.

Plus there’s usually a terminal guidance systems in missiles (radar, infrared, TV/electro-optical, etc) which can identify specific targets. So even if the weapon is a ways off in theory it should find the target.

You would expect the Russians would design their GPS guided weapons to work in GPS degraded environments. On paper their missiles do have multiple guidance methods and actually many of them lack GPS/GLONASS entirely. So apparently whatever navigation systems they are relying on either don’t work well to begin with, have not been properly calibrated, or have not been maintained.

It’s also worth noting GLONASS is less accurate than GPS. They have much fewer satellites and very few ground stations that happen to be located in obscure parts of the world.

I believe these new Iranian suicide drones rely solely on GLONASS for navigation, making them entirely vulnerable to jamming but also probably don’t account for buildings in the way unless they can be and are specifically programmed to avoid them.

A family friend of my parents grew up in Poland during the Cold War and was conscripted into submarine service. He has always said “I don’t know what the west was so afraid of during the Cold War” and then recounts how equipment was never maintained, systems never worked properly or at all, morale was awful, and the submarine crew was always on the verge of mutiny.

Edit: Also worth noting the Russians have resorted to using surface to air missiles for ground attack. I really have no idea how that works, but I cannot imagine it could be that accurate. They’re supposed to follow  the ground systems radar beam to the (air) target and then switch using internal radar or infrared homing. So how you guide the missile for ground attack, no clue. Other than just lobbing the missiles on a ballistic trajectory.


----------



## Yoused

Citysnaps said:


> Overall I'm very surprised how Russian/Soviet military capability/doctrine/technology/readiness/discipline/professionalism appears to have degraded so dramatically over the last 30 years.




There is a word for it: "kleptocracy". The Russians had many tanks sitting in the near-Ukraine Belgorod area, and very few of them were actually functional because parts had been pilfered off of them with gleeful abandon. There was the thing with 1.5 million military uniforms that they were unable to find, almost certainly because of graft between the quartermasters and the supplier: the uniforms probably never existed, the money just changed hands, with proper kickbacks as needed.

Russia had a massive, powerful military force, and about three-quarters or so of it was numbers on paper that were outright fiction. Which, of course, puts a massive damper on morale. At least the USSR had a relatively decent ability to wage war – when they transitioned to plutocracycapitalism, the system was ripe for the plucking, and pluck they did.

Alisa Rosenbaum left her Russian homeland for America, changing her identity to become Ayn Rand: how proud she would be of how far her mother-Russia has come.


----------



## Yoused

Israeli missles have wiped out a factory in Syria that assembled drones from parts made in Iran. These may or may not have been destined for use in Ukraine. No human casualties were reported.



			Israel destroys Iranian drone manufacturing plant in Syria


----------



## Deleted member 215

Liberal Democrats call on Biden to shift Ukraine strategy | CNN Politics
					

More than two dozen liberal House members are calling on President Joe Biden to shift course in his Ukraine strategy and pursue direct diplomacy with Russia to bring the months-long conflict to an end.




					www.cnn.com
				




Progressive lawmakers call on Biden to seek a diplomatic end to the war, rather than further escalation.

Support for continued war aid to Ukraine is as low as 29% among Republicans.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> He has always said *“I don’t know what the west was so afraid of during the Cold War” *and then recounts how equipment was never maintained, systems never worked properly or at all, morale was awful, and the submarine crew was always on the verge of mutiny.




There was plenty to be afraid of then. There were many elements that were formidable and professionally operated that the US took very seriously.  The Soviet SRF (Strategic Rocket Forces) come to mind. The US, having an excellent view and insight into their capabilities from many SS-18 and other MIRV'd ICBM test launches at Tyuratam and other sites (including SLBMs in the north) to reentry at Kamchatka demonstrated how real the threat was. Both sides having the ability to change doctrine to launch on warning (as opposed to absorbing a first strike and then retaliating) was particularly problematic and destabilizing. And then there was Dead Hand and ERCs potentially further destabilizing.


----------



## Deleted member 215

TBL said:


> Liberal Democrats call on Biden to shift Ukraine strategy | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> More than two dozen liberal House members are calling on President Joe Biden to shift course in his Ukraine strategy and pursue direct diplomacy with Russia to bring the months-long conflict to an end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive lawmakers call on Biden to seek a diplomatic end to the war, rather than further escalation.
> 
> Support for continued war aid to Ukraine is as low as 29% among Republicans.




And like the cowards they are, the progressive caucus has already withdrawn their letter. 

I'm not saying "negotiating with Putin" was the solution, but I am for anything that could de-escalate a war that seems to have no end in sight. Democrats are just so toothless. If the GOP takes the house, which they likely will, they may stop aid to Ukraine entirely. It might've been nice to have some kind of alternative from the other side before that happens.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

TBL said:


> And like the cowards they are, the progressive caucus has already withdrawn their letter.
> 
> I'm not saying "negotiating with Putin" was the solution, but I am for anything that could de-escalate a war that seems to have no end in sight. Democrats are just so toothless. If the GOP takes the house, which they likely will, they may stop aid to Ukraine entirely. It might've been nice to have some kind of alternative from the other side before that happens.




I'm no Trump supporter, but I guarantee if he was in office he would be going ballistic about the EU still not pulling their fair share NATO weight despite an actual war happening in their backyard.  

It should also be mentioned that a lot of EU countries have a far larger social safety net than the US.  I don't think it takes much effort to make a connection between that and their military spending.  They can afford to have nice things for their citizens while we can't.


----------



## Macky-Mac

TBL said:


> And like the cowards they are, the progressive caucus has already withdrawn their letter.
> 
> I'm not saying "negotiating with Putin" was the solution, but I am for anything that could de-escalate a war that seems to have no end in sight. Democrats are just so toothless. If the GOP takes the house, which they likely will, they may stop aid to Ukraine entirely. It might've been nice to have some kind of alternative from the other side before that happens.




CNN:


> ....Jayapal contended the letter was released by staff without proper vetting and said it improperly conflated her caucus’ position with GOP divisions over providing more aid to Ukraine aid, which Democrats back. She withdrew the letter after the embarrassing intra-party feud....




progressive chaos from the progressive caucus.....especially given that voting for the midterm election is currently underway


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I'm no Trump supporter, but I guarantee if he was in office he would be going ballistic about the EU still not pulling their fair share NATO weight despite an actual war happening in their backyard.



If Cheetolini was still in the WH, the war would have been over by the first week of March. The US MIC might be a little irked about losing all those profits, though.


----------



## Nycturne

TBL said:


> I'm not saying "negotiating with Putin" was the solution, but I am for anything that could de-escalate a war that seems to have no end in sight. Democrats are just so toothless. If the GOP takes the house, which they likely will, they may stop aid to Ukraine entirely. It might've been nice to have some kind of alternative from the other side before that happens.




What would that even look like though? I don’t see a good way to de-escalate this that doesn’t involve telling Ukraine to accept losses to a neighboring country that:

Attempted regime change and may very well try it again.
Has used its military to take and hold land within Ukraine’s borders twice in the last 10 years.
Used propaganda to push the idea that Ukraine is not a legitimate state, and that it rightfully belongs to Russia.
Is weaker now than it likely will be in 10 years.
I don’t see Ukraine backing down on that. As this looks like the _best_ opportunity to give Russia a bloody nose and make them think twice about trying this stunt again in the future, there’s even less incentive to do so. And with Putin at the helm, he’s not going to cede jack squat to Ukraine unless he himself is under threat. Let alone getting any sort of justice for atrocities already committed. Those atrocities being part of Russia’s tactic for extracting concessions from the other side for a _long_ time. 

This is about as close to “immovable wall vs unstoppable force” as I’ve seen in a while.



Yoused said:


> If Cheetolini was still in the WH, the war would have been over by the first week of March.




The war for regime change, perhaps. But I fully expect they would find themselves bogged down in a drawn out occupation that would have been brutal and bloody against an internal resistance.


----------



## Yoused

Nycturne said:


> I don’t see a good way to de-escalate this




"_How do you like the view, Vlad? Here, let me open the window._"

It is *the only option*.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> "_How do you like the view, Vlad? Here, let me open the window._"
> 
> It is *the only option*.




It's not the _*only*_ option.   Some oligarchs are probably trying to figure out a better one.   Buying some generals should be getting cheaper by the day at this point, no?

Huge puzzle about whom to trust has likely been underway for awhile now. The questions become how to defang the FSB or can they be reliably turned, and where to stash Vlad so they don't have to stage some kind of accident, which no one would believe anyway.

In the best of all worlds either Vlad or a replacement head of state just declares victory as the rubble continues to smoke from the most recent insane assaults on Ukrainian civilians in the interior  -- "we have restored ORDER in Ukraine which was our mission"--  and pulls back troops all the way to Russia proper, with all due thanks to its meanwhile abused puppet Belarus.

Who in Russia would care much about how the hostilities end on paper,  so long as the danger to their own sons and husbands could just stop already.  With all the coffins, and all those men and families who have fled conscription, it's pretty clear at this point how the populace sees the prospects for military victory.

Then the West kicks in billions to rebuild Ukraine and life stumbles back to uneasy normalcy for a few decades, assuming the nationalists in some of the EU countries don't get carried away with themselves.

Russia would have some issues trying to right its economy.   Its friends are not in much better shape thanks to their own rogue behavior.   The West would have to think about how to lift sanctions on Russia without encouraging another round of expansionist dreams in Moscow.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

lizkat said:


> It's not the _*only*_ option.   Some oligarchs are probably trying to figure out a better one.   Buying some generals should be getting cheaper by the day at this point, no?
> 
> Huge puzzle about whom to trust has likely been underway for awhile now. The questions become how to defang the FSB or can they be reliably turned, and where to stash Vlad so they don't have to stage some kind of accident, which no one would believe anyway.
> 
> In the best of all worlds either Vlad or a replacement head of state just declares victory as the rubble continues to smoke from the most recent insane assaults on Ukrainian civilians in the interior  -- "we have restored ORDER in Ukraine which was our mission"--  and pulls back troops all the way to Russia proper, with all due thanks to its meanwhile abused puppet Belarus.
> 
> Who in Russia would care much about how the hostilities end on paper,  so long as the danger to their own sons and husbands could just stop already.  With all the coffins, and all those men and families who have fled conscription, it's pretty clear at this point how the populace sees the prospects for military victory.
> 
> Then the West kicks in billions to rebuild Ukraine and life stumbles back to uneasy normalcy for a few decades, assuming the nationalists in some of the EU countries don't get carried away with themselves.
> 
> Russia would have some issues trying to right its economy.   Its friends are not in much better shape thanks to their own rogue behavior.   The West would have to think about how to lift sanctions on Russia without encouraging another round of expansionist dreams in Moscow.




Well, it's not like we exited Afghanistan gracefully or that there was some big government overthrow as a result.  I think a good percentage of the Russian people are going to be pissed regardless.  There's not going to be a lot of "worth it!" going on.  So I think pitching some kind of victory has more to do with leader's egos.  

If nothing else, I think the general public's opinion on any conflict on the globe has shifted the blame to the leaders (as it should be) instead of trying to lump the country's entire population supporting the leader's actions 100%.  There's no "they're all Nazis!" equivalent.  At best we'll say they are on board because they are under threat of getting killed or imprisoned by the leadership, not a lot of true believers.


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Well, it's not like we exited Afghanistan gracefully




Depends on to which exit you refer. The US exit from Afghanistan in 1989 was a policy tragedy that gave rise to the Taliban, largely because the US used Afghanistan like a fifty-cent whore in a threesome with the Soviet Union, then booted her onto the sidewalk afterwards. Everything that followed was because of that. If Saint Ronnie had been able to leave well enough alone, the towers would probably still be standing in lower Manhattan and there would have been no more recent exit.



Chew Toy McCoy said:


> If nothing else, I think the general public's opinion on any conflict on the globe has shifted the blame to the leaders (as it should be) instead of trying to lump the country's entire population supporting the leader's actions 100%.  There's no "they're all Nazis!" equivalent.  At best we'll say they are on board because they are under threat of getting killed or imprisoned by the leadership, not a lot of true believers.




Imagine if FoxNoise were absolutely dominant, with NewsMax to back them up, and networks like CNN were nearly impossible to find. That is essentially Russia. A lot of Russians supported the SVO because they have been saturated with pro-Putin bullshit. And, well, it did not affect them – until it did.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> So I think pitching some kind of victory has more to do with leader's egos.



Well yeah.   The trick is to find someone with enough connection to Putin to make an attractive pitch to end this madness pronto,  while stroking his ego and laying out a game plan that sounds like Putin comes off wise and heroic for 1) having gone there at all and 2) having unerringly discerned when he'd [plausibly] accomplished the [re-explained] mission and 3) having determined that the time had come to say so and to tell Ukraine "see, now you've been schooled, and don't come out of your proper place ever again."

All Zelenskyy wants from Russia at this point is for them to turn tail and head outta there, leaving a horrendous mess and nightmares to recover from...   but with the eastern borders of their sovereign state intact.   He doesn't care what they SAY in order to save face.   He cares that they leave.

And what he says?   "Don't let the door hit you in the ass" would be fun to pipe out to their retreating forces, but Ukraine is not that stupid.  If Russian oligarchs and generals can manage to persuade Putin to call it a day and cease hostilities, why interfere with their internal exchanges.   

Sure there are political solutions.  They were established already in 1991 for god's sake.
​_Leave well enough alone.  Grow and build stuff. Trade. Feed your families.  Make friends.  _​
This conflict could end up documented as _the special military operation in lieu of World War III_, the time when everyone finally realized that any idiot can start a war but most likely shouldn't.

But, that's unlikely.  I mean one might have thought already that the USA as well as Russia had made that clear to themselves, to each other and to friends and frenemies alike more than a few times in the past fifty years, but the whole planet appears to be full of slow learners.

Regardless of how this works out,  "See ya in court"  must be said by Ukraine down the road apiece.  Evidence gathering as to war crimes by Putin's ill managed troops meanwhile to continue.


----------



## Nycturne

Yoused said:


> "_How do you like the view, Vlad? Here, let me open the window._"
> 
> It is *the only option*.




I’d give it a 50/50 chance of working. If anyone other than the oligarchs in Russia did it, there'd be hell to pay. _Maybe_ it doesn't act like an inciting event and his replacement decides not to escalate knowing where that leads, but there's a good chance Putin's supporters would hold power even with Putin's removal. That'd be a huge gamble to take. 



lizkat said:


> But, that's unlikely. I mean one might have thought already that the USA as well as Russia had made that clear to themselves, to each other and to friends and frenemies alike more than a few times in the past fifty years, but the whole planet appears to be full of slow learners.



It seems like what the Cold War really taught nations was "Stick to proxy wars." So long as you aren't risking direct conflict with another nuclear power, you are "fine". But Putin seems to take that as a sign that it can directly do a territory grab without interference because other nations don't want to risk direct conflict with Russia.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Citysnaps said:


> There was plenty to be afraid of then. There were many elements that were formidable and professionally operated that the US took very seriously.  The Soviet SRF (Strategic Rocket Forces) come to mind. The US, having an excellent view and insight into their capabilities from many SS-18 and other MIRV'd ICBM test launches at Tyuratam and other sites (including SLBMs in the north) to reentry at Kamchatka demonstrated how real the threat was. Both sides having the ability to change doctrine to launch on warning (as opposed to absorbing a first strike and then retaliating) was particularly problematic and destabilizing. And then there was Dead Hand and ERCs potentially further destabilizing.




Clearly nuclear weapons are something to fear. His point was we vastly overestimated the the organization and operational abilities of the Soviet Union, at least towards the end of its existence. That’s not to say even the most inept military can’t cause great devastation with nukes. The last 8 months or so have clearly indicated this still appears to be the case.


----------



## lizkat

AG_PhamD said:


> Clearly nuclear weapons are something to fear. His point was we vastly overestimated the the organization and operational abilities of the Soviet Union, at least towards the end of its existence. That’s not to say even the most inept military can’t cause great devastation with nukes. The last 8 months or so have clearly indicated this still appears to be the case.




Heck, and not to derail the thread (so I regard this as a momentary tangent)...   it's not just inept military that can cause nuclear devastation.   It's anyone in the nukes club needing to deal with hazardous waste from nuclear operations be they experimental, post-energy-production or accidental...

I mean at Hanford cleanup site after all this time the US DoE and WA state designees are still "preparing to..."  secure and dispose of waste that in some cases already has leaked into the environment...  and the cost estimates keep rising,  even as both Rs and Ds have other ideas about where to put appropriations.  Meanwhile some containers are ticking time bombs since they are just steel drums, and single-hulled so to speak.​​Meanwhile environmental issues about the proposed vitrification method have arisen, and  a" cost-saving" method of grouting is being suggested as an alternative, but no one knows for sure if that's not just kicking the cans... well, the leaking drums...  down the road apiece at a lesser short term cost.  And gee,  who would think anyone in the USA would choose that path, eh?​
End of thread derail..  carry on.

I'll carry on:   here's hoping no one is stupid enough to introduce a "dirty bomb" into the situation of Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. 

Someone needs to persuade Putin he has shown enough of a forceful hand via his "special military operation."    And that "winning" might best be viewed now as ending up with an economy that can be revived in time to stave off domestic issues exacerbated by his call for conscription.   

My lingering wonderment is whether the FSB is all still on board with their boss.  It must be a very fraught time amongst the movers and shakers around Putin.  Not the innermost circle who are surely sycophants, but the ones a bit further out, the implementers...  and the ones thinking about how to shift gears out of this conflict while saving their own skins.


----------



## AG_PhamD

lizkat said:


> Heck, and not to derail the thread (so I regard this as a momentary tangent)...   it's not just inept military that can cause nuclear devastation.   It's anyone in the nukes club needing to deal with hazardous waste from nuclear operations be they experimental, post-energy-production or accidental...
> 
> I mean at Hanford cleanup site after all this time the US DoE and WA state designees are still "preparing to..."  secure and dispose of waste that in some cases already has leaked into the environment...  and the cost estimates keep rising,  even as both Rs and Ds have other ideas about where to put appropriations.  Meanwhile some containers are ticking time bombs since they are just steel drums, and single-hulled so to speak.​​Meanwhile environmental issues about the proposed vitrification method have arisen, and  a" cost-saving" method of grouting is being suggested as an alternative, but no one knows for sure if that's not just kicking the cans... well, the leaking drums...  down the road apiece at a lesser short term cost.  And gee,  who would think anyone in the USA would choose that path, eh?​
> End of thread derail..  carry on.
> 
> I'll carry on:   here's hoping no one is stupid enough to introduce a "dirty bomb" into the situation of Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> Someone needs to persuade Putin he has shown enough of a forceful hand via his "special military operation."    And that "winning" might best be viewed now as ending up with an economy that can be revived in time to stave off domestic issues exacerbated by his call for conscription.
> 
> My lingering wonderment is whether the FSB is all still on board with their boss.  It must be a very fraught time amongst the movers and shakers around Putin.  Not the innermost circle who are surely sycophants, but the ones a bit further out, the implementers...  and the ones thinking about how to shift gears out of this conflict while saving their own skins.




Absolutely. Nuclear waste post the Soviet Union was/is a huge problem. We’ve donated substantial resources to help Russia deal with such problems. Especially with their nuclear submarines. That’s not to say we don’t have our own problem with nuclear waste, primarily due to NIMBY. Not to mention back in the 50’s and 60’s waste, especially in research facilities, was literally thrown in barrels and at best were sunk in the ocean, at worst tossed in the woods behind the facility only to leak into the ground. 

My uncle used to work at an compound of an engineering company that was involved with testing the feasibility of nuclear bombers (1960’s?). They literally dumped radioactive waste in the woods. It wasn’t cleaned up until the early 2000’s I believe. 

Then there’s the issue of “Broken Arrows”a mishaps with nuclear weapons. The US has come around to reporting their mishaps, all of which are quite concerning. Russia has not done this, but we do know sitting off the coast of Bermuda at the bottom of the ocean is a Russian nuclear powered, nuclear armed ballistic sub (k-129). It has 2 nuclear reactors and 16 nuclear ballistic missiles each with multiple warheads. This submarine alone allegedly has more destructive power than all of America’s (known) “broken arrows”. And sadly such mistakes aren’t a Cold War issue either, it wasn’t that long ago (2007? 2008?) a B-52 flew halfway across America completely unaware it had 6 operational nuclear tipped cruise missiles strapped to its wings.


----------



## AG_PhamD

@lizkat I think either side would be insane to use a dirty bomb. Frankly, creating a nuclear dirty bomb is entirely within Ukraines capabilities given their nuclear power industry. Given Russias threats about nuclear launches, I wouldn’t be surprised if Ukraine came up with a contingency- or pretended to , in order to say “we can play this game too”. Even then, I can’t imagine if Russia detonated a nuke the West would not become directly involved. 

That said, dirty bombs are of questionable effect. In reality they would probably cause more fear and panic and denial of entry to an area than illness and death, unless maybe they can be airburst over a populated area. Depending on where it is detonated could be easier to very difficult to clean up. 

It makes absolutely zero sense though that Ukraine would detonate a dirty bomb on their own soil, especially when they are clearly progressing at regaining their territory. It would make a lot more sense for Russia to use them to deny the Ukrainians into an area Russian has control over.


----------



## Macky-Mac

lizkat said:


> ....Someone needs to persuade Putin he has shown enough of a forceful hand via his "special military operation."    And that "winning" might best be viewed now as ending up with an economy that can be revived in time to stave off domestic issues exacerbated by his call for conscription.
> 
> My lingering wonderment is whether the FSB is all still on board with their boss.  It must be a very fraught time amongst the movers and shakers around Putin.  Not the innermost circle who are surely sycophants, but the ones a bit further out, the implementers...  and the ones thinking about how to shift gears out of this conflict while saving their own skins.




unfortunately it seems that there's a strong current of "Putin hasn't done enough!" among the Russian militocracy elite  (the term for them that I've seen more and more is "siloviki"; former KGB, military, national police, etc and people like the head of the Wagner Group). So my suspicion is we're unlikely to see any group that's friendly towards peace pushing Putin out of the picture in the near term


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> unfortunately it seems that there's a strong current of "Putin hasn't done enough!" among the Russian militocracy elite  (the term for them that I've seen more and more is "siloviki"; former KGB, military, national police, etc and people like the head of the Wagner Group). So my suspicion is we're unlikely to see any group that's friendly towards peace pushing Putin out of the picture in the near term




We don't know for sure what was the initial advice to Putin from his military advisers.  What they really think now they'd best keep to themselves, since in Russia the idea of military really talking back to head of state had already acquired a bad look and feel to it, before Putin's presidency.  It was said back then that "No one will ever trust the army again..."  and probably that is true in the Kremlin to this day.

So the oligarchs will offer a solution... support the production of new and polished advice from military who by now wish Putin never even "went there" with that godforsaken decision to invade Ukraine in order to cement his self-imaged heroic legacy. 

The super-wealthy Russians have enough money to let all the prospective takers from the military and ex KGB line up at the trough like it's hog feeding time down on the farm.  The price is just summoning up enough nerve to pitch Putin an off-ramp out of Ukraine before things get too difficult domestically.   Sure there could be just a tiny hint that taking that off ramp might be the best thing for not only Russia's future,  but hey, possibly for the future of Putin himself. 

The advice is "you won already, bring it on home and have a parade instead of some kind of thing that looks really bad on TV, eh?"  Western TV.  Because whatever it is, would land there.

  Putin has in the past prided himself on being strict about limiting dissent,  but by "rule of law"  --albeit it rubber-stamped law--  and not by instilling fear like in the bad old days.  But now the levels of mutual distrust are rising again.   Oligarchs will like to nip that in the bud.  So much easier if all they have to do, as Putin has permitted them to do before,  is to stay out of politics,  and then not worry about who's watching what they do with their business arrangements...

The ones who say "Russia should do more!" the loudest right now may well among the first to lap up some of whatever's probably being put on offer right now.  It's not like they can be seen to be wavering.  That way lies their own accidental fall out some window at Vlad's pleasure.

But it's also not like Russia can pull a win out of the hat here.  They overextended themselves,  lost the coin flip on how well "conscription" would play in the hinterlands,  are relying on assistance from a frenemy held close (Iran), which state Russia does not _really_ want to help arrive at a state of possessing nuclear weapons.   Turkey is a sometime friend, sometime frenemy.  Even though its accession to the EU now seems permanently stalled,  Turkey does not wish to become a pariah to European nations,  so has been trying to dance the dance on the matter of Ukrainian sovereignty.

So the military and the Russian hardliners look around and find themselves regarding what,  outsourced manufacture of Iran-designed drones? Some imported North Korean weapons?

And meanwhile Joe Biden is renewing neglected contacts in South America, including making friends with Venezuela with an eye to slowing down any renewed interest on the part of the also overextended Chinese to improve their LatAm influence.

Eeek, what's Russia to do?  Dial 911 and see if Cuba has any gold under the mattress?  Seriously? The new head of the once renowned Cuban Ballet lacks even a theatre in which to showcase her dancers...  all the stages have worm-eaten floorboards in the decades of neglect under Fidel.

Oh I know:  how about pull in horns, declare victory, get home and start trying to get out from under sanctions while selling some oil to whoever will take it and still has an undamaged port or shared pipeline.   That way Putin stays in power, food lands on tables,  the oligarchs resume their business activities with Putin getting his cut _and their explicit support... _


----------



## Yoused

now Russia is fighting _*Satanists*!_





Pavlov? Why does that name sound familiar?


----------



## Deleted member 215

Oh for crying out loud 

Watch the American right eat this shit up...


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> We don't know for sure what was the initial advice to Putin from his military advisers.  What they really think now they'd best keep to themselves, since in Russia the idea of military really talking back to head of state had already acquired a bad look and feel to it, before Putin's presidency.  It was said back then that "No one will ever trust the army again..."  and probably that is true in the Kremlin to this day.
> 
> So the oligarchs will offer a solution... support the production of new and polished advice from military who by now wish Putin never even "went there" with that godforsaken decision to invade Ukraine in order to cement his self-imaged heroic legacy.
> 
> The super-wealthy Russians have enough money to let all the prospective takers from the military and ex KGB line up at the trough like it's hog feeding time down on the farm.  The price is just summoning up enough nerve to pitch Putin an off-ramp out of Ukraine before things get too difficult domestically.   Sure there could be just a tiny hint that taking that off ramp might be the best thing for not only Russia's future,  but hey, possibly for the future of Putin himself.
> 
> The advice is "you won already, bring it on home and have a parade instead of some kind of thing that looks really bad on TV, eh?"  Western TV.  Because whatever it is, would land there.
> 
> Putin has in the past prided himself on being strict about limiting dissent,  but by "rule of law"  --albeit it rubber-stamped law--  and not by instilling fear like in the bad old days.  But now the levels of mutual distrust are rising again.   Oligarchs will like to nip that in the bud.  So much easier if all they have to do, as Putin has permitted them to do before,  is to stay out of politics,  and then not worry about who's watching what they do with their business arrangements...
> 
> The ones who say "Russia should do more!" the loudest right now may well among the first to lap up some of whatever's probably being put on offer right now.  It's not like they can be seen to be wavering.  That way lies their own accidental fall out some window at Vlad's pleasure.
> 
> But it's also not like Russia can pull a win out of the hat here.  They overextended themselves,  lost the coin flip on how well "conscription" would play in the hinterlands,  are relying on assistance from a frenemy held close (Iran), which state Russia does not _really_ want to help arrive at a state of possessing nuclear weapons.   Turkey is a sometime friend, sometime frenemy.  Even though its accession to the EU now seems permanently stalled,  Turkey does not wish to become a pariah to European nations,  so has been trying to dance the dance on the matter of Ukrainian sovereignty.
> 
> So the military and the Russian hardliners look around and find themselves regarding what,  outsourced manufacture of Iran-designed drones? Some imported North Korean weapons?
> 
> And meanwhile Joe Biden is renewing neglected contacts in South America, including making friends with Venezuela with an eye to slowing down any renewed interest on the part of the also overextended Chinese to improve their LatAm influence.
> 
> Eeek, what's Russia to do?  Dial 911 and see if Cuba has any gold under the mattress?  Seriously? The new head of the once renowned Cuban Ballet lacks even a theatre in which to showcase her dancers...  all the stages have worm-eaten floorboards in the decades of neglect under Fidel.
> 
> Oh I know:  how about pull in horns, declare victory, get home and start trying to get out from under sanctions while selling some oil to whoever will take it and still has an undamaged port or shared pipeline.   That way Putin stays in power, food lands on tables,  the oligarchs resume their business activities with Putin getting his cut _and their explicit support... _



Excellent post, thoughtful, nuanced and well worth reading closely.

Two things today are worth noting:

The first is Mr Putin's speech to the Valdai Club (a think tank with close links to the Kremlin) today; while it is clear that his paranoia is becoming more pronounced, - and one wonders who is permitted to tender advice to him (the old "speak truth to power") - nevertheless, some of what he said is worth noting.

Apart from the paranoia, his address is also a sort of call (of the "we have common interests and the West hates and despises us all" variety, railing especially against what he described as "western hegemony", and the position - and thus power - enjoyed by the dollar as a major global currency) to most of the planet that does not comprise "the West" (which seems to be mainly defined as that world which includes the US, UK, EU and NATO).

"Cultural war" stuff - the kind of stuff beloved of the far right everywhere - was another topic attacked, along with sneers at (former) Prime Minister Liz Truss (some of Mr Putin's most vicious personal attacks have been reserved for female political leaders).

Asked whether he thought about Russian casualties, Mr Putin said he constantly thought of Russian soldiers who had fallen in Ukraine, but said Moscow had no choice but to launch what Moscow calls its "special military operation". Mr Putin also said that the costs of the conflict – including to the Russian economy – were unavoidable.

The second story of note is that (and it appears to have been confirmed by credible sources) is that Ksenia Sobchak - socialite, journalist, TV personality, daughter of the (late) one time (liberal) Mayor of (what was then known as) Leningrad (and known mentor of Mr Putin, who studied under him when Mr Sobchak was considered a bright and brilliant and idealistic academic who taught Law in Leningrad State University, and later served under him when Mr Sobchak had become Mayor of the renamed city of St Petersburg), Anatoly Sobchak, - who is reputedly Mr Putin's goddaughter - and who has enjoyed close ties (personal, professional) with the Russian elite, turned up in Lithuania today, complete with Israeli passport, (for Russian passports bearing a tourist stamp for the Baltic region are no longer accepted or deemed valid for short term stays in the Baltic states), a little ahead of a (Russian) warrant that had been issued for her arrest.

This is interesting because it suggests that the - already extremely narrow - space for discussion and dissent is being further reduced - and, moreover, that the (previous) protection - that proximity to power and to political elites - that had been extended to such an individual, no longer seems to be sufficient or no longer applies, or is no longer guaranteed.


----------



## Yoused

Reuters acquired a large trove of documents from an abandoned Russian military outpost in Balaklia, about 50 some miles west of Izium.









						Abandoned Russian base holds secrets of retreat in Ukraine
					

When Russian troops fled the Ukrainian town of Balakliia last month, they left behind thousands of documents that show in unprecedented detail the inner workings of the Russian war machine.




					www.reuters.com
				




The article is lengthy an a bit graphic in places.


----------



## Colstan

Remember when Kyiv was supposed to fall within 72 hours?

Now, Ukrainian Maj. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov says that Ukraine will launch a military offensive to recapture Crimea in the new year.









						Ukraine's Intel Chief On How The War Ends, Putin's Nuclear Threats, Iranian Drones, And More
					

In a wide-ranging interview with The War Zone, Ukrainian Maj. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov answers our questions about the war and where it's headed.




					www.thedrive.com
				




At this point, I have no reason to think that Ukraine won't accomplish that goal, and continue to gain ground against the Russians going forward, particularly since the occupiers won't be ready for the harsh winter to come.

"We finished up with the Russian professional army, and now it's time to defeat unprofessional."
- Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine


----------



## AG_PhamD

Colstan said:


> Remember when Kyiv was supposed to fall within 72 hours?
> 
> Now, Ukrainian Maj. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov says that Ukraine will launch a military offensive to recapture Crimea in the new year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine's Intel Chief On How The War Ends, Putin's Nuclear Threats, Iranian Drones, And More
> 
> 
> In a wide-ranging interview with The War Zone, Ukrainian Maj. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov answers our questions about the war and where it's headed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedrive.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this point, I have no reason to think that Ukraine won't accomplish that goal, and continue to gain ground against the Russians going forward, particularly since the occupiers won't be ready for the harsh winter to come.
> 
> "We finished up with the Russian professional army, and now it's time to defeat unprofessional."
> - Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
> 
> View attachment 18697




I think Crimea will be challenging to recapture. The Ukrainians have been fighting Russians there since 2014. The Russians have had ample time to fortify their claim. Crimea is basically an island and there’s only 2 ways in from mainland Ukraine. On the other hand, as I’m sure you know, Russia only has road in and it’s a bridge that was recently damaged. Ukraine has no Navy to speak of though, which will make things difficult. I wouldn’t be surprised if Russia just throws wave after wave of untrained soldier into Crimea to defend it, especially as it will inevitably be their last stand. 

That said, Ukraine is harassing Crimea again, attacking the Russian’s naval port is Sevastopol with drones and autonomous boats. Allegedly they blew up a large fuel and weapons depot, damaged a minesweeper, and may have damaged the Admiral Makarov frigate, the successor to the Moskova as the Black Sea flagship. Russia only admits to the minesweeper being struck. Rumor has it the Makarov’s radar may have been damaged. 






if Ukraine can build autonomous bosts and Russia allows them to get that can get that close, you’d think someone would give them a couple torpedos they could strap on to a larger boat. Or figure out a way to launch some anti ship missiles. Relying on a slow (relative to a missle), tiny boats laden with explosive, hoping get close enough to explode and cause damage seems awfully wishful. In the video where the drone boat appears to be aimlessly driving in a circle behind the ship I’m guessing it’s probably trapped in the ship’s wake. This attack method is really only sounds feasible with stationary or very slowly moving ships. 

Now Russia has cancelled the agreement for allowing Ukrainian grain  shipments. 

Between blockading grain exports that feed swaths of the world, destroying Ukraine’s energy infrastructure (mind you they previously exported almost 4000 gigawatts to places like Romania, Slovakia, Hungary), and causing a European energy crisis (incl likely blowing up Nordstream), Russia is really asking for other countries to get involved.


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> Russia is really asking for other countries to get involved




umm …


----------



## Colstan

AG_PhamD said:


> I think Crimea will be challenging to recapture.



I never said that it would be easy, happen anytime soon, be a result of a military operation, or even happen at all. My post was more inspirational, rather than using my non-existent knowledge of combined forces warfare. To steal a line I've used concerning a certain fruit company, I've often heard "Ukraine can't do" and then they go and do it.



AG_PhamD said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if Russia just throws wave after wave of untrained soldier into Crimea to defend it, especially as it will inevitably be their last stand.



As the meme goes, and following General Zaluzhnyi's line of thinking, "more ors for the meat grinder", as crude as that is. Even Russia is eventually going to run out of warm bodies to toss away. Those new recruits are untrained, ill-equipped, and underfed, assuming they have any food or supplies at all. Right now, those men are just target practice for the Ukrainians.

I don't know what's going to happen in the UKR-RU conflict, that history is still being written. What I do know is that, as of this moment, Ukraine is advancing while the Russians are taking a pummeling the likes which they haven't seen in generations. Ukraine is roughly the size of Texas, they have taken back territory roughly the size of Delaware, and I see no reason to think that Ukraine won't continue to push the occupiers out of their homeland.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Colstan said:


> I never said that it would be easy, happen anytime soon, be a result of a military operation, or even happen at all. My post was more inspirational, rather than using my non-existent knowledge of combined forces warfare. To steal a line I've used concerning a certain fruit company, I've often heard "Ukraine can't do" and then they go and do it.
> 
> 
> As the meme goes, and following General Zaluzhnyi's line of thinking, "more ors for the meat grinder", as crude as that is. Even Russia is eventually going to run out of warm bodies to toss away. Those new recruits are untrained, ill-equipped, and underfed, assuming they have any food or supplies at all. Right now, those men are just target practice for the Ukrainians.
> 
> I don't know what's going to happen in the UKR-RU conflict, that history is still being written. What I do know is that, as of this moment, Ukraine is advancing while the Russians are taking a pummeling the likes which they haven't seen in generations. Ukraine is roughly the size of Texas, they have taken back territory roughly the size of Delaware, and I see no reason to think that Ukraine won't continue to push the occupiers out of their homeland.




The only place I’m aware they’re advancing is in Bakhmut. They’ve been pushing there for 5 months and have been stalled out for most of it. They’ve only relatively recently gained traction, and by that 100-200 meters per day by their own admission. The Wagner Group is apparently in charge of this effort. Apparently they are just sending wave after wave after wave of soldiers into a literal meat grinder. And these are probably mostly the conscripted prisoners. 

I think the best case scenario is somehow Russia strikes a peace deal for Crimea. Maybe some slivers in the Donbas if they’re very lucky. The Ukrainians no intention of allowing that. And the cost of gaining nothing since 2014 (or perhaps losing everything)— profoundly deteriorating their military capabilities years if not decades to come, if not permanently. It probably also doesn’t help their country to kill off a large swath of men of reproductive age. I assume they will not find their way back into the international markets until they agree to pay war reparations too. 

It’s hard to foresee any possibility of anything remotely resembling success for Russia. The longer this war goes on the more capabilities Ukraine will acquire and the less Russia will have.

It’s fascinating Russians can still go along with this. When they’re using prisoners as soldiers and buying weapons from North Korea and Iran, they must know their situation is dire.


----------



## Colstan

AG_PhamD said:


> The only place I’m aware they’re advancing is in Bakhmut. They’ve been pushing there for 5 months and have been stalled out for most of it. They’ve only relatively recently gained traction, and by that 100-200 meters per day by their own admission. The Wagner Group is apparently in charge of this effort. Apparently they are just sending wave after wave after wave of soldiers into a literal meat grinder. And these are probably mostly the conscripted prisoners.



Considering that Ukraine gained 3,800km2 in just one week back in September, it doesn't surprise me that the Russian's have advanced little since the initial invasion started. They've been hamstrung by many things, but the most obvious is the dependency upon rail supply. Once the three-pronged attack went beyond supply lines, and then later Ukraine's relentless attacks on Russian railways and trucking, the RU military advances stalled and never recovered.


AG_PhamD said:


> I think the best case scenario is somehow Russia strikes a peace deal for Crimea. Maybe some slivers in the Donbas if they’re very lucky. The Ukrainians no intention of allowing that.



At this point, Ukraine has shown no interest in bargaining any of their land or people away to satisfy Putin, and I don't see why they should. I remember Macron saying not to humiliate Putin. I disagree, that's exactly what needs to happen, and even if that wasn't the goal, it's way too late to prevent Putin's total humiliation; that shipped sailed months ago.


AG_PhamD said:


> It’s fascinating Russians can still go along with this.



Russians are historically used to hardship, suffering, and being told what to do by a strongman. You'd think that, at some point, they'd had enough of that, but evidently they are willing to take on more suffering to further Putin's quixotic promise of a greater Russian empire, whether through fear, patriotism, or simply not knowing what else to do.

From what I gather, Putin's original goal was to create a new Russian empire, resurrecting the borders of Nicholas II. The president of Belarus, already a Russian puppet, had a map behind him that leaked invasion plans of Moldova. Finland was destined to fall after that, and so on. This didn't go according to plan. Putin can't extract himself from Ukraine because that would be admitting defeat, something that he can't do. Nor can Russia continue this war, because it is coming at great cost, which they may never recover from. It's quite the mess that Mr. Putin has gotten himself into.

What I am certain of is that nobody will take the conventional Russian military seriously ever again, not for another generation, at least. Nor will anyone underestimate the Ukrainian people or military. A lot of the news coverage has been about Russia's failures, while Ukraine's successes have often been ignored, especially in the early months. It's hard to quantify both Russia's complete, systematic failure at every level, compared to Ukraine's outstanding over-performance, equally at every level.


AG_PhamD said:


> It’s hard to foresee any possibility of anything remotely resembling success for Russia. The longer this war goes on the more capabilities Ukraine will acquire and the less Russia will have.



If I were to sit down and write a script for how this would unfold, this is the scenario I would have used for a complete and total Russian failure, with a near perfect record on the part of the Ukrainians. If I had released this script back in January, nobody would have believed it, including myself.


----------



## Eric

1,000 Russian soldiers killed in 24 hours as Ukraine strikes unequipped troops​








						1,000 Russian soldiers killed in 24 hours as Ukraine strikes unequipped troops | 10 points
					

At least 1,000 Russian soldiers have been killed as Ukraine targeted unequipped Russian troops deployed on the frontlines of war. This is the largest number of casualties on the Russian side since the beginning of the war.




					www.indiatoday.in
				




As long as Putin lives, people will keep dying by the thousands on both sides. Someone needs to snuff him out.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> 1,000 Russian soldiers killed in 24 hours as Ukraine strikes unequipped troops​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1,000 Russian soldiers killed in 24 hours as Ukraine strikes unequipped troops | 10 points
> 
> 
> At least 1,000 Russian soldiers have been killed as Ukraine targeted unequipped Russian troops deployed on the frontlines of war. This is the largest number of casualties on the Russian side since the beginning of the war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indiatoday.in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as Putin lives, people will keep dying by the thousands on both sides. Someone needs to snuff him out.




The guy is committing war crimes against his own troops, sending them untrained into battle with old and dysfunctional or no weapons at all.    This cannot be escaping awareness of their families back home by now. 

The problem is that as pressure against him rises at home. he's less likely to be persuaded by his advisers to find some kind of off ramp unless they can dress it up like a stunning victory.  A little late for that now.  What Putin has had his shelling forces do lately  -- attacking fundamental infrastructure in Kyiv before hard winter sets in--   is just sickening,  no matter from which country one is reading that news.  Everyone understands lethality of cold, of no water or heat.   To do it intentionally and to a civilian population is beyond the pale. 

How does one dress that up as mission accomplished and so time to come home?   I fear he will stage some kind of false flag maneuver with unconventional weapons, and then use unconventional weapons in retaliation and THEN declare that a mission of "self defense" has been accomplished despite great odds and sacrifices yada yada.


----------



## Nycturne

lizkat said:


> What Putin has had his shelling forces do lately  -- attacking fundamental infrastructure in Kyiv before hard winter sets in--   is just sickening,  no matter from which country one is reading that news.  Everyone understands lethality of cold, of no water or heat.   To do it intentionally and to a civilian population is beyond the pale.




There's logic to it. A very dark, despicable logic, for sure. My guess is that the goal here is to induce war fatigue on the civilian population in Ukraine, and get them to apply pressure on the government to capitulate at the negotiation table in order to just end it. Doing it right before a hard winter is a way to amplify the effect. There's been folks that claim that civilian war fatigue takes a bit longer to develop in authoritarian regimes due to the effect of propaganda, which would work in Putin's favor. So long as Putin can erode Ukraine's will faster than it erodes at home, I'd bet he thinks he can get what he wants that way.

That all said, you can't guarantee that it will be the result. It's possible it can backfire and strengthen the resolve of Ukrainians to ensure Russia can't just do this again 10 years from now. Just consider how the UK handled bombings by the Germans in WWII. Ukraine has a military that with aid is doing better than anyone expected, and a government that is doing its damnedest to continue being angry, loud, and focused on the threat. I could very easily see Ukraine seeing this as another reason to give Russia the finger instead of give in.



lizkat said:


> How does one dress that up as mission accomplished and so time to come home?




You don't, but this is just a means for Putin's military goals here.


----------



## Eric

Nycturne said:


> There's logic to it. A very dark, despicable logic, for sure. *My guess is that the goal here is to induce war fatigue on the civilian population in Ukraine, and get them to apply pressure on the government to capitulate at the negotiation table in order to just end it*. Doing it right before a hard winter is a way to amplify the effect. There's been folks that claim that civilian war fatigue takes a bit longer to develop in authoritarian regimes due to the effect of propaganda, which would work in Putin's favor. So long as Putin can erode Ukraine's will faster than it erodes at home, I'd bet he thinks he can get what he wants that way.
> 
> That all said, you can't guarantee that it will be the result. It's possible it can backfire and strengthen the resolve of Ukrainians to ensure Russia can't just do this again 10 years from now. Just consider how the UK handled bombings by the Germans in WWII. Ukraine has a military that with aid is doing better than anyone expected, and a government that is doing its damnedest to continue being angry, loud, and focused on the threat. I could very easily see Ukraine seeing this as another reason to give Russia the finger instead of give in.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't, but this is just a means for Putin's military goals here.



Russia learned absolutely nothing from Afghanistan. If their people don't want you there, you'll never get them to capitulate under any circumstances and you'll end up leaving with your trail between your legs and nothing to show for it other than mass casualties and worn-torn regions. Shit, it wasn't even so long ago, how could they not get this?

If the snake won't relent, you cut its head off. What Putin is doing is nothing short of pure genocide.


----------



## Yoused

Russian court imposes second fine on Wikimedia for not removing entries that make the Kremlin sad (something to do with non-violent resistance in Ukraine). Together, the fines total 5 million rubles (about 17 shillings). How they can hope to make this stick is kind of baffling to me, though there does appear to be a branch office in Russia.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> how could they not get this?




In retreating from Afghanistan, the former USSR leaders told themselves that Afghanistan was a bunch of squabbling tribes who finally became too troublesome (along with the "meddling" of international proxy war fighters from all over the world, east and west!) to bother uniting permanently under the Soviet banner. 

But since 1991 in Moscow the leadership is not of the USSR but Russian Federation, and the whole idea of Ukraine is... _well that turf was always just a part of the ancient homeland and these are our brothers wanting to rejoin us. _

That's the myth Putin was peddling and apparently still thinks he can sell in.

He is sending unprepared unarmed conscripts to die in vain for his own delusions of restoring a Russian Empire.   And his latest nod to any "difficulty"  lately is the photo op of him talking about how there is ongoing need for "modernization" of Russian weapons.

 How stupid can Russian mothers and wives pretend to be,  while they wait at home for the coffins? Maybe the question is how long before all those Russian families stop pretending ignorance and join protests against the terrible costs.

Historically, Russians are clearly used to hardship, but historically they did not have as much potential access to information about the progress of any conflict as is likely now.   There is nothing special about this so-called "special military operation"  any more,  except for the risks of accidentally igniting the war before the one Einstein said would be fought with sticks and stones.  Even Putin must see that by now.

The question is whether Putin will choose to cut losses and save face and so say of Ukraine as the USSR did about Aghanistan "this has actually proved to be more trouble than it is worth to us for now" and just go home.  However, if he truly believes he is meant to draw Ukrainian land and people back to a Russian "homeland" then he will likely mean to apply military force to that end, even if having to withdraw over winter.

So it may be up to Russians to dissuade him or make his desires moot, since it appears there is no level of suffering to which he's not willing to put his own troops never mind Ukraine's and their civilians.


----------



## Macky-Mac

lizkat said:


> ...How does one dress that up as mission accomplished and so time to come home?  ....




you're forgetting that the Russians are already "home" now after the annexations.....

Russia's still a long long long way from being forced out of the occupied territories by the Ukrainians, even though they're having some substantial successes.

You mentioned Afghanistan.....how long were the Russians there? Something like 9 years if I'm remembering correctly, and I don't recall that they were fighting with the goal of "retrieving lost lands of the motherland and reuniting the Russian people" as they're supposedly doing now.

 I'd love it if your "mission accomplished,...time to come home" scenario actually played out, but I'm unhappily inclined to believe this will never end that way.

Putin seems to be settling in for a long "special military operation" instead of what he originally expected.

Clearly he's hoping to out last western support and supply for Ukraine. Unfortunately there's some evidence that he might indeed have a reasonable expectation for support to fade......we've recently seen both conservative Republicans and Progressive Democrats make statements suggesting open ended support should be reduced;



lizkat said:


> Vlad's houseboy Kevin pipes up
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1582433015908929537/






TBL said:


> Liberal Democrats call on Biden to shift Ukraine strategy | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> More than two dozen liberal House members are calling on President Joe Biden to shift course in his Ukraine strategy and pursue direct diplomacy with Russia to bring the months-long conflict to an end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Progressive lawmakers call on Biden to seek a diplomatic end to the war, rather than further escalation.
> 
> Support for continued war aid to Ukraine is as low as 29% among Republicans.





Putin will be sending off poorly trained troops to the meat grinder for quite a while, unfortunately....maybe he's hoping his admirer Trump will return and help him out


----------



## AG_PhamD

Colstan said:


> Considering that Ukraine gained 3,800km2 in just one week back in September, it doesn't surprise me that the Russian's have advanced little since the initial invasion started. They've been hamstrung by many things, but the most obvious is the dependency upon rail supply. Once the three-pronged attack went beyond supply lines, and then later Ukraine's relentless attacks on Russian railways and trucking, the RU military advances stalled and never recovered.
> 
> At this point, Ukraine has shown no interest in bargaining any of their land or people away to satisfy Putin, and I don't see why they should. I remember Macron saying not to humiliate Putin. I disagree, that's exactly what needs to happen, and even if that wasn't the goal, it's way too late to prevent Putin's total humiliation; that shipped sailed months ago.
> 
> Russians are historically used to hardship, suffering, and being told what to do by a strongman. You'd think that, at some point, they'd had enough of that, but evidently they are willing to take on more suffering to further Putin's quixotic promise of a greater Russian empire, whether through fear, patriotism, or simply not knowing what else to do.
> 
> From what I gather, Putin's original goal was to create a new Russian empire, resurrecting the borders of Nicholas II. The president of Belarus, already a Russian puppet, had a map behind him that leaked invasion plans of Moldova. Finland was destined to fall after that, and so on. This didn't go according to plan. Putin can't extract himself from Ukraine because that would be admitting defeat, something that he can't do. Nor can Russia continue this war, because it is coming at great cost, which they may never recover from. It's quite the mess that Mr. Putin has gotten himself into.
> 
> What I am certain of is that nobody will take the conventional Russian military seriously ever again, not for another generation, at least. Nor will anyone underestimate the Ukrainian people or military. A lot of the news coverage has been about Russia's failures, while Ukraine's successes have often been ignored, especially in the early months. It's hard to quantify both Russia's complete, systematic failure at every level, compared to Ukraine's outstanding over-performance, equally at every level.
> 
> If I were to sit down and write a script for how this would unfold, this is the scenario I would have used for a complete and total Russian failure, with a near perfect record on the part of the Ukrainians. If I had released this script back in January, nobody would have believed it, including myself.




I heard a some interesting numbers today. 7M Ukrainians left the country due to the war. About 700,000 men left Russia due to mobilization plus another 500,000 when the “special military operation” began. That’s pretty incredible when you think about it.


----------



## lizkat

Macky-Mac said:


> You mentioned Afghanistan.....how long were the Russians there? Something like 9 years if I'm remembering correctly, and I don't recall that they were fighting with the goal of "retrieving lost lands of the motherland and reuniting the Russian people" as they're supposedly doing now.




Eric's post,  to which mine was a reply, had mentioned Afghanistan and was asking if Russia hadn't learned anything from its long engagement there.

I was pointing out that the former USSR's retreat from defending a puppet government in its then satellite state of Afghanistan was a really different (and simpler) kind of maneuver,  compared to the domestic political issues Putin has created for himself and for the Russian Federation for finding the off ramp out of the conflict in Ukraine.  

Afghanistan's puppet government was no more acceptable to tribal elders of Afghanistan than the Taliban would quickly become in 1991 and the Taliban 2.0 of 2022 will eventually become.   The USSR had been in there since 1978 and all that had happened bottom-line-wise was that the west plus militant Islamists from the Middle East and Central Asia had been drawn into the conflict... and yet Moscow's puppet government in Kabul was no more ahead of the game ten years on than it had been when first installed.  Somehow they were hanging on.  The "somehow" was by some quick lessons in Afghanistan's hundreds of years' worth of teaching corrupt central governments how to survive, a day at a time:  make promises, take the money.​
From Moscow's increasingly exasperated POV,  1) the Afghans were not even a Slavic people, and 2) a scorecard was required just to keep track of who the puppet government's friends were today.  It finally did come down to realizing that the puppet was for sale. Every day.  So it was like what had gone on in the former Indochina, only with more puzzle pieces.​​To the point of difference --for USSR then and now for Russia--  between Afghanistan and Ukraine in justifying withdrawal:   neither Moscow nor citizens of geographic Russia viewed Afghanistan as a part of homeland.  Afghanistan was proving to be more trouble than worth considering that other satellite states of far more value and "cousinship" were also getting uppity as the USSR's grip on its cobbled-together "turf" weakened from within.​​It was easy enough in the end to say a pox on it and just pull military forces out, letting the puppet government struggle on for a couple more years before the Taliban took control.  One could eventually ask if the US had learned anything in their first Afghanistan tour before re-engaging in 2001,  but that's another thread.​
Putin's problem in Ukraine is different.   As leader of the post-USSR successor Russian Federation,  he tried to dress up his illegal incursion into a sovereign Ukraine as a "special military operation"  framing it as merely a necessary reinforcement or defense of _a part of Russia proper._ Nothing in the post Soviet Union history of eastern Europe could be further from the truth.   But to Putin at least, since he put it that way,  it's now more of a challenge to frame withdrawal as just a practical-tactical sort of thing.  He saw himself reviving a dream of empire, a greater Russia from the time of the Tsars.   He was selling that in. 

Now what to say?  _"I made a mistake"... ?_

Nah.  What he has to say now is something that sounds open ended and practical-tactical and just get out and figure no one's going to stand up any time soon whining that _"you promised us Ukraine when the cherry blossoms returned..."   _He might be the only guy on the planet still figuring he has to fight on in Ukraine.

How he frames an abandonment of mission may matter less to the average Russian now though than the fact that what was billed as a short term endeavor in eastern Ukraine has ground on for nearly a year.  The bollixed aggression has left their own economy a shambles,  amplified risky "best friends forever" alliances with China and Iran, annoyed their other frenemy Turkey, resulted in new international sanctions and worst of all,  sent home thousands of coffins and thousands, tens of thousands of unwilling potential conscripts into exile.   Oh, and bonus bollix:  Putin's aggression has driven both Finland and Sweden to sign accession protocols with NATO.

Russians' concerns now aside from the practical --how to get along without a breadwinner in the family--  may run also to concerns about status of their social environment.  Putin had managed to walk a line between exerting control over dissent and not wanting to instill too much fear in the population.   Now he doesn't care about the latter.   His willingness to tolerate public expression of opinion so long as it didn't get too political is gone, and he's made that clear by forceful suppression of protests against the Ukraine conflict. 

The crackdown on dissent --and Putin resorting to conscription--  may have waked up a somnolent population that was more or less living though the "frog in saucepan on a simmer" experience in Russia while Putin tightened his control year after year, election after election.  Now they look around and the whole landscape has changed.   The biggest question is whether the Russian military thinks Putin can weather this period and whether he's even willing to take that question into consideration as he tries to overcome his miscalculations on Ukraine.


----------



## lizkat

So after Germany's Scholtz and China's Xi had a meeting, and apparently agreed that the prospect of Russia using nukes over the Ukraine situation would be a bridge too far,  Xi was reported by Chinese state media to have "called on the international community to "reject the threat of nuclear weapons and advocate against a nuclear war to prevent a crisis on the Eurasian continent."

Of course no one has yet vouched for whether Putin has taken that on board  as a useful suggestion.









						Scholz and Xi agree Russia would cross a line with nuclear weapons in Ukraine
					

After a meeting with Xi in Beijing, Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the two leaders agreed that with the use of nuclear weapons, Russia would cross a line drawn by the international community.




					www.npr.org


----------



## lizkat

From Reuters, a report that contrary to initial expectations, the impact of Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing conflict have improved rather than worsened economic conditions in Georgia, not least because of so many Russians fleeing across the border with everything they own including cash.









						From Russia with cash: Georgia booms as Russians flee Putin's war
					

As war chokes Europe, a small nation wedged beneath Russia is enjoying an unexpected economic boom.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Macky-Mac

lizkat said:


> So after Germany's Scholtz and China's Xi had a meeting, and apparently agreed that the prospect of Russia using nukes over the Ukraine situation would be a bridge too far,  Xi was reported by Chinese state media to have "called on the international community to "reject the threat of nuclear weapons and advocate against a nuclear war to prevent a crisis on the Eurasian continent."
> 
> Of course no one has yet vouched for whether Putin has taken that on board  as a useful suggestion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scholz and Xi agree Russia would cross a line with nuclear weapons in Ukraine
> 
> 
> After a meeting with Xi in Beijing, Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the two leaders agreed that with the use of nuclear weapons, Russia would cross a line drawn by the international community.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org




Clearly Putin must think he gets some advantage by keeping everyone guessing. 

I suppose the fear that he might escalate to the use of nukes does cause the West to limit the extent and type of weapons given to Ukraine


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> 1,000 Russian soldiers killed in 24 hours as Ukraine strikes unequipped troops​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1,000 Russian soldiers killed in 24 hours as Ukraine strikes unequipped troops | 10 points
> 
> 
> At least 1,000 Russian soldiers have been killed as Ukraine targeted unequipped Russian troops deployed on the frontlines of war. This is the largest number of casualties on the Russian side since the beginning of the war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indiatoday.in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as Putin lives, people will keep dying by the thousands on both sides. Someone needs to snuff him out.



@Eric: If someone (anyone) argued for "snuffing out" an American president - even as an irresponsible owner of an online media platform (not as though this doesn't have form in the US: let us contemplate the dismal prior examples of Dr Arn on MR, the loathsome Mr Musk on Twitter, etc, etc...) - would you not be outraged?

"Snuffing out" is the language of the mob, the mafia, the schoolyard bully, the thugs of the world, a world without the rule of law, and, worse, it plays into the vision and version of the world that amoral bullies (such as Mr Trump, Mr Putin) want to see prosper and profit.  And it is also grotesquely irresponsible, as it fails to uphold (legal and moral and ethical) standards.

Leaving aside mere morality, if Mr Putin is indeed "snuffed out", how can one expect that (or hope for) those who succeed him to abide by (or even wish or want to abide by) the rule of law in any administration they establish?

I have met - and spoken with - senior Romanians who regret (sotto voce) how they dealt with Nicolae Ceausescu, richly though he may have been thought to have deserved such a fate.  Some of them have said to me (very quietly and very privately) that they are of the opinion that a proper (meticulous, methodical) trial would have been better, for them, for the state, and for the future of the state and the triumph of the rule of law.

You can do better and be better than that.

The rule of law matters, and, we must be better than "Them" and be seen to be better than Them.  We must model - and live by, and be seen to live by and adhere to - the behavior and conduct - behavior and conduct governed by ethics and the rule of law - that we wish to see implemented, otherwise we are no better than those we condemn.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> *@Eric: If someone (anyone) argued for "snuffing out" an American president - even as an irresponsible owner of an online media platform (not as though this doesn't have form in the US: let us contemplate the dismal prior examples of Dr Arn on MR, the loathsome Mr Musk on Twitter, etc, etc...) - would you not be outraged?*
> 
> "Snuffing out" is the language of the mob, the mafia, the schoolyard bully, the thugs of the world, a world without the rule of law, and, worse, it plays into the vision and version of the world that amoral bullies (such as Mr Trump, Mr Putin) want to see proper and profit.  And it is also grotesquely irresponsible, as it fails to uphold standards.
> 
> Leaving aside mere morality, if Mr Putin is indeed "snuffed out", how can one expect that (or hope for) those who succeed him to abide by (or even wish or want to abide by) the rule of law in any administration they establish?
> 
> I have met - and spoken with - senior Romanians who regret (sotto voce) how they dealt with Nicolae Ceausescu, richly though he may have been thought to have deserved such a fate.  Some of them have said to me (very quietly and very privately) that they are of the opinion that a proper (meticulous, methodical) trial would have been better, for them, for the state, and for the future of the state and the triumph of the rule of law.
> 
> You can do better and be better than that.
> 
> The rule of law matters, and, we must be better than "Them" and be seen to be better than Them.  We must model - and live by, and be seen to live by and adhere to - the behavior and conduct - behavior and conduct governed by ethics and the rule of law - that we wish to see implemented, otherwise we are no better than those we condemn.



The fact that what Putin is doing does NOT outrage you is a bigger question. Maybe I was vague here when I said "snuffed out" so let me be crystal clear, someone should assassinate that maniac before he kills more innocent people.

The answer to your question is an unequivocal no, if any person is committing mass genocide, no matter who they are, they should be stopped at any cost.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> @Eric: If someone (anyone) argued for "snuffing out" an American president - even as an irresponsible owner of an online media platform (not as though this doesn't have form in the US: let us contemplate the dismal prior examples of Dr Arn on MR, the loathsome Mr Musk on Twitter, etc, etc...) - would you not be outraged?
> 
> "Snuffing out" is the language of the mob, the mafia, the schoolyard bully, the thugs of the world, a world without the rule of law, and, worse, it plays into the vision and version of the world that amoral bullies (such as Mr Trump, Mr Putin) want to see proper and profit.  And it is also grotesquely irresponsible, as it fails to uphold standards.
> 
> Leaving aside mere morality, if Mr Putin is indeed "snuffed out", how can one expect that (or hope for) those who succeed him to abide by (or even wish or want to abide by) the rule of law in any administration they establish?
> 
> I have met - and spoken with - senior Romanians who regret (sotto voce) how they dealt with Nicolae Ceausescu, richly though he may have been thought to have deserved such a fate.  Some of them have said to me (very quietly and very privately) that they are of the opinion that a proper (meticulous, methodical) trial would have been better, for them, for the state, and for the future of the state and the triumph of the rule of law.
> 
> You can do better and be better than that.
> 
> The rule of law matters, and, we must be better than "Them" and be seen to be better than Them.  We must model - and live by, and be seen to live by and adhere to - the behavior and conduct - behavior and conduct governed by ethics and the rule of law - that we wish to see implemented, otherwise we are no better than those we condemn.




LOL. What rule of law applies to a dictator who violates international law and starts an unnecessary war, abducts children and forcibly removes them from their parents and their country, targets civilians and civilian infrastructure, uses rape as an instrument of war, and commits other war crimes?  You think he‘s going to voluntarily show up at The Hague for a trial?

Kill the fucker.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> The fact that what Putin is doing does NOT outrage you is a bigger question. Maybe I was vague here when I said "snuffed out" so let me be crystal clear, someone should assassinate that maniac before he kills more innocent people.
> 
> The answer to your question is an unequivocal no, if any person is committing mass genocide, no matter who they are, they should be stopped at any cost.




Oh, dear.

No, I'm afraid that you were not vague at all; you were a perfect reflection of your trigger-happy society in your immature and irresponsible - and yes, politically illiterate - post.

And yes, you should be better and do better.

Advocating assassination is disgraceful, and you (and others here) would be the first to howl with outraged venom were others to advocate such an approach to dealing with an American president who was impervious to the rule of law and invaded other countries committing war crimes with abandon.

Does a preference for standards - such as the adhering to, or abiding by, the rule of law - somehow exclude that one can also be outraged by how Mr Putin and his forces conduct their "special military operation"? 

Or, is the mental landscape of some US posters incapable of admitting that one can hold a complex thought, one that (simultaneously) insists on upholding the rule of law while admitting that what is happening in Ukraine is appalling?

And no: "Snuffing out" - as a preferred policy - is unacceptable, even if Russians do it.  (And anyone else doing it - leaving aside the morality which is unacceptable - will never be accepted in - or by - Russia).  And - to be candid - assassination - even if the intended target is a moral monster - rarely achieves anything.

Far better - to my mind - to put the man on trial, (in an internationally recognized court), calmly, coolly, rationally, *legally*, admit evidence, witnesses, and let facts and law and (accepted) principles determine how we deal with this.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> Kill the fucker.



No.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> Oh, dear.
> 
> No, I'm afraid that you were not vague at all; you were a perfect reflection of your trigger-happy society in your immature and irresponsible - and yes, politically illiterate - post.
> 
> And yes, you should be better and do better.
> 
> Advocating assassination is disgraceful, and you (and others here) would be the first to howl with outraged venom were others to advocate such an approach to dealing with an American president who was impervious to the rule of law and invaded other countries committing war crimes with abandon.
> 
> Does a preference for standards - such as the adhering to, or abiding by, the rule of law - somehow exclude that one can also be outraged by how Mr Putin and his forces conduct their "special military operation"?
> 
> Or, is the mental landscape of some US posters incapable of admitting that one can hold a complex thought, one that insists on upholding the rule of law while admitting that what is happening in Ukraine is appalling?
> 
> And no: "Snuffing out" - as a preferred policy - is unacceptable, even if Russians do it.  (And anyone else doing it - leaving aside the morality which is unacceptable - will never be accepted in - or by - Russia).  And - to be candid - assassination - even if the intended target is a moral monster - rarely achieves anything.
> 
> Far better - to my mind - to put the man on trial, (in an internationally recognized court), calmly, coolly, rationally, *legally*, admit evidence, witnesses, and let facts and law and (accepted) principles determine how we deal with this.




I guess you must really like russian cheese.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> You think he‘s going to voluntarily show up at The Hague for a trial?



No.

Of course not.

But, he could be handed over.

But - after a defeat, in which (using carrots, currencies, such as time and money) his successors may arrive at uncomfortable conclusions that surrendering him (if they haven't already murdered him, or persuaded him that death is preferable to a future without power and prestige) he may be handed over to The Hague to stand trial.

In the late 1990s, - and yes, I worked in Bosnia at that time - nobody thought that Mr Milosevic or Dr Karadic - among others - would ever be arraigned; yet, they were. 

This process took time, the careful and meticulous amassing of evidence, the persuasion of his successors that the political (and economic cost) of protecting such people would be too high a price to pay, and so on.  This couldn't have happened in 1997, but, by a decade later, things were different.

If we don't model (and adhere to, abide by) the rule of law, we are no better than those we condemn.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> I guess you must really like russian cheese.



Spare me.

Pathetic and puerile.

Worse, an uninformed and unintelligent and uninteresting post.

If you were ever in Russia - and I have worked there, monitoring rather flawed elections - so, yes, I do know the country - you know perfectly well that their cheese is dire, and falls far of meeting European standards.

So, no, I don't care for Russian cheese.

However, advocating assassination is disgusting and disgraceful.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> No.
> 
> Of course not.
> 
> But, he could be handled over.
> 
> But - after a defeat, in which (using carrots, currencies, such as time and money) his successors may arrive at uncomfortable conclusions that surrendering him (if they haven't already murdered him, or persuaded him that death is preferable to a future without power and prestige) he may be handed over to The Hague to stand trial.
> 
> In the late 1990s, - and yes, I worked in Bosnia at that time - nobody thought that Mr Milosevic or Dr Karadic - among others - would ever be arraigned; yet, they were.
> 
> This process took time, the careful and meticulous amassing of evidence, the persuasion of his successors that the political (and economic cost) of protecting such people would be too high a price to pay, and so on.  This couldn't have happened in 1997, but, by a decade later, things were different.
> 
> If we don't model (and adhere to, abide by) the rule of law, we are no better than those we condemn.




Who‘s going to hand him over? Nobody is going to invade Russia, so the best that‘s going to happen is that Putin stops raping and destroying Ukraine.  He‘ll continue to rig elections, throw gay people in jail, and commit various crimes from the comforts of his own mansions.

He needs to die.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> Spare me.
> 
> Pathetic and puerile.
> 
> Worse, an uninformed and unintelligent and uninteresting post.
> 
> If you were ever in Russia - and I have worked there, monitoring rather flawed elections - so, yes, I do know the country - you know perfectly well that their cheese is dire, and falls far of meeting European standards.
> 
> So, no, I don't care for Russian cheese.
> 
> However, advocating assassination is disgusting and disgraceful.




So now we know you‘re a russian troll. That explains your terrible posts.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> Oh, dear.
> 
> No, I'm afraid that you were not vague at all; you were a perfect reflection of your trigger-happy society in your immature and irresponsible - and yes, politically illiterate - post.
> 
> And yes, you should be better and do better.



I see I've outraged you more than Putin has after killing thousands of innocent people, thank you for making my point.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> So now we know you‘re a russian troll. That explains your terrible posts.



Personal - and puerile - insults in lieu of any intelligent thought, or analysis?  

Seriously, this is pathetic, puerile, and imbecilic, and so idiotically juvenile.  But, unfortunately, all too predictable.  

I will confess that I fail to see how an argument - and, a plea - for upholding - and modeling, and abiding by - the rule of law (instead of a moronic rush to justify brute force, and assassination) is considered to be a position akin to that of "a Russian troll".

But, your binary culture will admit of no nuance that excludes blowing brains out as a choice, as political preference, political culture, and mere discourse.  

So be it: I'm still for the rule of law.  

You know, putting someone on trial rather than hanging them from a lamppost.  

But, that is me.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> I see I've outraged you more than Putin has after killing thousands of innocent people, thank you for making my point.



@Eric: With those sort of posts, regrettably, I simply see you as yet another trigger happy (unthinking) American.  Shoot first and ask questions (when you have to clean up the mess, political, social, cultural., economic, nuclear - while the Russians (outrageously) threaten the use of nuclear weapons, it remains an incontrovertible fact that only the US has ever - disgracefully - used them) afterwards.  

No nuance, limited understanding of concepts such as the rule of law.

Seriously: From a site owner (Musk, Arn, - granted, the role models leave a lot to be desired) this is pathetic.  

You cannot stand in - sit in - judgment on others if you do not uphold, abide by, adhere to, the standards you proclaim.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> Personal - and puerile - insults in lieu of any intelligent thought, or analysis?
> 
> Seriously, this is pathetic, puerile, and imbecilic, and so idiotically juvenile.  But, unfortunately, all too predictable.



You should really try saying some of this stuff out loud before you post it some time.


----------



## Cmaier

Eric said:


> You should really try saying some of this stuff out loud before you post it some time.




I know. I‘m hurt, injured, damaged and impaired by her words, remarks, comments, and locutions.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> You should really try saying some of this stuff out loud before you post it some time.



And you should be - perhaps - a little more thoughtful before advocating assassination so blithely, with such casual and irresponsible insouciance - as a solution for political problems.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> And you should be - perhaps - a little more thoughtful before advocating assassination so blithely, with such casual and irresponsible insouciance - as a solution for political problems.



He deserves to die to end this war, your pretentious nonsensical word-salad posts aren't going to change my mind. Try a little empathy, If it were your family that he targeted you would change your tune.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> He deserves to die to end this war, your pretentious nonsensical word-salad posts aren't going to change my mind. Try a little empathy, If it were your family that he targeted you would change your tune.



Try argument, not insult.

Try something intelligent, and informed, please.  

Not the irrational and capricious outbursts that characterize the tone, temper and content of some of your posts.

That is, something informed by knowledge, not irrational and capricious outbursts.  (And changing your mind - such as it is - on anything - as I have learned from experience - is a task quite beyond my current skill set).

Anyway: Why does the idea of being guided by the rule of law offend you so much?

Are you Arn, or Elon Musk?


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> Try argument, not insult.



One of the reasons it's hard for you to offend me is because after the first few words of one of your insufferable rants this is all I see before moving on.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> One of the reasons it's hard for you to offend me is because after the first few words of one of your insufferable rants this is all I see before moving on.



Yeah, whatever.

Offend you?

I'm not sure you can be offended.

Still less are you capable of engaging in dialogue, especially when your posts on these topic are trite insults or pathetic and puerile (and illiterate) memes.

Still: Pearls before swine.....what can I say?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Anyway, @Eric:

Advocating assassination is not a good look.

Forget me, I'm a wimpy European: I mean, I have worked in Ukraine, Russia, Georgia, Afghanistan, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Belarus, etc, etc, as a senior adviser on political and electoral matters.....so, what do I know, eh?

But, you know, someday, you may want to attract advertisers.

Now, I know: Americans think that killing children in schools is up there with the Second Amendment.  

And people with uteruses deserve to die.  

And people of color, well, we know you (you plural) like to kill them, as well.

However, advertisers (capitalists cowards) may run scared of platforms that advocate assassination (rather than seeking to gather evidence, arraign someone, and have them face trial).....just saying:

If you want to make money (in a post Twitter universe), you may wish to....ah, temper... your enthusiasm for irrational bloodshed.  Not all advertisers care for this.


----------



## Colstan

I usually stay out of food fights, but this has been great fun. I'm sure Mr. Putin will quite happily go to court to prove his innocence. Maybe a judge will rule he needs anger management classes. Serial killers need emotional counseling, rapists need to get in touch with their feelings, genocidal war criminals need understanding and support to see the error of their ways. Maybe a complementary food basket and parting gift, so that everyone will come to a mutual understanding and respect one another.

Oh dear, and while I was writing this, another gem appeared. Oh this is fantastic. Not only is it time for Putin to willingly submit himself to justice, we need to get a few shots in at the capitalist bourgeoisie, all in the name of the proletariat. Oh, and tarring and feathering an entire country, too. This isn't typical socialist pablum, but moonbat territory.

Keep it up @Scepticalscribe, you're totally convincing me with your one sentence paragraphs and personal internet outrage.


----------



## Deleted member 215

@Scepticalscribe is 100% right here.

@Eric and @Cmaier the both of you need to calm your tits. This is what pisses me off most about libs; they won't hesitate to eat their own. You guys barely even disagree on this, yet here you are jumping on someone over disagreement with your own emotional reactions to this conflict.


----------



## Cmaier

TBL said:


> @Scepticalscribe is 100% right here.
> 
> @Eric and @Cmaier the both of you need to calm your tits. This is what pisses me off most about libs; they won't hesitate to eat their own. You guys barely even disagree on this, yet here you are jumping on someone over disagreement with your own emotional reactions to this conflict.




I barely disagree? I believe i disagree entirely. I believe that anyone who does what Putin does not only deserves to die from a moral perspective, but that killing him is the only rational solution.  How many million people does he have to murder and rape before it‘s ok to talk about killing him?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

TBL said:


> @Scepticalscribe is 100% right here.
> 
> @Eric and @Cmaier the both of you need to calm your tits. This is what pisses me off most about libs; they won't hesitate to eat their own. You guys barely even disagree on this, yet here you are jumping on someone over disagreement with your own emotional reactions to this conflict.



Well said. 

And thank you.

And nowhere have I defended Mr Putin. Or his actions.  Not least because they are indefensible.

However, I merely think that the rule of law matters, and that he should face trial in a competent (and legitimate) and recognized - court of law, rather than suggest assassination as a recommended solution.

Leaving morality aside (and one cannot, for this is also a moral matter), one cannot, credibly, advocate assassination, and then recommend to Russia (and others) that they construct a (post-Putin) state buttressed by the rule of law.  It doesn't work like that.


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> @Scepticalscribe is 100% right here.
> 
> @Eric and @Cmaier the both of you need to calm your tits. This is what pisses me off most about libs; they won't hesitate to eat their own. You guys barely even disagree on this, yet here you are jumping on someone over disagreement with your own emotional reactions to this conflict.



Yes, show us how wrong we are by acting just like you are preaching against, this hypocrisy while acting like your above it all is laughable. Seriously man, get over yourself.


----------



## Eric

Cmaier said:


> I barely disagree? I believe i disagree entirely. I believe that anyone who does what Putin does not only deserves to die from a moral perspective, but that killing him is the only rational solution.  How many million people does he have to murder and rape before it‘s ok to talk about killing him?



This same crowd jumped me for saying the same thing about Hitler, the “well that would’ve been hasty” when talking about taking out a man responsible for killing 6 million Jews pretty much sets the tone.

BTW @TBL since you brought political sides to it what you are advocating is extremely Liberal, learn what party represents your positions before preaching to others about theirs.


----------



## Cmaier

Eric said:


> This same crowd jumped me for saying the same thing about Hitler, the “well that would’ve been hasty” when talking about taking out a man responsible for killing 6 million Jews pretty much sets the tone.
> 
> BTW @TBL since you brought political sides to it what you are advocating is extremely Liberal, learn what party represents your positions before preaching to others about theirs.




I would have happily snuffed baby hitler if i had a Time Machine and free saturday.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> I would have happily snuffed baby hitler if i had a Time Machine and free saturday.



That also assumes that you possessed the fortuitous gift of foresight in addition to your Time Machine and (a) Free Saturday.


----------



## Yoused

Eric said:


> This same crowd jumped me for saying the same thing about Hitler



Here is the problem: Hitler is a martyr. There are thousands of Americans who think he has been treated poorly by history, and that is partly because he was allowed to do the right thing by killing Hitler. Imagine if we had had chance to see him do the walk of shame, to be locked up in a dungeon for 25 years to share his food with rats and roaches, to be utterly humilialed and degraded. But, instead, he died his way out of shame, and so a segment of the population still reveres him. Lunatics _with lots of guns_.

Killing the bad guy is ingrained in our psyches, in part because we want this bad thing (whatever it may be) to be over. It is the visceral and facile answer to our frustrations and desire for recompense, but in the end, it _always comes back to bite us in the ass_.

I mean, I fully understand the anger, and have been caught up in the bloodlust myself. But H.L.Mencken said that _for every problem we have, there isa solution that is clean, simple and wrong_. In this case, very wrong. It might solve our problem right now, but our descendants will be coping with the repercussions, and those will almost certainly be worse. But, at least we all will be pushing up daisies ourselves by then, so that much will be _not our problem_.


----------



## Yoused

And, while on the subject of violence and retribution,









						'We know where your family live' - Ukrainian fighters face online death threats
					

A BBC investigation finds that Ukrainian soldiers and pro-Ukrainian activists are being targeted on Telegram.



					www.bbc.com
				




*We will, we will
Dox you!*​


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> Here is the problem: Hitler is a martyr. There are thousands of Americans who think he has been treated poorly by history, and that is partly because he was allowed to do the right thing by killing Hitler. Imagine if we had had chance to see him do the walk of shame, to be locked up in a dungeon for 25 years to share his food with rats and roaches, to be utterly humilialed and degraded. But, instead, he died his way out of shame, and so a segment of the population still reveres him. Lunatics _with lots of guns_.
> 
> Killing the bad guy is ingrained in our psyches, in part because we want this bad thing (whatever it may be) to be over. It is the visceral and facile answer to our frustrations and desire for recompense, but in the end, it _always comes back to bite us in the ass_.
> 
> I mean, I fully understand the anger, and have been caught up in the bloodlust myself. But H.L.Mencken said that _for every problem we have, there isa solution that is clean, simple and wrong_. In this case, very wrong. It might solve our problem right now, but our descendants will be coping with the repercussions, and those will almost certainly be worse. But, at least we all will be pushing up daisies ourselves by then, so that much will be _not our problem_.




Every day people are dying and getting maimed and getting raped and having their children stolen and having their homes destroyed and their lives upended by this creep. Try explaining to them that we can‘t kill Putin, because if we do then something hypothetically worse can happen at some point in the future.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> Every day people are dying and getting maimed and getting raped and having their children stolen and having their homes destroyed and their lives upended by this creep. Try explaining to them that we can‘t kill Putin, because if we do then something hypothetically worse can happen at some point in the future.



And - forgive me - but, is this supposed to be an argument for the (hypothetical, rhetorical, retrospective) assassination of President L. B. Johnson, yes?

And, if so, yes, nevertheless, I still reject it.

Rule of law......standards....


----------



## Yoused

Scepticalscribe said:


> Rule of law......standards....




Which is also problematic. In Russia, Vlad defines what "rule of law" means, and the world is still on edge about the big flash-booms that Russia has (we cannot assume that they are as defective as the rest of their military).


----------



## Colstan

TBL said:


> @Eric and @Cmaier the both of you need to calm your tits. This is what pisses me off most about libs; they won't hesitate to eat their own. You guys barely even disagree on this, yet here you are jumping on someone over disagreement with your own emotional reactions to this conflict.



This isn't about team sport politics. I'm not a liberal, but I support the war in Ukraine, because it's the right thing to do. Telling Eric and Cliff to "calm down" because it's not in the best interest of the tribe is a wrongheaded way of seeing this.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Colstan said:


> This isn't about team sport politics. I'm not a liberal, but I support the war in Ukraine, because it's the right thing to do. Telling Eric and Cliff to "calm down" because it's not in the best interest of the tribe is a wrongheaded way of seeing this.




It’s more that they’re being dicks, but sure.

And supporting the war is not the same as thinking the assassination of Putin would solve everything.


----------



## Eric

Yoused said:


> Here is the problem: Hitler is a martyr. There are thousands of Americans who think he has been treated poorly by history, and that is partly because he was allowed to do the right thing by killing Hitler. Imagine if we had had chance to see him do the walk of shame, to be locked up in a dungeon for 25 years to share his food with rats and roaches, to be utterly humilialed and degraded. But, instead, he died his way out of shame, and so a segment of the population still reveres him. Lunatics _with lots of guns_.
> 
> Killing the bad guy is ingrained in our psyches, in part because we want this bad thing (whatever it may be) to be over. It is the visceral and facile answer to our frustrations and desire for recompense, but in the end, it _always comes back to bite us in the ass_.
> 
> I mean, I fully understand the anger, and have been caught up in the bloodlust myself. But H.L.Mencken said that _for every problem we have, there isa solution that is clean, simple and wrong_. In this case, very wrong. It might solve our problem right now, but our descendants will be coping with the repercussions, and those will almost certainly be worse. But, at least we all will be pushing up daisies ourselves by then, so that much will be _not our problem_.



Yoused, the man killed 6 million Jews and here you are accusing _us_ of bloodlust for wanting him dead? Making it sounds like the alternative could be worse is insane, again *6 million Jews died* in the most heinous of ways. No, it could not have possibly been any worse with him dead, get real. Sorry but you guys sound like sympathizers when you defend him this way.


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> It’s more that they’re being dicks, but sure.
> 
> And supporting the war is not the same as thinking the assassination of Putin would solve everything.



We're only being dicks because we're defending a position you don't support, get off the name calling.


----------



## sgtaylor5

I found these very helpful:
https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-us/ and
https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-world/
From _The 5000-Year Leap_ by Skousen: both ways of thinking are needed to govern: Without the right, we'd go broke. Without the left, we wouldn't have empathy for others.
What kind of world do we want to live in? Do we even have a choice? I think we do. But, it takes commanding vision to get there.

I have been consumed with thoughts of getting rid of those that I see as opposed to my way of thinking in the US national sphere. I also know that is a wrong and potentially evil way of thinking and I oppose that in my mind when it comes up. Doesn't hurt that there is no way to accomplish anything I think of. But, there are those who *do* have the power, and I fear for my country when I see those people on the rise to power.

Countries gain in moral authority when they do the right things and suffer when they do the wrong things.

The Unites States has done many great things:

*showing the world how to run a free, democratic country* (until lately)
humanitarian efforts, public and private, around the world
keeping the peace (but I wish we hadn't been so ham-handed about it recently (Iraq, Afghanistan))
but suffers when doing wrong:

manifest destiny (destruction of native Americans)
slavery and how to think about blacks in general
empire-building (not in our general charter)
the intentional destruction of countervailing power structures against big business and the super rich.
Israel did right when, instead of a Mossad hit, they successfully captured and tried Adolf Eichmann. I personally think they lost their moral mandate after Labour lost it's long running mandate after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin and Likud took over. Netanyahu has been as corrosive to Israeli politics as Trump has been to ours.

South Africa did right and better by turning governance over to the blacks and setting up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to right long standing wrongs to the majority of the population. I wish we had one of those here.

Can the world do better? I do think that in the long run it would be better if Putin was brought to justice in a _legal_ manner into the International Court of Justice rather than in a _power_ manner via assassination. The US doesn't like the International Court of Justice, because some of their national deeds were evil. Fine. let those that were and are guilty suffer. Empire doesn't suit the American character and I'd like to see this country last longer than 300 years.

It took the help of an rightly inflexible graveyard cashier when I worked at the Park N Jet to show me that the invasion of Iraq was a grievous injustice and that we should have been in Afghanistan as a lightning stroke to get Bin Laden and nothing else. That really started me on the path from the right to the left. We can change our minds; I'm living proof.


----------



## Alli

Scepticalscribe said:


> Advocating assassination is disgraceful, and you (and others here) would be the first to howl with outraged venom were others to advocate such an approach to dealing with an American president who was impervious to the rule of law and invaded other countries committing war crimes with abandon.






Scepticalscribe said:


> But, he could be handed over.



One cannot compare the recommendation of assassination of a specific dictatorial monster to a what-if scenario of assassinating a random country leader. OTOH, if the US or England found themselves with someone in charge who decided to invade Monaco (example), bomb all the homes and businesses, rape anyone now left on the streets, and send the remaining living children off to live in Texas…then yes, that leader needs to be dealt with as well. And how the hell do you think said leader (Putin or the imaginary one) is going to get to The Hague? Handed over? Seriously.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Eric said:


> We're only being dicks because we're defending a position you don't support, get off the name calling.




No, I'm saying it because of the way you berated scepticalscribe and accused anyone who disagrees with your position of being a Putin supporter/Russian propagandist. My criticism is of your tactics and behavior, not your political position.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Eric said:


> We're only being dicks because we're defending a position you don't support, get off the name calling.



"bing a dick" is just "being a dick".......you can argue for your position without it


----------



## Eric

TBL said:


> No, I'm saying it because of the way you berated scepticalscribe and accused anyone who disagrees with your position of being a Putin supporter/Russian propagandist. My criticism is of your tactics and behavior, not your political position.



You're free to disagree but if you continue with the these attacks you'll be getting a break, so chill out.


----------



## Colstan

TBL said:


> It’s more that they’re being dicks, but sure.



You called them out for not sticking to the liberal standard that you expect, but sure.


TBL said:


> And supporting the war is not the same as thinking the assassination of Putin would solve everything.



I agree with the left-leaning folks here on perhaps 50% of issues. On the 50% we don't agree on, we may find compromise, or just remain in disagreement. In this case, I'm with Alli, Eric and Cliff that Uncle Putin needs to get the Mussolini treatment. Nobody says it would solve everything, so stow the straw man, but it would change the dynamic of having a murderous dictator doing as he pleases with his neighbors, while blackmailing the world with his threats.


----------



## Cmaier

EDIT: Since the post I cited was deleted for name-calling multiple forum members, I am removing the citation below.



TBL said:


> [Removed]




Name-calling is the last refuge of those who have no merits to argue.  This discussion started by saying we were bloodthirsty animals merely for suggesting  killing murderous dictators like Hitler and Putin, who between them have murdered many millions of people, initiated wars against numerous countries, targeted civilians in war, used rape as a tool of war, committed genocide, taken tens of thousands of children from their parents, etc. Etc.    Right off the bat it was name-calling instead of ”here’s the counter-argument.”   You guys are pretty disappointing.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Eric said:


> You're free to disagree but if you continue with the these attacks you'll be getting a break, so chill out.




Moderators shouldn't be participating in threads they're moderating.......when things get heated, it's obviously difficult for a moderator to moderate without getting overheated themselves. 

Any sense of "fairness" disappears


----------



## Alli

Macky-Mac said:


> Moderators shouldn't be participating in threads they're moderating.......when things get heated, it's obviously difficult for a moderator to moderate without getting overheated themselves.
> 
> Any sense of "fairness" disappears



Easier said than done on a small forum with few moderators.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Alli said:


> Easier said than done on a small forum with few moderators.



not really......moderators just have to resist participating in threads they're moderating. That's just part of the task.


----------



## lizkat

Colstan said:


> You called them out for not sticking to the liberal standard that you expect, but sure.
> 
> I agree with the left-leaning folks here on perhaps 50% of issues. On the 50% we don't agree on, we may find compromise, or just remain in disagreement. In this case, I'm with Alli, Eric and Cliff that Uncle Putin needs to get the Mussolini treatment. Nobody says it would solve everything, so stow the straw man, but it would change the dynamic of having a murderous dictator doing as he pleases with his neighbors, while blackmailing the world with his threats.




An assassination might not "change the dynamic" in an appreciably better way.

One could not be sure of anything going forward after Putin had initiated the invasion of Ukraine.  Even the best of military advisers acknowledge that with the first shot fired, what happens and what was planned begin to diverge.

We don't really know what level of support Putin truly had then or truly retains now.   If someone were to assassinate Putin, no one could  foretell what would then ensue, either with respect to conclusion of Russia's aggression in Ukraine,  or regarding political / military / social upheaval in Russia.  In any case there would remain the grotesque economic burdens Putin has brought down upon his country by persisting in a military operation that only five countries in the world don't condemn him for.  He is able to continue this assault upon Ukraine only because everyone fears escalation to use of nuclear weapons.

The destruction of life and infrastructure in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is horrendous.  There is no guarantee that it would cease upon the assassination of Putin.  No assurance of effective regime change either.  No assurance that whoever seized power would not threaten to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Doubtless one result would be a fast spreading conspiracy theory that Ukrainians somehow managed the assassination.  It would serve every Kremlin insider working meanwhile to gain enough power to take over. 

There is no succession plan right now except that the prime minister steps in as acting president for a maximum of three months, after which elections shall be held. Who gets to stand is determined behind the scenes by elites and the upper house of the parliament. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin is a technocrat, an economist, a tax guy and a supremely bland politician, which is the only reason there even is someone in that slot,  else Putin would have done away with it in one of his unending assaults on the efficacy of Russian government checks and balances over the years.  It's not clear he'd become the favorite, and it's not clear who would have enabled that behind the scenes either.  

Foreign Affairs ran a piece earlier this year about potential power struggles when Putin ceases to lead Russia (for whatever reason).  









						The Power Struggle After Putin
					

Russia’s inevitable succession crisis




					www.foreignaffairs.com
				






> Most autocracies are surprisingly durable. Even after authoritarian leaders die in office, their regimes often survive for years or even decades. According to the political scientists Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Erica Frantz, who analyzed all succession events in authoritarian countries between 1946 and 2012, 87 percent of autocratic regimes were still in place one year after a leader’s death, and 76 percent were still in place after five years.
> 
> But not all forms of authoritarianism are equally durable. Kendall-Taylor and Frantz found that compared with monarchies, single-party regimes, and military juntas, personalist autocracies such as the one Putin has built are the most vulnerable to regime change. Seventy-eight percent of them were still in place a year after a leader’s death, but that number declined to just 44 percent after five years. In many cases, such as Syria under Hafez al-Assad and North Korea under Kim Il Sung, power passed directly to a family member, helping ensure the survival of the regime. But in Russia, Putin’s daughters are not being groomed for rule; the media are strongly discouraged from even talking about them.






> Recent Russian history provides some clues as to what it might look like if things go off the rails. In 1993, a power struggle between Yeltsin and the leftover Soviet parliament yielded two weeks of “dual power” in Russia that ended with tanks firing on parliament. In 1999, the transition from Yeltsin to Putin coincided with the resumption of war in the breakaway region of Chechnya and a series of mysterious bombings in Moscow apartment complexes that killed hundreds. When Putin had to temporarily step away from the presidency in 2008 due to term limits, rival factions orchestrated the arrest of key figures from each other’s ranks—a form of political hostage taking aimed at gaining leverage in the succession struggle. In short, leadership transitions in Russia have the potential to be very messy.




So how can one think an assassination of Vladimir Putin would serve anyone's interests?  It will not bring back the dead.  It offers no guarantee of stopping the dreadful slaughter and mistreatment of civilians in Ukraine.   And... the very question of who would do such a thing certainly circulates amongst those inside Russia who already wish Putin were no longer head of state, but the fact that no one has done it during the extension of this debacle suggests that the man is not without effective support even now.   All that killing Putin would do would be to insert a new level of apprehension about how the conflict in Ukraine will finally come to an end.


----------



## Alli

Macky-Mac said:


> not really......moderators just have to resist participating in threads they're moderating. That's just part of the task.



If someone is not following the thread, how will they know if moderation is needed?

Police officers just have to resist driving on the same roads where they hand out tickets?


----------



## Eric

lizkat said:


> An assassination might not "change the dynamic" in an appreciably better way.
> 
> One could not be sure of anything going forward after Putin had initiated the invasion of Ukraine.  Even the best of military advisers acknowledge that with the first shot fired, what happens and what was planned begin to diverge.
> 
> We don't really know what level of support Putin truly had then or truly retains now.   If someone were to assassinate Putin, no one could  foretell what would then ensue, either with respect to conclusion of Russia's aggression in Ukraine,  or regarding political / military / social upheaval in Russia.  In any case there would remain the grotesque economic burdens Putin has brought down upon his country by persisting in a military operation that only five countries in the world don't condemn him for.  He is able to continue this assault upon Ukraine only because everyone fears escalation to use of nuclear weapons.
> 
> The destruction of life and infrastructure in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is horrendous.  There is no guarantee that it would cease upon the assassination of Putin.  No assurance of effective regime change either.  No assurance that whoever seized power would not threaten to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Doubtless one result would be a fast spreading conspiracy theory that Ukrainians somehow managed the assassination.  It would serve every Kremlin insider working meanwhile to gain enough power to take over.
> 
> There is no succession plan right now except that the prime minister steps in as acting president for a maximum of three months, after which elections shall be held. Who gets to stand is determined behind the scenes by elites and the upper house of the parliament. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin is a technocrat, an economist, a tax guy and a supremely bland politician, which is the only reason there even is someone in that slot,  else Putin would have done away with it in one of his unending assaults on the efficacy of Russian government checks and balances over the years.  It's not clear he'd become the favorite, and it's not clear who would have enabled that behind the scenes either.
> 
> Foreign Affairs ran a piece earlier this year about potential power struggles when Putin ceases to lead Russia (for whatever reason).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Power Struggle After Putin
> 
> 
> Russia’s inevitable succession crisis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foreignaffairs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So how can one think an assassination of Vladimir Putin would serve anyone's interests?  It will not bring back the dead.  It offers no guarantee of stopping the dreadful slaughter and mistreatment of civilians in Ukraine.   And... the very question of who would do such a thing certainly circulates amongst those inside Russia who already wish Putin were no longer head of state, but the fact that no one has done it during the extension of this debacle suggests that the man is not without effective support even now.   All that killing Putin would do would be to insert a new level of apprehension about how the conflict in Ukraine will finally come to an end.




Lots to unpack here but just wanted to address this point:


> So how can one think an assassination of Vladimir Putin would serve anyone's interests?




This is a very unpopular war, not just around the world but also within the Russian government. Without Putin there to drive it I think they pull the plug on it, same goes for Hitler. It's not about vengeance or bloodlust, it's about preventing more unnecessary deaths going forward.


----------



## Macky-Mac

lizkat said:


> An assassination might not "change the dynamic" in an appreciably better way.
> 
> One could not be sure of anything going forward after Putin had initiated the invasion of Ukraine.  Even the best of military advisers acknowledge that with the first shot fired, what happens and what was planned begin to diverge.
> 
> ....




indeed.....setting aside the moral, and emotional issues, there's a very practical question of whether such an action would improve the situation or just make things worse


----------



## shadow puppet

The thing I worry about in the event of an assassination (and trust me, I have wondered why no one has made an attempt on Trump, MTG and the like), is that it would turn them into martyrs.  Which in turn, could and most likely would, create an even worse situation.


----------



## DT

Macky-Mac said:


> not really......moderators just have to resist participating in threads they're moderating. That's just part of the task.




Since Eric is the site owner, admin and primary moderator, he effectively moderates every thread, but (understandably) also wants to participate on his own site.  Otherwise, and this is just from my perspective, why even bother?  (i.e., it's not as if this site is for generating revenue - like, for example, The Verge - in fact, I'd suspect he loses money on keeping this site running, even with donations).


----------



## Macky-Mac

Alli said:


> If someone is not following the thread, how will they know if moderation is needed?
> 
> Police officers just have to resist driving on the same roads where they hand out tickets?




"following" is different than "participating"


----------



## Citysnaps

Macky-Mac said:


> "following" is different than "participating"




Eric's site...he can participate if and whenever he wants to.

To suggest that he shouldn't, after spending $ setting it up, bringing members in, managing it, etc. is just plain silly.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

TBL said:


> It’s more that they’re being dicks, but sure.
> 
> And supporting the war is not the same as thinking the assassination of Putin would solve everything.



Well said.

This is an important distinction to draw.

One can support the war - and support Ukraine's right to exist as a sovereign nation - while deploring a post that calls for the assassination of Mr Putin.


Eric said:


> We're only being dicks because we're defending a position you don't support, get off the name calling.



Your position is indefensible, and what is worse, you are unable to defend it -  or accept disagreement - without lashing out with intemperate posts where insult is confused with argument.




sgtaylor5 said:


> I found these very helpful:
> https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-us/ and
> https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-world/
> From _The 5000-Year Leap_ by Skousen: both ways of thinking are needed to govern: Without the right, we'd go broke. Without the left, we wouldn't have empathy for others.
> What kind of world do we want to live in? Do we even have a choice? I think we do. But, it takes commanding vision to get there.
> 
> I have been consumed with thoughts of getting rid of those that I see as opposed to my way of thinking in the US national sphere. I also know that is a wrong and potentially evil way of thinking and I oppose that in my mind when it comes up. Doesn't hurt that there is no way to accomplish anything I think of. But, there are those who *do* have the power, and I fear for my country when I see those people on the rise to power.
> 
> Countries gain in moral authority when they do the right things and suffer when they do the wrong things.
> 
> The Unites States has done many great things:
> 
> *showing the world how to run a free, democratic country* (until lately)
> humanitarian efforts, public and private, around the world
> keeping the peace (but I wish we hadn't been so ham-handed about it recently (Iraq, Afghanistan))
> but suffers when doing wrong:
> 
> manifest destiny (destruction of native Americans)
> slavery and how to think about blacks in general
> empire-building (not in our general charter)
> the intentional destruction of countervailing power structures against big business and the super rich.
> Israel did right when, instead of a Mossad hit, they successfully captured and tried Adolf Eichmann. I personally think they lost their moral mandate after Labour lost it's long running mandate after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin and Likud took over. Netanyahu has been as corrosive to Israeli politics as Trump has been to ours.
> 
> South Africa did right and better by turning governance over to the blacks and setting up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to right long standing wrongs to the majority of the population. I wish we had one of those here.
> 
> Can the world do better? I do think that in the long run it would be better if Putin was brought to justice in a _legal_ manner into the International Court of Justice rather than in a _power_ manner via assassination. The US doesn't like the International Court of Justice, because some of their national deeds were evil. Fine. let those that were and are guilty suffer. Empire doesn't suit the American character and I'd like to see this country last longer than 300 years.
> 
> It took the help of an rightly inflexible graveyard cashier when I worked at the Park N Jet to show me that the invasion of Iraq was a grievous injustice and that we should have been in Afghanistan as a lightning stroke to get Bin Laden and nothing else. That really started me on the path from the right to the left. We can change our minds; I'm living proof.



Excellent, well argued and thoughtful post.

@lizkat's is also well worth reading closely.


TBL said:


> No, I'm saying it because of the way you berated scepticalscribe and accused anyone who disagrees with your position of being a Putin supporter/Russian propagandist. My criticism is of your tactics and behavior, not your political position.



Exactly.

Deploring the idea of assassination does not - in any way - make one a supporter of what Russia (or Mr Putin) has done.




Macky-Mac said:


> "bing a dick" is just "being a dick".......you can argue for your position without it



Again, exactly.   

Well said.


Eric said:


> You're free to disagree but if you continue with the these attacks you'll be getting a break, so chill out.



A threat?

Are you capable of tolerating disagreement, and dissent - and, indeed, name-calling, given that some of your own posts were a veritable model of intemperate insult - without recourse to exclusion, expulsion and use of the mod hammer?


Cmaier said:


> EDIT: Since the post I cited was deleted for name-calling multiple forum members, I am removing the citation below.
> 
> 
> 
> Name-calling is the last refuge of those who have no merits to argue.  This discussion started by saying we were bloodthirsty animals merely for suggesting  killing murderous dictators like Hitler and Putin, who between them have murdered many millions of people, initiated wars against numerous countries, targeted civilians in war, used rape as a tool of war, committed genocide, taken tens of thousands of children from their parents, etc. Etc.    Right off the bat it was name-calling instead of ”here’s the counter-argument.”   You guys are pretty disappointing.



Nobody said you were "bloodthirsty animals" for "killing murderous dictators" - please do not put words in my - or anyone else's mouth.

What I have argued for is the rule of law.


Macky-Mac said:


> Moderators shouldn't be participating in threads they're moderating.......when things get heated, it's obviously difficult for a moderator to moderate without getting overheated themselves.
> 
> Any sense of "fairness" disappears



Agreed.

This is a separate issue to that of the thread, but - over the two years that this site has existed - is something that I have noted occurs.

@Eric and @Cmaier: You cannot be judge, jury, prosecutor and impassioned (if intemperate) participants in your own threads, and simultaneously maintain a sense of fairness.

Sometimes, there may be a contradiction - a conflict - between the positions required of a site owner (and/or mod) and that of an enthusiastic and engaged poster.

While, in a small site, I would not argue that mods exclude themselves, I would recommend that they pay even closer attention to their own posts.

Tossing insults around - and then threatening retribution by way of recourse to a mod's hammer when someone responds in like manner - doesn't just lack a "sense of fairness" (as @Macky-Mac so rightly says), but is, instead, an abuse of power.

And this is not the first - or second - time that this has occurred on this site.


Macky-Mac said:


> not really......moderators just have to resist participating in threads they're moderating. That's just part of the task.



Agreed.

Or, at the very least, control themselves, restrain their more erratic impulses, and try to exercise some thought before pressing "post".


DT said:


> Since Eric is the site owner, admin and primary moderator, he effectively moderates every thread, but (understandably) also wants to participate on his own site.  Otherwise, and this is just from my perspective, why even bother?  (i.e., it's not as if this site is for generating revenue - like, for example, The Verge - in fact, I'd suspect he loses money on keeping this site running, even with donations).



Yes, but to reiterate: You cannot credibly be judge, jury, prosecutor, enforcer and passionately engaged participant who is willing to use the powers of the former position to silence or shut up debate in the latter.   

Or, of course, you can, but, to be candid, it is an utter (and all too often, capricious) abuse of power.

And, if @Eric - or any other mod - is to engage in a thread as a participant, mistaking insult for debate - it ill behoves them to use their powers as staff members to silence (exclude, expel) those with whom they disagree, for, to do so, is an abuse of power. 

Now, personally, I think your suspension - preceded by an ugly threat - of @TBL is in poor form.

Not only is it unfair, it also comes across as extraordinarily capricious, and not a little intolerant.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Citysnaps said:


> Eric's site...he can participate if and whenever he wants to.
> 
> To suggest that he shouldn't, after spending $ setting it up, bringing members in, managing it, etc. is just plain silly.



No problems about participation.

The problems arise when @Eric uses the powers (as site owner and staff) at his disposal to police - and silence or exclude participants - in debate in which he participates as a member.

This is something that can lead to abuses of power.


----------



## Macky-Mac

DT said:


> Since Eric is the site owner, admin and primary moderator, he effectively moderates every thread, but (understandably) also wants to participate on his own site.  Otherwise, and this is just from my perspective, why even bother?  (i.e., it's not as if this site is for generating revenue - like, for example, The Verge - in fact, I'd suspect he loses money on keeping this site running, even with donations).




I am of course fully aware that it's Eric site....mama's lil stinker, right......and I hope he's enjoying having the site



Citysnaps said:


> Eric's site...he can participate if and whenever he wants to.
> 
> To suggest that he shouldn't, after spending $ setting it up, bringing members in, managing it, etc. is just plain silly.




I'm not suggesting he shouldn't participate in any thread.......I'm just making suggestions that would make the site more welcoming


----------



## Citysnaps

Scepticalscribe said:


> No problems about participation.
> 
> The problems arise when @Eric uses the powers (as site owner and staff) at his disposal to police - and silence or exclude participants - in debate in which he participates as a member.
> 
> This is something that can lead to abuses of power.




In life we all have choices to make. If you don't like the way the site is run, to the point where it makes you unhappy or angry, simply don't participate. That's what I would do if I felt that way. 

Easy.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> No problems about participation.
> 
> The problems arise when @Eric uses the powers (as site owner and staff) at his disposal to police - and silence or exclude participants - in debate in which he participates as a member.
> 
> This is something that can lead to abuses of power.



You should know that if it wasn’t for me defending you outside of the public forums you would’ve been gone a long time ago. In this case those powers are the only reason you’re still here.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> You should know that if it wasn’t for me defending you outside of the public forums you would’ve been gone a long time ago. In this case those powers are the only reason you’re still here.



Seriously?

This is what passes for an argument?  

A masked threat disguised as a demand for gratitude?

You can do a lot better than this.


----------



## Citysnaps

Scepticalscribe said:


> Seriously?
> 
> This is what passes for an argument?
> 
> A masked threat disguised as a demand for gratitude?
> 
> You can do a lot better than this.




What he said is true. Don't think he was looking for anything in return. Just stating facts.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Citysnaps said:


> What he said is true. Don't think he was looking for anything in return. Just stating facts.



We run the risk of derailing the thread if this element of this discussion is continued here; some version of SFF is probably better.

But, capricious moderation - and an inability to distinguish between hats (mod or participant and to use the powers of the latter to suppress and silence individuals in the former) - is something that - to my mind - has marred this site.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> We run the risk of derailing the thread if this element of this discussion is continued here; some version of SFF is probably better.
> 
> But, capricious moderation - and an inability to distinguish between hats (mod or participant and to use the powers of the latter to suppress and silence individuals in the former) - is something that - to my mind - has marred this site.




Unless I’m missing something, the only moderation in this thread occurred when somebody told mods to f- off, insulted a non-mod forum member who had done nothing other than post that he agreed with other forum members, and personally insulted various mods by calling them names.  Not sure how that’s “capricious.”


----------



## Citysnaps

Scepticalscribe said:


> *We run the risk of derailing the thread *if this element of this discussion is continued here; some version of SFF is probably better.
> 
> But, capricious moderation - and an inability to distinguish between hats (mod or participant and to use the powers of the latter to suppress and silence individuals in the former) - is something that - to my mind - has marred this site.




That ship sailed long ago. 

Again...Eric's site.   Upset or angry about how it's run? Consider other site options that will bring you happiness.


----------



## Alli

So how can we rerail this thread? Anyone?


----------



## lizkat

​


Eric said:


> This is a very unpopular war, not just around the world but also within the Russian government. Without Putin there to drive it I think they pull the plug on it, same goes for Hitler. It's not about vengeance or bloodlust, it's about preventing more unnecessary deaths going forward.




The popularity of the war is not a metric that has some level below which assassination is justified.  Of course I can hope the war's unpopularity is having some effect on Putin's inner circle.  I hope they'll be able to talk him into calling a halt to military attacks in Ukraine,  not just try to kill him and figure that his death would put an end to the war.   They couldn't know if killing Putin would even do that.   This pertains whether an assassination was attempted from insanity, in desperation, or if "only" meaning to rid the landscape of an evil person on the grounds that any citizen would do it legally right now

*if there were a legal way but there isn't and so what, let's*​_* just get on with it and worry about the state of the law later. *_​​What is the difference between the assassin and a corrupt authoritarian dictator at that moment?

It's an extrajudicial, extralegal decision to force change of government.  The antithesis of rule of law.

To assassinate a head of state or other official --a good, bad or indifferent leader--  is in the end to go for it "and then it will be done."  But it's never just done, never really over.   The reverberations continue the end of time --same as slaughter of an innocent whose memory is carried forever by descendants of kin and friends-- but magnified because of high profile, therefore creating more future risk of reprisal.

The goal is to stop the carnage in Ukraine, not to wonder if that would continue if someone offed Putin.


----------



## Eric

lizkat said:


> The goal is to stop the carnage in Ukraine, not to wonder if that would continue if someone offed Putin.



And how does one go about that when the one pulling all the strings is being so relentlessly defended? If that were one of our family members being massacred by that maniac you can bet your ass they wouldn't be defending the person who ordered the strike.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Citysnaps said:


> That ship sailed long ago.
> 
> Again...Eric's site.   Upset or angry about how it's run? Consider other site options that will bring you happiness.



You know, this is not the first time this suggestion has been made.

Is this the TA equivalent of being handed a loaded pistol in an office while the door is closed quietly?

Eric's site, agreed: But, someday, Eric the site owner will have to consider how he deals with dissent and disagreement, and whether using staff powers to silence and suppress contributions he dislikes in debates where he is an enthusiastic participant is the best way to run the site.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> ​
> 
> The popularity of the war is not a metric that has some level below which assassination is justified.  Of course I can hope the war's unpopularity is having some effect on Putin's inner circle.  I hope they'll be able to talk him into calling a halt to military attacks in Ukraine,  not just try to kill him and figure that his death would put an end to the war.   They couldn't know if killing Putin would even do that.   This pertains whether an assassination was attempted from insanity, in desperation, or if "only" meaning to rid the landscape of an evil person on the grounds that any citizen would do it legally right now
> 
> *if there were a legal way but there isn't and so what, let's*​_* just get on with it and worry about the state of the law later. *_​​What is the difference between the assassin and a corrupt authoritarian dictator at that moment?
> 
> It's an extrajudicial, extralegal decision to force change of government.  The antithesis of rule of law.
> 
> To assassinate a head of state or other official --a good, bad or indifferent leader--  is in the end to go for it "and then it will be done."  But it's never just done, never really over.   The reverberations continue the end of time --same as slaughter of an innocent whose memory is carried forever by descendants of kin and friends-- but magnified because of high profile, therefore creating more future risk of reprisal.
> 
> The goal is to stop the carnage in Ukraine, not to wonder if that would continue if someone offed Putin.



Excellent post and well said.


Eric said:


> And how does one go about that when the one pulling all the strings is being so relentlessly defended? If that were one of our family members being massacred by that maniac you can bet your ass they wouldn't be defending the person who ordered the strike.



Nobody is defending Mr Putin on this site, and I am unclear as to how you can construe this from the posts of those who argue for the application of the rule of law.


----------



## Eric

Scepticalscribe said:


> Excellent post and well said.
> 
> Nobody is defending Mr Putin on this site, and I am unclear as to how you can construe this from the posts of those who argue for the application of the rule of law.



Oh good then, my bad. So you agree he should be assassinated since he's the one who's ordered the death of thousands of people, carpet bombing hospitals and occupied schools with children then?

Glad we see eye to eye on this one.


----------



## Citysnaps

Scepticalscribe said:


> Is this the TA equivalent of being handed a loaded pistol in an office while the door is closed quietly?
> 
> Eric's site, agreed: But, someday, Eric the site owner will have to consider how he deals with dissent and disagreement, and whether using staff powers to silence and suppress contributions he dislikes in debates where he is an enthusiastic participant is the best way to run the site.




Not at all.

Just suggesting, and I'm being sincere, that it's probably best to find happiness for _yourself_ rather than worry about how _someone else_ chooses to manage _their_ site.  Whether it's the best way to run the site, in the end, falls on him, good or bad. Those are _his_ dice to roll. I wouldn't worry about it.

And with that...why bang your head against the wall trying to get someone to do something they might not want to do?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Eric said:


> Oh good then, my bad. So you agree he should be assassinated since he's the one who's ordered the death of thousands of people, carpet bombing hospitals and occupied schools with children then?
> 
> Glad we see eye to eye on this one.



No.

Nowhere have I written - or stated, or said - that Mr Putin should be assassinated.  

Rather, as I have already written, I believe that he should be compelled to stand trial.  

This is at least the third post on this thread where my position has been misrepresented, or deliberately misunderstood.  Perhaps reading comprehension is not the strong point of some on this thread.

I have argued - through several pages - for the application of the rule of law.

We must uphold our own standards, and must be seen to adhere to the standards we preach, otherwise, we are little better than those whom we condemn.

Leaving aside the legal and moral arguments, assassination as a political tool doesn't work, - even if the Russians were do carry out such an act themselves - and the long term effects have little to recommend them.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

In any case, if Republicans win the House - or, worse, the Senate - following the mid-term elections, I would rather imagine that US policy towards Ukraine might swivel, might pivot, as a consequence, with considerable pressure being exerted on Ukraine to enter talks, (and consider concessions).


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> Rather, as I have already written, I believe that he should be compelled to stand trial.



Which will never happen. He hasn’t broken any laws of the only jurisdiction that has access to him, because he created those laws. No other jurisdiction has access to him.  So by insisting on an impossible solution, you are condemning thousands of more innocent ukrainians to having their homes and businesses destroyed, to freeze to death in the winter, to be blown up by rockets and artillery aimed at their homes, schools, and hospitals, and to be raped, slaughtered, and thrown into mass graves by russian troops.  

But if it makes you feel better, I’m all for us going in there, kidnapping him, putting him on trial, and then executing him when he’s found guilty.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> In any case, if Republicans win the House - or, worse, the Senate - following the mid-term elections, I would rather imagine that US policy towards Ukraine might swivel, might pivot, as a consequence, with considerable pressure being exerted on Ukraine to enter talks, (and consider concessions).




They will never consider concessions, nor should they. That only encourages Russia to do it again. Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, whatever random country Putin feels like taking chunks of next. And if Biden wants to support Ukraine, congress has no easy way to stop it. The executive branch is vested with enormous power to enact foreign policy, and to send troops and armaments where the president believes it is necessary to protect the U.S., its treaty allies, and its interests.  If congress refuses to authorize money for weapons for Ukraine, those same weapons will go to Ukraine in the form of NATO or US troops. And rightfully so.


----------



## lizkat

Eric said:


> And how does one go about that when the one pulling all the strings is being so relentlessly defended? If that were one of our family members being massacred by that maniac you can bet your ass they wouldn't be defending the person who ordered the strike.




One isn't defending Putin's behavior by saying that assassinating the guy will not solve the problem, and might exacerbate it.  

The change in Putin's direction clearly has to come from one or more of his advisers persuading him that his domestic political situation is weakening and can be strengthened only by his cessation of military action in Ukraine.

Their pressure on him will be because of the effectiveness of the West's sanctions and military assistance to Ukraine... and maybe a tacit acknowledgment in Putin's inner circles, although not by Putin himself, that the West has actually behaved with restraint versus Russia, even given the mutual deterrence issues around potential use of nuclear weapons. 

The West didn't have to do these things:  ask Ukraine not to commit counter-aggression in Russia, ask Ukraine to signal readiness for a political end to conflict --not to give up turf,  but to engage in conventional political means of ending a war, e.g., arranging a ceasefire, setting up a neutral location for talks, providing channels for discussion of repatriation of prisoners, medical care etc.​
The aggression in Ukraine is untenable because most of the countries in the world are UN members and do subscribe to territorial sovereignty  --including his sometime pals in China, Iran, Turkey.   His peers in UN security council do want this to stop.

Yes it's excruciating to see Putin's cruelty continue as winter approaches.  Killing him won't stop it. 

Who's to say that butcher of a general he put in as commander wouldn't say it's okay  _I got this, just get me more guns, some vodka, cabbage, potatoes,  we are Russia and we will prevail. _​
Putin has to be brought to see stopping his aggression as an advantage to him,  personally.  That's the process that is already happening, grindingly slow though it is.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

lizkat said:


> One isn't defending Putin's behavior by saying that assassinating the guy will not solve the problem, and might exacerbate it.



Exactly, and very well said.  

Excellent post.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> Exactly, and very well said.
> 
> Excellent post.




Doesn't help me slog through the war news every day.  I'd like to kill him myself but hope no one does.


----------



## lizkat

Cmaier said:


> They will never consider concessions, nor should they. That only encourages Russia to do it again. Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, whatever random country Putin feels like taking chunks of next. And if Biden wants to support Ukraine, congress has no easy way to stop it. The executive branch is vested with enormous power to enact foreign policy, and to send troops and armaments where the president believes it is necessary to protect the U.S., its treaty allies, and its interests.  If congress refuses to authorize money for weapons for Ukraine, those same weapons will go to Ukraine in the form of NATO or US troops. And rightfully so.



Yeah Kevin McCarthy's talking campaign-level (or maybe Russian asset level?) trash when he speaks of reducing aid to Ukraine... and it's far from clear that the majority of his caucus would be with him if he went to make a thing of it next term, gavel in hand or otherwise.   Americans don't like Russia's aggression in Ukraine, and that's a bipartisan sentiment.

Biden tried to make it clear he was not talking about Ukraine making territorial concessions,  only for Ukraine to signal that it understood there must be a political settlement to end of any conflict, not just cessation of hostilities because the last man standing saw no one left to shoot at.   It would be a process, not some kind of package.   It would mean sitting down with a mediator (Turkey maybe) and possibly some international mediation facilitators, not ones strongly associated with the West,  to hash out return of prisoners, return of Ukrainians forcibly removed to interior of Russia, safe passage out of conflict zones by retreating troops and logistics services and whatever else comes up as talks continue.


----------



## Alli

lizkat said:


> Yeah Kevin McCarthy's talking campaign-level (or maybe Russian asset level?) trash when he speaks of reducing aid to Ukraine... and it's far from clear that the majority of his caucus would be with him if he went to make a thing of it next term, gavel in hand or otherwise. Americans don't like Russia's aggression in Ukraine, and that's a bipartisan sentiment.



We’re in a world of hurt should McCarthy become Speaker.


----------



## Citysnaps

Alli said:


> We’re in a world of hurt should McCarthy become Speaker.




Disappoints me no end he "represents" California, even if it's just a chunk of the state.


----------



## lizkat

Alli said:


> We’re in a world of hurt should McCarthy become Speaker.



Yeah and not just him but the rest of those inclined to weaken federal government by defunding "inconvenient" agencies,  then deriding them, declaring them incompetent and disbanding them, one at a time.  But I digress.

McCarthy just on the matter of Ukraine (and other appropriations-related measures) as Speaker will be problematic unless some in his caucus can persuade him he's not immune to rebellion.   John Boehner finally found out how difficult it can be to herd cats, and he had a far better grasp of how to do it than does Kevin McCarthy, even observing him as minority leader.    Starting off by trying to kill aid to Ukraine is not the way to cement alliances as a new Speaker.   He'd split the party and possibly the Trump base too.


----------



## Macky-Mac

lizkat said:


> So after Germany's Scholtz and China's Xi had a meeting, and apparently agreed that the prospect of Russia using nukes over the Ukraine situation would be a bridge too far,  Xi was reported by Chinese state media to have "called on the international community to "reject the threat of nuclear weapons and advocate against a nuclear war to prevent a crisis on the Eurasian continent."
> 
> Of course no one has yet vouched for whether Putin has taken that on board  as a useful suggestion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scholz and Xi agree Russia would cross a line with nuclear weapons in Ukraine
> 
> 
> After a meeting with Xi in Beijing, Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the two leaders agreed that with the use of nuclear weapons, Russia would cross a line drawn by the international community.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org




Sunday's briefing from ISW includes some comments about Xi among its discussion of Russia's apparent toning down of their nuclear threat.....an interesting briefing but too long to quote, so here's a link;    ISW for 11-6


----------



## Nycturne

Eric said:


> And how does one go about that when the one pulling all the strings is being so relentlessly defended? If that were one of our family members being massacred by that maniac you can bet your ass they wouldn't be defending the person who ordered the strike.




That's the billion dollar question, isn't it?

Here's where I might come off a bit callous, but I don't think taking Putin out should be on NATO's todo list right now. Yes it means the war goes on, and Putin's regime will likely continue to push the boundaries with war crimes under the thought that we wouldn't risk an escalation with a nuclear power. But it's not a great situation no matter what we do. The key in my mind is that we don't repeat the mistakes of the 1930s by letting a power just take territory unopposed in some misguided attempt at appeasement. And while it's not the ideal way to do it, the Ukrainian people, with humanitarian and military support, could certainly give the Russians a bloody nose here. I'm not that upset with what we've done up to this point to help Ukraine, and if anything, I'd want us to make sure we do everything we can on the humanitarian aid side as well so that Russia doesn't get away with attacking infrastructure.

I really don't want to see a precedent set that if you have nuclear arms, you can take territory unopposed. As far as I know though, we don't really have a great playbook for this sort of situation. So there's a lot of careful feeling it out as we go. And because Putin screwed up and showed the real state of the Russian military through this aggression, it sounds like there's suddenly some very real non-nuclear responses being planned in the event Russia does escalate with a nuclear weapon. I'll be honest, the idea that we seriously think we might be able to stop a nuclear power without resorting to MAD makes me a bit more hopeful that human civilization won't burn itself down in nuclear fire at some point. 



lizkat said:


> McCarthy just on the matter of Ukraine (and other appropriations-related measures) as Speaker will be problematic unless some in his caucus can persuade him he's not immune to rebellion.   John Boehner finally found out how difficult it can be to herd cats, and he had a far better grasp of how to do it than does Kevin McCarthy, even observing him as minority leader.    Starting off by trying to kill aid to Ukraine is not the way to cement alliances as a new Speaker.   He'd split the party and possibly the Trump base too.




Isolationism is fun though, who needs allies in the larger world? We can just turn ever inward and let the troubles of this world pass us by. /s

Brynn Tannehill makes a pretty good argument in my mind that from a strategic perspective, supporting Ukraine is probably one of the best ways to spend our military budget to take Russia off the table as a serious threat for the next couple decades, and let us focus more on China and North Korea in the near term. As having to deal with both Russia-NATO concerns and Pacific concerns splits our attention and resources. It also happens to be relatively cheap compared to getting directly involved. 

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1589616853709512704/


----------



## AG_PhamD

shadow puppet said:


> The thing I worry about in the event of an assassination (and trust me, I have wondered why no one has made an attempt on Trump, MTG and the like), is that it would turn them into martyrs.  Which in turn, could and most likely would, create an even worse situation.




I’m sure it’s been tried, I just don’t think such plans/attempts are commonly advertised by the secret service. But there is a list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_incidents_involving_Donald_Trump

I suspect most sane people realize it would be extremely difficult to carry out an assassination without the resources of a state. And even that would be a challenge. 

While I think it’s entirely reasonable to hope Putin is assassinated or deposed or whatever, it shouldn’t come with the expectation that freedom and democracy will follow. More than likely some power-hungry subordinate will follow. And the US involvement in an assassination of a major world leader in todays age would be unthinkable. Assassinating Putin sounds like an a very easy way of starting a nuclear war. Ignoring the fact many, many Russians support Putin, having another country take out your leader is a huge violation of sovereignty (Much of the Russian criticism is less about the war and more about how it is being fought). And if countries feel entitled to assassinate everyone they disagree with, we will find ourselves in an extremely dangerous world. 

It’s not to say I don’t think Putin deserves the severest of consequences for what he has done, but for the safety and security of the world globally foreign assassinations are not a road worth going down.


----------



## Yoused

About a century ago (and a tad) the despot of the Russian Empire got his country into a bit of a war. It did not go well. Eventually he had to step down from his position. In the end, it turned out quite badly for him and his family (not to mention that Greg Ras*putin*). Other problems for Russia followed.

Granted, Nicky was kind of nudged into the war. He did not start it himself. Still, the Russian people can be rather unforgiving. You do have to push them very far to have the situation boil over, but turning the screws on dissent will do you no favors, because they tried that back then – it was _de rigueur_ – and it just made things worse.


----------



## AG_PhamD

In other news, Ukraine is reportedly rebuilding their An-225 using their second unfinished airframe. 








						Second Mriya aircraft is being built at secret facility and is one third of the way complete
					

The Antonov State Enterprise is building a second An-225 Mriya aircraft after the first one was destroyed by Russian occupiers during the offensive in Kyiv Oblast in February. Source: Acting General Director of Antonov, Yevhen Havrylov, in Leipzig, speaking to Bild, a German newspaper.




					news.yahoo.com
				




Zelensky apparently pledged $800m to the project, which seems a little insane during a time of war. I guess there’s no price for national pride? That’s not an fiscally rational decision at all. 

I’m just a little confused because they claim in the article it’s about 30% complete. It had been previously reported for over a decade this second plane was was apparently 60-70% complete. Perhaps they scavenged parts off of it? Or they were trying to mislead investors. 

I’m curious where they will be getting their engines- manufactured by Motor Sich is Zaporizhzhia. I’d imagine that factory is a currently crater in the ground. 

Given the discontinuation of the 747 , the fact no one is making giant cargo jets (ie C-5, C-17), and everything else is limited by the cargo opening (ie 777F) and/or payload (C-130, A400m), I could potentially see Boeing or Airbus joining up with Antanov to make some sort of modern freighter aircraft.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> In other news, Ukraine is reportedly rebuilding their An-225 using their second unfinished airframe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Second Mriya aircraft is being built at secret facility and is one third of the way complete
> 
> 
> The Antonov State Enterprise is building a second An-225 Mriya aircraft after the first one was destroyed by Russian occupiers during the offensive in Kyiv Oblast in February. Source: Acting General Director of Antonov, Yevhen Havrylov, in Leipzig, speaking to Bild, a German newspaper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zelensky apparently pledged $800m to the project, which seems a little insane during a time of war. I guess there’s no price for national pride? That’s not an fiscally rational decision at all.
> 
> I’m just a little confused because they claim in the article it’s about 30% complete. It had been previously reported for over a decade this second plane was was apparently 60-70% complete. Perhaps they scavenged parts off of it? Or they were trying to mislead investors.
> 
> I’m curious where they will be getting their engines- manufactured by Motor Sich is Zaporizhzhia. I’d imagine that factory is a currently crater in the ground.
> 
> Given the discontinuation of the 747 , the fact no one is making giant cargo jets (ie C-5, C-17), and everything else is limited by the cargo opening (ie 777F) and/or payload (C-130, A400m), I could potentially see Boeing or Airbus joining up with Antanov to make some sort of modern freighter aircraft.




An excellent move. And planned since the 225 was destroyed.  Ukraine and Mriya will rebuild/survive.


----------



## Yoused

meanwhile, the looting becomes ridiculous









						A Russian convoy stole an amusement park train from Ukraine and drove it out of Kherson, Ukrainian advisor claims
					

A video posted by Anton Gerashchenko shows a kid's choo-choo train amid a convoy of vehicles, which Gerashchenko said was driven by Russians.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## AG_PhamD

Citysnaps said:


> An excellent move. And planned since the 225 was destroyed.  Ukraine and Mriya will rebuild/survive.




I’m confident Ukraine will be successful in winning this war- or perhaps better said, losing less than Russia. And they will definitely rebuild stronger than ever. I actually wanted to visit Ukraine for years to visit Kiev, Odessa, Chernobyl, Duga Radar, Bukovel ski resort, etc and when the war broke out I figured that a visit might never happen. Things are looking up though. 

I would love to see an AN-225 in the sky again. That said, it’s really not a financially reasonable endeavor. For years there’s been interest in finishing the second airframe but every analysis suggested it would cost hundreds of millions which would not be recouped (current estimate 400-800m). The only reason it even exists is because of the Soviet Buran (space shuttle) program and it will likely only ever fly again as part of a massive government project. You can buy A LOT of used 747’s these days for that price. They could probably squeeze a C-17 out of the US or NATO if they had a reason for one. 

But it is a symbol of Ukrainian national pride. While not a sane investment, I imagine it would boost the Ukrainian economy by employing many people across the whole supply chain. I think it has to be rebuilt in order to restore Ukraine’s pride and national sense of self. 

It seems similar to me like losing the twin towers on 9/11 in the sense they were a symbol of NYC and America for that matter. It’s not until the Freedom tower was completed that you could finally have the sense that NYC had finally recovered its symbolic loss and demonstrated strength in overcoming the tragedy.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Russian forces have made a quick withdrawal across the river in northern Kherson Obvlast with Ukrainian forces entering Kherson....another major success for Ukraine


----------



## Eric

Macky-Mac said:


> Russian forces have made a quick withdrawal across the river in northern Kherson Obvlast with Ukrainian forces entering Kherson....another major success for Ukraine



This great news overall and a good boost for Ukraine. Sadly, Russia (Putin) is still indiscriminately bombing populated areas and killing civilians. It's one thing to fight a war and another to just kill the innocent to be a senseless murderer, Putin deserves nothing less than to die a horrible death.


----------



## Cmaier

Things about to get more dangerous. Russian missile crossed the border into poland and killed two people, reportedly.


----------



## shadow puppet

Damn. This does not sound good.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1592593586948050944/

Polish media reported that two people died Tuesday afternoon after a projectile struck an area where grain was drying in Przewodów, a Polish village near the border with Ukraine.









						US Official: Russian Missiles Crossed into Poland, Killing 2
					

Russia pounded Ukraine's energy facilities Tuesday with its biggest barrage of missiles yet, striking targets across the country and causing widespread blackouts, and a U.S. official said missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, where two people were killed.




					www.military.com


----------



## Cmaier

shadow puppet said:


> Damn. This does not sound good.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1592593586948050944/
> 
> Polish media reported that two people died Tuesday afternoon after a projectile struck an area where grain was drying in Przewodów, a Polish village near the border with Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US Official: Russian Missiles Crossed into Poland, Killing 2
> 
> 
> Russia pounded Ukraine's energy facilities Tuesday with its biggest barrage of missiles yet, striking targets across the country and causing widespread blackouts, and a U.S. official said missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, where two people were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.military.com




I wouldn’t bet they “missed their targets.”


----------



## Eric

There was no mistake, they will continue to encroach until they are stopped.


----------



## Cmaier

Eric said:


> There was no mistake, they will continue to encroach until they are stopped.




I’ll withhold judgment for a bit - a grain processing plant could blow up for lots of reasons, and I’m not sure they’ve absolutely determined it’s missiles yet


----------



## Pumbaa

Cmaier said:


> I wouldn’t bet they “missed their targets.”



Well… Given the competence exhibited by the russian military and the use of soviet era equipment, that would be believable.

Intentionally striking Poland at this point would be more like playing 4D chess.


----------



## AG_PhamD

shadow puppet said:


> Damn. This does not sound good.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1592593586948050944/
> 
> Polish media reported that two people died Tuesday afternoon after a projectile struck an area where grain was drying in Przewodów, a Polish village near the border with Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US Official: Russian Missiles Crossed into Poland, Killing 2
> 
> 
> Russia pounded Ukraine's energy facilities Tuesday with its biggest barrage of missiles yet, striking targets across the country and causing widespread blackouts, and a U.S. official said missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, where two people were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.military.com




Not a good situation. 

I suppose there is a small possibility they are Ukrainian air defenses gone awry, but in that the US confirmed they are Russian likely either means they were confirmed on the ground as Russian or tracked on radar. 



Cmaier said:


> I wouldn’t bet they “missed their targets.”



In the interest of unnecessary escalation, wouldn’t assume they were intentionally launched into Poland. I’m not sure there is a good justification for Russia doing so. They could have had a guidance problem or were mislead with GPS/GLONAS spoofing. If they were relying on inertial navigation, the margin of error can become quite significant, especially if they had a problem. Many of Russia’s missiles have been off-target. 

Regardless, it was only a matter of time before this was going to happen. I’m sure Russia will deny it. This is an extremely dangerous road to go down, especially now that civilians have been killed. I’d hope this will make Russia reconsider their actions. But I doubt it.


----------



## Cmaier

Pumbaa said:


> Well… Given the competence exhibited by the russian military and the use of soviet era equipment, that would be believable.
> 
> Intentionally striking Poland at this point would be more like playing 4D chess.



I think the most likely scenario is “intentional accident.”  Aim in that vicinity and don’t worry about whether the missiles hit poland, just to see what NATO does. Push the boundaries a little bit at a time. Next time intentionally hit supplies destined to support ukraine, etc., if NATO does nothing this time.


----------



## Eric

Cmaier said:


> I’ll withhold judgment for a bit - a grain processing plant could blow up for lots of reasons, and I’m not sure they’ve absolutely determined it’s missiles yet



Russia will (if they haven't yet) say it was an accident, just like bombing schools with children, or saying they weren't about to start the war. They deceive and manipulate.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Eric said:


> Russia will (if they haven't yet) say it was an accident, just like bombing schools with children, or saying they weren't about to start the war. They deceive and manipulate.




they've already said "it's not ours".......but looking at a map it's quite possible that it was intended for some target near the city of  Lviv in Ukraine.

If Russia is hoping that NATO will lose interest, an intentional targeting of Poland would but (yet another) stupid move


----------



## shadow puppet

Macky-Mac said:


> they've already said "it's not ours".......



Sure did.









						Russia's defence ministry denies Russian missiles struck Polish territory
					

Russia's defence ministry on Tuesday denied reports that Russian missiles had hit Polish territory, describing them as "a deliberate provocation aimed at escalating the situation".




					www.reuters.com


----------



## AG_PhamD

Russia has already had surveillance drones crash in Poland. But 2 missiles and 2 civilian deaths is a whole new realm. I would assume this was an accident but the timing during G20 is a little suspect. 

I suspect Poland and NATO will not be looking to escalate things with direct military involvement. But I would not be surprised to see more indirect military support. Perhaps all those Mig-29’s that the US didn’t want transferred might be finding their way into Ukrainian hands. It would be nice if Poland/NATO sent a couple hundred cruise missiles Russias way though as a one time show of force. Not going to happen though.


----------



## Nycturne

AG_PhamD said:


> It would be nice if Poland/NATO sent a couple hundred cruise missiles Russias way though as a one time show of force. Not going to happen though.




Probably not, but I would be tempted by the idea of a single strike against _just_ the site responsible for the missiles that crossed the border. Very much: "I know what you did, and from where, and it won't be doing that again anytime soon, so knock it off."


----------



## AG_PhamD

I’m confused with some of the reports saying rockets or missiles/rockets. Rockets implies a lack of guidance system (as opposed to missiles which do) and would have a very short range.


----------



## Eric

AG_PhamD said:


> Russia has already had surveillance drones crash in Poland. But 2 missiles and 2 civilian deaths is a whole new realm. I would assume this was an accident but the timing during G20 is a little suspect.
> 
> I suspect Poland and NATO will not be looking to escalate things with direct military involvement. But I would not be surprised to see more indirect military support. Perhaps all those Mig-29’s that the US didn’t want transferred might be finding their way into Ukrainian hands. It would be nice if Poland/NATO sent a couple hundred cruise missiles Russias way though as a one time show of force. Not going to happen though.



Dumb move on their part, Poland is already sounding the alarms and rightfully so. Intentional or not you can never believe what Russia says and the fact that they're indiscriminately bombing everything is no excuse for crossing the line, even accidentally. Seemingly, at this point Russia's only goal outside of knocking out the grid is straight up murder of civilians. Any action taken at this point, especially an escalation from NATO, is justified IMO.





__





						Loading…
					





					www.cnn.com
				



Poland holds emergency security meeting after reports of fatal explosion, as Russian missiles bombard nearby Ukraine​


----------



## AG_PhamD

Nycturne said:


> Probably not, but I would be tempted by the idea of a single strike against _just_ the site responsible for the missiles that crossed the border. Very much: "I know what you did, and from where, and it won't be doing that again anytime soon, so knock it off."




I think that’s the most we’d possibly see, but even that I think is a huge stretch. And chances are whatever launched platform launched the missiles is mobile and has already moved. I’m not sure what long range missile capabilities Poland has, if any. If they lack sufficient long range weapons of their own, then they would have to work with NATO to deliver a response. And if the missile was launched from a submarine, retaliation will be all the more difficult. Not to mention likely to be considered a disproportional response.


----------



## Citysnaps

The US knows exactly what happened. Precisely when/where the missile was launched, its in-flight trajectory, and where it landed, via the SBIRS satellite system (the follow on to the older DSP satellite program). No doubt that information was relayed to NATO partners shortly after the event.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Citysnaps said:


> The US knows exactly what happened. Precisely when/where the missile was launched, its in-flight trajectory, and where it landed, via the SBIRS satellite system (the follow on to the older DSP satellite program). No doubt that information was relayed to NATO partners shortly after the event.




We more than likely know where it came from. The Pentagon seemed quick to confirm it was indeed Russian, so I assume they do. 

I could be wrong, but SBIRS, at least historically was only able to track ballistic missiles. These missiles that landed in Poland were allegedly cruise missiles, which would fly substantially lower and slower, and be much smaller. They also wouldn’t have the same infrared signature after launch as they’d be powered in flight with a jet engine rather than a rocket. I would not be surprised however if we have some space-based system to track cruise missiles.

If such a system does not exist, or in addition to it if it does, I would imagine our E-3 AWACS would have an eye on them. The internet says they have a range is ~250miles but I think it’s fair to assume it’s likely much greater than that. Otherwise on the Polish side of things they probably wouldn’t be gathering much of info. The F-35 is marked as having a 300mi range on it’s radar for airborne targets and that’s a fraction of the size (granted much newer tech and AESA radar). We’re probably also receiving Ukraine’s radar information, not to mention definitely neighboring NATO partners radar. The military seems to have implied throughout the conflict we have a full view of the airspace above Ukraine (and likely into neighboring parts of Russia) 

Some of these radars are so good too that they can identify the target specifically, as in what type of aircraft it is. Not sure if they can do this for individual types of cruise missiles, but again, it wouldn’t surprise me if they could.  

People with military or technical experience can correct me.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> We more than likely know where it came from. The Pentagon seemed quick to confirm it was indeed Russian, so I assume they do.
> 
> I could be wrong, but SBIRS, at least historically was only able to track ballistic missiles. These missiles that landed in Poland were allegedly cruise missiles, which would fly substantially lower and slower, and be much smaller. They also wouldn’t have the same infrared signature after launch as they’d be powered in flight with a jet engine rather than a rocket. I would not be surprised however if we have some space-based system to track cruise missiles.
> 
> If such a system does not exist, or in addition to it if it does, I would imagine our E-3 AWACS would have an eye on them. The internet says they have a range is ~250miles but I think it’s fair to assume it’s likely much greater than that. Otherwise on the Polish side of things they probably wouldn’t be gathering much of info. The F-35 is marked as having a 300mi range on it’s radar for airborne targets and that’s a fraction of the size (granted much newer tech and AESA radar). We’re probably also receiving Ukraine’s radar information, not to mention definitely neighboring NATO partners radar. The military seems to have implied throughout the conflict we have a full view of the airspace above Ukraine (and likely into neighboring parts of Russia)
> 
> Some of these radars are so good too that they can identify the target specifically, as in what type of aircraft it is. Not sure if they can do this for individual types of cruise missiles, but again, it wouldn’t surprise me if they could.
> 
> People with military or technical experience can correct me.




We have incredible space assets.


----------



## Andropov

Someone on Twitter noticed that Przewodów (where the missiles hit) has the same latitude as Kyiv and the same longitude as Lviv. Could be just a coincidence, but maybe it was caused by human error. Hanlon's razor may apply here.


----------



## Renzatic

Andropov said:


> Someone on Twitter noticed that Przewodów (where the missiles hit) has the same latitude as Kyiv and the same longitude as Lviv. Could be just a coincidence, but maybe it was caused by human error. Hanlon's razor may apply here.



I doubt very seriously that Russia would purposefully strike a NATO country. What matters now is how Putin reacts to the pressure the west will be applying after this impossible to ignore mistake.

If he issues a formal apology, takes a couple of lumps, then lets an underling face a firing squad to save face, things will probably carry on as usual. If not…


----------



## Cmaier

After emergency G7 meeting, Biden says there’s “plenty of information to contest” the idea that the missile was fired from Russia. He says it’s “unlikely...that it was fired from Russia.”

“We are going to figure out exactly what happened,” he adds.

———

Maybe fired from belarus or occupied ukraine territory? Hard to know what this means yet.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Andropov said:


> Someone on Twitter noticed that Przewodów (where the missiles hit) has the same latitude as Kyiv and the same longitude as Lviv. Could be just a coincidence, but maybe it was caused by human error. Hanlon's razor may apply here.




That’s a good find. I was wondering if there were any such obvious coordinate mistakes that could explain where it landed.

In addition to the other potential reasons I listed- GLONASS spoofing, crappy inertial guidance/ other inherent guidance failures, etc, I suppose it’s also possible they were slightly damaged in interception and kept flying. 

I can’t see a good reason for Russia to want to instigate things further with NATO. Especially when they’re performing this poorly. 

Plus you have a bunch of poorly maintained weaponry of questionable build quality (esp if this is Iranian or NK stuff), run by a bunch very possibly poorly trained, underpaid/unpaid, exhausted, hungry, improperly equipped Russian soldiers that don’t want to be there. What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## Renzatic

Cmaier said:


> Maybe fired from belarus or occupied ukraine territory? Hard to know what this means yet.




If the missiles trajectory is traced to occupied Ukrainian territory, then it’d be considered an attack by Russia. If it wasn’t, then this situation is about to get considerably more complicated.

At the most extreme interpretation of events, a Ukrainian false flag attack meant to draw NATO into the war would be awkward for everyone involved.


----------



## Cmaier

Renzatic said:


> If the missiles trajectory is traced to occupied Ukrainian territory, then it’d be considered an attack by Russia. If it wasn’t, then this situation is about to get considerably more complicated.
> 
> At the most extreme interpretation of events, a Ukrainian false flag attack meant to draw NATO into the war would be awkward for everyone involved.




Well, Biden said it wasn’t “fired from russia.” Doesn’t mean Russians didn’t fire it.


----------



## Citysnaps

Cmaier said:


> Well, Biden said it wasn’t “fired from russia.” Doesn’t mean Russians didn’t fire it.




Black Sea?


----------



## lizkat

Seems like political and military leaders in the West are attempting not to escalate or to involve NATO over this incident.   But there could be a kind of _sotto voce_  "this time, anyway..." addendum to that agreement.


----------



## Yoused

The debris seems to suggest a Kh-555 type subsonic cruise missle, which is exclusively air-launched and has a 1300knot range. Thus, it could have come from a plane out of Sevastopol flying over the Black Sea ("not Russia").


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> The debris seems to suggest a Kh-555 type subsonic cruise missle, which is exclusively air-launched and has a 1300knot range. Thus, it could have come from a plane out of Sevastopol flying over the Black Sea ("not Russia").




Looks like these were Ukrainian air defense missiles.


----------



## Eric

Cmaier said:


> Looks like these were Ukrainian air defense missiles.



In response to Russia's bombardment, this response is appropriate.



			NATO says Russia remains responsible for the fatal missile strike in Poland likely caused by Ukrainian air defense
		

NATO says Russia remains responsible for the fatal missile strike in Poland likely caused by Ukrainian air defense​
"Russia bears ultimate responsibility as it continues its illegal war against Ukraine," NATO's head said.


----------



## AG_PhamD

I guess my initial inkling of the possibility of this being an air defense missile was correct. Pretty shocking that not one, but two ended up in Poland.

I’m not sure I understand how the Ukrainians didn’t realize this was the case pretty quickly. Surely they would have been tracking their own missile. Plus, I would have figured the Polish could quickly identify the missile as belonging to the S-300. These missiles don’t have a particularly long range and there’s no way one could have made it from anywhere in the Russian occupied territory, Black Sea, or Russia proper. Belarus I suppose maybe have been possible but I imagine likely at the edge of its range. Or perhaps the powers didn’t mind 12 or so hours of confusion to tank the Russian stock market and rally support for Ukraine and NATO.

Russia still clearly bears responsibility for this tragedy. Ukraine wouldn’t be firing surface-to-air missiles if they weren’t being bombarded by Russia.

I hope this encourages Ukraine’s partner nations to step up the air defense system transfers. This entire war the Western support has been there, but it seems the supplies are  often just enough as necessary and only are decided to be given in response to some problem after the fact.

I can appreciate all the complexities of supplying weapons in these circumstances. But Ukraine has time and time again shown their abilities- as has Russia. But so many times I hear we’re giving everything we possibly can, only for a month or two later for the Pentagon to whip out some retired system that evidently has been in sitting in storage for 25 years.

The fact of the matter is Ukraine has been grinding down the Russian military. And we’re not putting any NATO troops at risk. Between the tens of thousands being killed and maimed, and the hundreds of thousands young Russian men (esp educated ones) who have fled their country, Putin has single-handedly destroyed a generation of child bearing men- which will have lasting repercussions. And their population pyramid was already inverted before the war. 

We spent 20 years and $2.3 trillion in Afghanistan only to accomplish very little in the end. For $100-150B? over 2-3 years, sacrificing no US soldiers, we’ll likely ensure the downfall of Russia, one of our greatest strategic threats, for decades to come- if not indefinitely. Yes gas is expensive, that will work itself eventually, but this is probably the best value war ever dollar for dollar.


----------



## Yoused

Big fire in central Moscow, in an area with major rail hubs









						Moscow fire videos show smoke billowing around key train stations
					

A fire broke out in a two-story warehouse in the Russian capital's Komsomolskaya Square, Russian authorities said.




					www.newsweek.com
				




At the same time as a minor pipeline issue in St. Petersburg


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> Big fire in central Moscow, in an area with major rail hubs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moscow fire videos show smoke billowing around key train stations
> 
> 
> A fire broke out in a two-story warehouse in the Russian capital's Komsomolskaya Square, Russian authorities said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the same time as a minor pipeline issue in St. Petersburg



Lies. It’s just someone making s’mores.


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Lies. It’s just someone making s’mores.




Hey, I think I see four smaller flames on the right and four more on the left.


----------



## lizkat

EU voted to call Russia a state sponsor of terror.   Now its website is down, apparently a victim of retaliation by some bad actors.


----------



## Pumbaa

lizkat said:


> EU voted to call Russia a state sponsor of terror.   Now its website is down, apparently a victim of retaliation by some bad actors.



Sorry for laughing, but calling the EU "sponsors of homosexuality" to counter Russia being proclaimed a state sponsor of terrorism?

Funny on so many levels.


----------



## lizkat

Pumbaa said:


> Sorry for laughing, but calling the EU "sponsors of homosexuality" to counter Russia being proclaimed a state sponsor of terrorism?
> 
> Funny on so many levels.




What's really (but very grimly) funny is that the EU will have its website back up in a few hours or days, while the Russian Federation's economy, general welfare and standing among peers --yeah even its few remaining friends--  have been flushed down the toilet for years, maybe a decade or more due to Putin's folly in Ukraine.

They're now in recession after two quarters of losses, even though they had done all right at first thanks to increased oil exports and will have ended up with a decent harvest. But their foreign reserves in the west are frozen and they have spent most of the last ten years trying to pull out of an economic decline that wasn't exactly aided by their decision to go after Crimea in 2014.  They defaulted on foreign debt last summer for the first time since WWII (even though they were raking in a billion bucks a day off oil sales to pals)   so they will have added interest costs if and when they ever seek to borrow abroad again.





__





						Loading…
					





					www.cbsnews.com
				












						Russian debt default: two experts explain what it means for Russia and for global financial markets
					

Experts discuss the implications of Russia’s recent debt default for the global financial markets and Russia’s reputation




					theconversation.com


----------



## Yoused

Is great time for to be Russia billionaire









						Billionaire with "enemies in Russia" dies in mysterious helicopter crash
					

More than a dozen Russian businessmen have died this year, some under mysterious circumstances.




					www.newsweek.com
				




This was in the Nice part of France last week. But at least in tis case it was apparently not defenestration.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Yoused said:


> Is great time for to be Russia billionaire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billionaire with "enemies in Russia" dies in mysterious helicopter crash
> 
> 
> More than a dozen Russian businessmen have died this year, some under mysterious circumstances.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was in the Nice part of France last week. But at least in tis case it was apparently not defenestration.



And the "sudden" death (a cardiac arrest apparently) of the foreign minister of Belarus, Mr Vladimir Makei, was reported a few short days ago.

And no, if this was indeed murder most foul (as some sources have suggested), then not one single source - western, Belarusian, or, for that matter,  Russian, has thought to lay the blame for this action at the feet of the President of the country, Mr Lukashenko.


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> And the "sudden" death (a cardiac arrest apparently) of the foreign minister of Belarus, Mr Vladimir Makei, was reported a few short days ago.
> 
> And no, if this was indeed murder most foul (as some sources have suggested), then not one single source - western, Belarusian, or, for that matter,  Russian, has thought to lay the blame for this action at the feet of the President of the country, Mr Lukashenko.




Possibly Lukashenko is quite busy wondering if he's next.

For awhile Lukashenko tried to maintain a semblance of independence from Moscow,  but once he had had to ask his ally for assistance in quelling the  2020-21 uprisings by his own citizens, the helpful response by Putin pretty much sealed a  convenient "soft acquisition" of Belarus by Russia.   Not long after, Russian troops that were there "by invitation" for military drills were then parked near the border with Ukraine. A Russian military presence in Belarus is probably never going to go away.

There was also that hokey referendum in Belarus late last winter, almost coincident with Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  A bunch of changes were proposed for the Belarusian constitution, including revocation of its prior status as a nuclear free zone, so to allow the country once again to host nukes owned by Russia for the first time since the fall of the USSR.

The referendum itself only had one question, no details...  and was posed in Russian:  "Do you accept the amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus?"  

The fix was apparently in, since the question passed with about 65% approval.  It was denounced as a complete sham by EU, US and by the Belarusian opposition situated in Poland.

So I dunno.   Was the late foreign minister Mr. Makei critical of any of this stuff?   Seems to me Lukashenko might have tolerated such talk, at least behind closed doors.  After all there was a time he had wanted to demonstrate to the west that there was daylight between Belarus and Russia.

But if Putin was aware that there was "private" grumbling in high places in Minsk about Russia regaining control of Belarus, who could be surprised if Makei's name was not the only one on some Russian agency's list of inconvenient people?

The referendum in Belarus extended Lukashenko's right to rule until 2035.  Maybe Putin has decided he'd rather nudge someone else into place sooner.   So then why not start with a hand picked successor to Makei as foreign minister, eh?    Will be interesting to see who gets that slot and what western analysts think of the pick.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Some of the (exiled and other) Russian sources I have read seemed to think that both Makei and Lukashenko were attempting to preserve the independence and sovereignty of Belarus and that they were also attempting to discreetly distance themselves from any serious involvement in the "special military operation" and had become quite skilled in advancing reasons, excuses, explanations, justifications why Belarus was unable to commit itself with greater enthusiasm to this cause.  

Certainly, while people do die from heart attacks, the timing of this death - along with the senior (and trusted) position held by the deceased - coupled with the absolutely extraordinary numbers of strange (and sudden) deaths of members of the Russian military and economic elite in recent months - would give rise to, if not dark suspicions, at the very least, several searching questions.

While I don't know (and cannot say) that Mr Makei was murdered, I will admit to some considerable surprise if we learn subsequently that he was not.


----------



## bwinter88

Between foreign leaders, domestic oligarchs, and conscripted citizens, there is a dwindling population in that region who must feel safe from an untimely death at Putin’s hands. It boggles my mind how he retains as much support as he does. Surely the ones still alive so far must be realizing that Putin needs to be retired before they are next.


----------



## Herdfan

bwinter88 said:


> Between foreign leaders, domestic oligarchs, and conscripted citizens, there is a dwindling population in that region who must feel safe from an untimely death at Putin’s hands. It boggles my mind how he retains as much support as he does. Surely the ones still alive so far must be realizing that Putin needs to be retired before they are next.




But how can you get him out?  As you noted it, how he has the support he does remains a mystery.


----------



## Yoused

A facility being used a a base of operations for the Wagner Group – White-wing Russian mercenaries who have also been supporting the Ukraine attack – in the Central African Republic was bombed by an anonymous plane. CAR government reports that the plane appears to have left their airspace in a northerly direction, which would suggest that it came from Chad, with whom CAR has been having issues.

I hear tell that Chad employs Ukrainian mercenaries to fly their warplanes. Vlad may not have started an actual world war, but …


----------



## bwinter88

Herdfan said:


> But how can you get him out?  As you noted it, how he has the support he does remains a mystery.



From what I can glean from my Russian friends who have family in the country, it's a "stick with the devil you know" mentality.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Scepticalscribe said:


> Some of the (exiled and other) Russian sources I have read seemed to think that both Makei and Lukashenko were attempting to preserve the independence and sovereignty of Belarus and that they were also attempting to discreetly distance themselves from any serious involvement in the "special military operation" and had become quite skilled in advancing reasons, excuses, explanations, justifications why Belarus was unable to commit itself with greater enthusiasm to this cause.




It appears the Belarusian people have little appetite for involving themselves in the ”special military operation”. AFAIK they’re already suffering suffering under many of the same sanctions as Russia. 

Belarus has already given Russia a bunch of military hardware including tanks, combat vehicles, artillery, missiles, etc. The amount of active equipment they claim vs how much is likely active are probably two very different things- much like in Russian.  And what they do have is dated, Soviet Era stuff. 

Their annual defense budget for the past decade has been around $700m… minus the money that goes to corruption. One would infer very little maintenance has been happening, new and sophisticated equipment is not being purchased, and perhaps most importantly- little quality training is occurring. 

I would think at the the end of the day Belarus doesn’t have much to give except people- allegedly ~48,000 active soldiers. If Belarus attacked Russia, presumably most/all of their soldiers would have to defend their own 1000km border with Ukraine. Likely reserves and/or conscripts be drawn up but they probably don’t even have the necessary equipment in the proper numbers to sustain this, maybe even initiate it. Belarus attacking only serves to distract Ukraine and seemingly gains nothing except perhaps a little more affection from a pariah state with increasingly less and less to offer others. 

It’s also worth noting Belarus preformed extremely poorly in WWII. More than 25% of their population was killed (almost 2.5m people or about 15% of all WWII deaths).

I can’t blame the Belarusian civilians or government for having zero interest getting involved, even if they do have positive feelings towards Russia or support Russia’s invasion.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Attacks on Russian air bases put spotlight on new Ukrainian drone program | CNN
					

Multiple attacks targeting Russian military infrastructure this week have focused attention on Ukraine's efforts to develop longer-range combat drones.




					www.cnn.com
				




Ukraine successfully hit two Russian airbases deep within Russian territory, one of them within 125 miles of Moscow. 

Rather interesting considering Russia is supposed to have the most sophisticated, multilayer air defense in the world. I would remind people that in 1987 a German teenager flew a Cessna from Germany all the way through Russia into Moscow, with his transponder turned on, and landed in Red Square without being detected until the last minute when there was nothing that could be done. This was due to numerous oversights by Russian air defense (and a bit of luck on the pilots part). 

Likely this was a modified soviet-reconnaissance drone or potentially Ukraine has successfully launched its first long range attack drone. Surely some people will be fired and Russia will have to focus more attention on defending their domestic military infrastructure.


----------



## Eric

AG_PhamD said:


> Attacks on Russian air bases put spotlight on new Ukrainian drone program | CNN
> 
> 
> Multiple attacks targeting Russian military infrastructure this week have focused attention on Ukraine's efforts to develop longer-range combat drones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ukraine successfully hit two Russian airbases deep within Russian territory, one of them within 125 miles of Moscow.*
> 
> Rather interesting considering Russia is supposed to have the most sophisticated, multilayer air defense in the world. I would remind people that in 1987 a German teenager flew a Cessna from Germany all the way through Russia into Moscow, with his transponder turned on, and landed in Red Square without being detected until the last minute when there was nothing that could be done. This was due to numerous oversights by Russian air defense (and a bit of luck on the pilots part).
> 
> Likely this was a modified soviet-reconnaissance drone or potentially Ukraine has successfully launched its first long range attack drone. Surely some people will be fired and Russia will have to focus more attention on defending their domestic military infrastructure.



Good, Russia is relentlessly bombing their country, they have every right to fight back and send some bombs over the border. We should all be encouraging this, if Russia doesn't like it they can simply end the war but to warn them off is ridiculous.


----------



## Yoused

The second largest bank in the country, state-owned VTB, is (or was) fighting off a massive DDoS, the likes of which is entirely unprecedented.



			Russian state-owned bank VTB hit by largest DDoS attack in its history
		


A bank spokesman claims that it is primarily foreign-sourced, but they are also seeing domestic IPs, which they will turn over to the Gestapo authorities, because no one has ever, not even once, heard of personal computers and IoT devices being hijacked without their owners knowing.


----------



## Nycturne

Eric said:


> Good, Russia is relentlessly bombing their country, they have every right to fight back and send some bombs over the border. We should all be encouraging this, if Russia doesn't like it they can simply end the war but to warn them off is ridiculous.




I tend to be of the mind that you shouldn’t _have_ to resort to jumping into the mud just because the other side is wallowing in it. So long as they are focusing on military infrastructure though, with the goal being to erode the military’s will to continue, or reduce Russia’s ability to place it’s full effort on the front lines within Ukraine, I have no problem with it. I mean honestly, this shows an awful lot of audacity on the part of Ukraine here, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. 

Even better if they are doing this with either their own equipment, or equipment borrowed from Russia. It allows NATO countries that are providing support and aid to have plausible deniability. It’s a bit of a fine line we are trying to walk here, where we want to enable Ukraine to protect it’s sovereignty, but at the same time, we don’t want to encourage escalation by making it appear we are providing material support support for direct attacks on Russian soil either. And to be clear, the sort of escalation I’m talking about here is the kind where Russian allies like China or India decide to jump in and throw material at Putin to use in retaliation.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Nycturne said:


> I tend to be of the mind that you shouldn’t _have_ to resort to jumping into the mud just because the other side is wallowing in it. So long as they are focusing on military infrastructure though, with the goal being to erode the military’s will to continue, or reduce Russia’s ability to place it’s full effort on the front lines within Ukraine, I have no problem with it. I mean honestly, this shows an awful lot of audacity on the part of Ukraine here, and I don’t mean that in a bad way.
> 
> Even better if they are doing this with either their own equipment, or equipment borrowed from Russia. It allows NATO countries that are providing support and aid to have plausible deniability. It’s a bit of a fine line we are trying to walk here, where we want to enable Ukraine to protect it’s sovereignty, but at the same time, we don’t want to encourage escalation by making it appear we are providing material support support for direct attacks on Russian soil either. And to be clear, the sort of escalation I’m talking about here is the kind where Russian allies like China or India decide to jump in and throw material at Putin to use in retaliation.




These are not only exclusively military targets, but they are bases from which  Russia has been launching attacks. Therefore they are legitimate, legal attacks. I’m sure Ukraine would prefer have not to have to do this, but one would expect nothing less when one country invaded another for frivolous reasons.

It’s also worth noting, Ukraine can’t really escalate things any higher with Russia… unless Russia chooses to use weapons of mass destruction, which so think is highly unlikely. They can’t effectively target military assets and have largely resorted to taking out Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. At this point, barring WMD’s, there’s not much more than can do that they haven’t been. 

I too think it was a very wise decision Ukraine used their own equipment. It would not go over well with Russia if NATO hardware was used. That said, I would not be surprised if the US/NATO helped coordinate the attack and provide technical assistance upgrading the presumed drone model. Shortly before the attack the Pentagon announced they modified the HIMARS launchers sent to Ukraine not accept the long range ATACMS missiles that we have routinely denied requests for. (Many other countries have ATACMS that could be provided). I would imagine at the very least we provided satellite imagery to know when to attack and what defense systems should be avoided in routing.

Russia says the drone that hit one the bases imply minor damaged was incurred on two planes as a result of being shot down and the debris falling on the aircraft. This very well may be true, but the fact the drone made it 500km into Russia territory at subsonic speeds and weren’t shot down until they were immediately above their target should be quite embarrassing and concerning. Looking at the damage of one of the planes, I don’t think it will be flying anytime soon, if ever.





The wings mechanization clearly looks like it’s gone and the wing structure very well might be too. It’s also worth noting these have swing wings, which involves a lot of engineering. It looks like the afterburners have melted away, or at least the nozzles. The extremely delicate and expensive engine turbines are probably ruined too. Considering the Tu-22 was last built in 1969, I would think it would be scavenged for parts and scrapped. So much for “light damage”

The other plane damaged was reportedly a Tu-95, which I can’t seem to find pictures of. So either the damage was so minimal it’s not worth showing or so bad that they can’t.


----------



## leman

AG_PhamD said:


> Attacks on Russian air bases put spotlight on new Ukrainian drone program | CNN
> 
> 
> Multiple attacks targeting Russian military infrastructure this week have focused attention on Ukraine's efforts to develop longer-range combat drones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine successfully hit two Russian airbases deep within Russian territory, one of them within 125 miles of Moscow.
> 
> Rather interesting considering Russia is supposed to have the most sophisticated, multilayer air defense in the world. I would remind people that in 1987 a German teenager flew a Cessna from Germany all the way through Russia into Moscow, with his transponder turned on, and landed in Red Square without being detected until the last minute when there was nothing that could be done. This was due to numerous oversights by Russian air defense (and a bit of luck on the pilots part).
> 
> Likely this was a modified soviet-reconnaissance drone or potentially Ukraine has successfully launched its first long range attack drone. Surely some people will be fired and Russia will have to focus more attention on defending their domestic military infrastructure.




There is a joke about that. After the Mathias Rust incident it is said that Gorbachev has ordered the Soviet air defence personnel to start drinking, as downing  a glass would require them to lift the head up and actually look at the sky.


----------



## Nycturne

AG_PhamD said:


> These are not only exclusively military targets, but they are bases from which  Russia has been launching attacks. Therefore they are legitimate, legal attacks. I’m sure Ukraine would prefer have not to have to do this, but one would expect nothing less when one country invaded another for frivolous reasons.




Oh, I’m not suggesting Ukraine has overstepped. More that I think there’s a clear distinction between what Ukraine has been doing up to this point, and what Russia has been doing, and that I don’t think Ukraine should sink down to Russia’s level and start attacking civilian infrastructure. 

The attack on the bridge between Crimea and Russia is a tricky one, but seeking to cripple it with a small scale attack to slow the flow of military supplies does show restraint, which I appreciate.  



AG_PhamD said:


> I too think it was a very wise decision Ukraine used their own equipment. It would not go over well with Russia if NATO hardware was used. That said, I would not be surprised if the US/NATO helped coordinate the attack and provide technical assistance upgrading the presumed drone model. Shortly before the attack the Pentagon announced they modified the HIMARS launchers sent to Ukraine not accept the long range ATACMS missiles that we have routinely denied requests for. (Many other countries have ATACMS that could be provided). I would imagine at the very least we provided satellite imagery to know when to attack and what defense systems should be avoided in routing.




Agreed. It’s why I mentioned plausible deniability. Are we supplying Ukraine with intelligence? Yes. Could Ukraine have acted on provided intelligence on their own in this case? Also yes. It‘s enough that the truth of how much the US/NATO assist in these type of operations is lost in rumor and speculation, leaving Russia guessing as to how much we contributed.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Nycturne said:


> Oh, I’m not suggesting Ukraine has overstepped. More that I think there’s a clear distinction between what Ukraine has been doing up to this point, and what Russia has been doing, and that I don’t think Ukraine should sink down to Russia’s level and start attacking civilian infrastructure.
> 
> The attack on the bridge between Crimea and Russia is a tricky one, but seeking to cripple it with a small scale attack to slow the flow of military supplies does show restraint, which I appreciate.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. It’s why I mentioned plausible deniability. Are we supplying Ukraine with intelligence? Yes. Could Ukraine have acted on provided intelligence on their own in this case? Also yes. It‘s enough that the truth of how much the US/NATO assist in these type of operations is lost in rumor and speculation, leaving Russia guessing as to how much we contributed.




Yes, I got what you were saying. Sorry if my response sounded like the opposite. 

I’m not sure we fully understand what really happened to the bridge. All we know is what the Russians told us and not to say they always lie because they don’t, but they lie so often it’s hard to know when they’re telling the truth. I think it’s fair to assume Ukrainian military/intelligence was responsible and that a 3rd but I suppose that’s not proven publicly. The bridge was a vital route for bringing military supplies and on-military into Crimea. Considering there are other, less efficient routes to bring in non-military supplies, I think it’s a fair target. That said, if it’s true that the explosives were on a truck and if the driver was a civilian and unwilling participant, that’s not good. Then again, this is war and Ukraine doesn’t have the same luxuries we have with long range precision weapons. One could argue killing one civilian is worth saving many others, but still shouldn’t be the how things are done ideally. It could be argued if the truck driver or trucking company had been involved with supplying war materials, they could be considered a legitimate target. 

Personally, I think the US should stay out of making claims of helping Ukrainians with attacks, like they did with the Moskva. It only raises tensions and I’d imagine the Russians are already well aware of this or suspect it. Such claims only bolster the Russian propaganda about directly fighting NATO and how the US wants to destroy Russia. It also takes credit away from the Ukrainians on the ground doing the most challenging work and taking the greatest risks.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Nycturne said:


> ...The attack on the bridge between Crimea and Russia is a tricky one, but seeking to cripple it with a small scale attack to slow the flow of military supplies does show restraint, which I appreciate. ...




I'm going to disagree and say there's no question that the Crimea bridge was (and continues to be) a legitimate military target for Ukraine......further; missile launch sites inside Russia, air fields where bombers and missile launching air craft are based, ports in Crimea where Russian war ships are based......these are all legitimate targets for Ukraine as it tries to defend itself from the Russian invasion.

What Ukraine doesn't have much of, but needs, are weapons that can reach those targets.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> I'm going to disagree and say there's no question that the Crimea bridge was (and continues to be) a legitimate military target for Ukraine......further; missile launch sites inside Russia, air fields where bombers and missile launching air craft are based, ports in Crimea where Russian war ships are based......these are all legitimate targets for Ukraine as it tries to defend itself from the Russian invasion.
> 
> What Ukraine doesn't have much of, but needs, are weapons that can reach those targets.




Yes. The bridge was a vital route for the supply of fuel and weapons to Crimea, particularly the rail component. Without the rails, it takes trucks 3-4+ days to go the long route from the Russian side of the bridge, around the Sea of Azov, through their newly acquired land bridge, back down into Crimea. This alternative route is very dangerous because it’s within firing range of Ukraine and these supply lines are attacked regularly. Plus, if you’re talking about fuel, Russia has lost many fuel trucks and has had to supplement with civilian models. They are also muncher smaller than your average American tanker truck. Taking the long road is incredibly inefficient. 

Cutting off the supply lines to Crimea is probably in large part responsible for Ukraine being able to take back Kherson. 

I wonder if it was indeed a truck bomb, how they timed it to explode while a fuel train was also traveling across or did they just get lucky? Would the bomb alone have taken out the rail lines?  

Ukraine claims to be in the final testing stages of their own, domestically produced strike drone with a range of 1000km. Assuming they can produce these at scale, Russia may have a new problem to deal with.


----------



## Eric

We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.


----------



## MEJHarrison

Eric said:


> We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.




On the other hand, if they can beat them without stooping down to their level, they'll come out the other end in much better shape.


----------



## bwinter88

Eric said:


> We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.



Putin would be obligated to respond to the perceived escalation of US or NATO weapons being used on Russian homeland. Ukraine has been very careful to only use its own drones on these airbases. Ukraine has already won this war—it is now certain to turn towards the west while Putin has failed to achieve anything he promised from this conflict. He is a pariah on the world stage, Russia's military and economy is in shambles. Ukraine need only keep up the tempo to keep pressure on Russia and prevent them from pausing the conflict to regroup.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.





bwinter88 said:


> Putin would be obligated to respond to the perceived escalation of US or NATO weapons being used on Russian homeland. Ukraine has been very careful to only use its own drones on these airbases. Ukraine has already won this war—it is now certain to turn towards the west while Putin has failed to achieve anything he promised from this conflict. He is a pariah on the world stage, Russia's military and economy is in shambles. Ukraine need only keep up the tempo to keep pressure on Russia and prevent them from pausing the conflict to regroup.




I believe the cluster munitions they are looking for would be to work with howitzers and possibly HIMARS- and wouldn’t be used on Russian territory. These would increase the effectiveness of their artillery and help mitigate/slow the problem of dwindling US/NATO inventory of conventional artillery shells and GMLRS missiles that we have been providing. 

Obviously cluster munitions are controversial due to the risk unexploded submunitions pose to civilians. White phosphorous, also released in clusters, kills by the toxic smoke it’s produces, direct burns, or subsequent fires. Both are “banned”by the UN not because of their method of killing, but because they can kill indiscriminately. 

The US has not agreed to ban cluster bombs or white phosphorus but try to avoid using such weapons whenever possible. We developed a safer alternative for cluster bombs, no longer make them, haven’t used them in almost 2 decades, and have a large stockpile of them that will likely otherwise never be used. 

Russia has been using cluster munitions extensively in Ukraine, including white phosphorous. Considering cluster munitions would be used on Ukrainian soil, would pose a risk to Ukrainian civilians, and would be their responsibility to clean them up and deal with any consequences. But it also means their soldiers would have to deal with them if they advance on ground where they shot them, which will likely slow them down. 

Ultimately, I think it’s really up to Ukraine to weigh if the pros outweigh the cons. I think the US is more concerned about the optics than anything. 

——-
As for attacking Russia proper, Ukraine needs to be careful. Even if a target is fair game, it still has to be considered will Russia treat it as an attack worthy of responding with WMD’s. That said, I don’t think they’d ever be stupid enough to do that, but if Ukraine hit downtown Moscow the chances are much higher. Hitting an airbase in the middle of nowhere, probably not. Also worth noting, if Ukraine ever missed and hit an apartment building, it could create big problems. 

The sporadic tempo they use has been very wise- it keeps the pressure down, doesn’t make Russia feel overly threatened, and instills complacency allowing for future attacks. As it is, Ukraines best use of their limited military assets is striking Russian targets that directly play a role. 

I mostly agree with @bwinter88. Generally speaking Ukraine does not need the US to provide long range weapons at this point. They’re winning the war as it is and such weapons may unnecessarily rule up Russia more than they are. There applications where they would be useful, but may not be necessary. 

Perhaps more importantly we could scrounge up more air dense systems and associated missiles, as well as ship over some giant mobile power generators (ie 25MW), power substations, and boilers.


----------



## AG_PhamD

The US is finally seriously considering our long-range Patriot air defense system(s) to Ukraine. 



			https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/13/politics/us-patriot-missile-defense-system-ukraine/index.html
		


I’m not sure if this is actually going to happen- this system is one of our premier pieces of military technology. Putting it in Ukraine risks capture from Russia (albeit highly unlikely as it will be far from the front lines) or exposing how it used operationally. It’s an extremely complex system that requires a lot of manpower and extensive training (usually 1 year+)- not just to operate but to maintain and service. Both a pro/con- the Russians will likely try to target these for a political win, which would make the US look bad if but also may divert Russia’s limited weapon supplies. 

The other issue is a Patriot battery costs around $1B. Each missile costs $3-5 million so they probably won’t be used to take out $20,000 drones. It would be best reserved for ballistic missiles, aircraft, and cruise missiles. 

Hopefully the Israelis will change their mind about supplying Iron Dome, which would be useful against drones and potentially rockets, and artillery if they’re located that close to the front lines. 

There’s never going to be a true, comprehensive air defense system like Israel in the foreseeable future. It costs them many many billions and decades with multiple layers of systems to secure most of a country that’s the size of New Jersey. But every little bit helps I suppose. 

I don’t see how supplying Ukraine with Patriot could possibly escalate the situation anymore than it has. Short of WMD’s, which I think they know would mean game over, I can’t see what options Russia has left. They’re already attacking civilian infrastructure with the intention of hurting civilians.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> I don’t see how supplying Ukraine with Patriot could possibly escalate the situation anymore than it has. Short of WMD’s, which I think they know would mean game over, I can’t see what options Russia has left. They’re already attacking civilian infrastructure with the intention of hurting civilians.




I'm wondering if Patriot would be reserved for what would be believed to be an incoming tactical nuclear strike; tipped off pre-launch to Ukraine from the US.  Regarding training...that may have already been underway in the US or a European ally.


----------



## bwinter88

100% there was backchannel communication from the US to Russia saying, if you keep targeting civilians, we will send Patriot systems. As @AG_PhamD said, Russia has no escalatory options left outside of WMDs.


----------



## Macky-Mac

AG_PhamD said:


> ...Hopefully the Israelis will change their mind about supplying Iron Dome, which would be useful against drones and potentially rockets, and artillery if they’re located that close to the front lines.....




I think it's unlikely to happen. Israel has some sort of understanding with Russia regarding Syria that allows the Israelis to bomb Iranian and Hezbollah forces pretty much as Israel feels necessary. Providing Iron Dome to Ukraine would almost likely rupture that working agreement.


----------



## Cmaier

Macky-Mac said:


> I think it's unlikely to happen. Israel has some sort of understanding with Russia regarding Syria that allows the Israelis to bomb Iranian and Hezbollah forces pretty much as Israel feels necessary. Providing Iron Dome to Ukraine would almost likely rupture that working agreement.



Though I imagine one thing that this war has taught Israel is that it may need to reevaluate Russia’s ability to stop it from bombing Syria even if it tried.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Cmaier said:


> Though I imagine one thing that this war has taught Israel is that it may need to reevaluate Russia’s ability to stop it from bombing Syria even if it tried.




yes, certainly, although I suspect they've paid a lot of attention to Russia's successes and failures in Syria over the last 6 or 7 years and already feel confident.

But I also suspect that Russia not trying to stop the bombing isn't the only benefit Israel gets out of the situation.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> I think it's unlikely to happen. Israel has some sort of understanding with Russia regarding Syria that allows the Israelis to bomb Iranian and Hezbollah forces pretty much as Israel feels necessary. Providing Iron Dome to Ukraine would almost likely rupture that working agreement.




Yes, that is definitely true. But the calculus seems to be changing slightly now that Russia is buying weapons from Iran. I think it’s a lot easier to justify selling defensive weapons than offensive weapons. 

That said I’m not even sure the capacity exists to hand over a meaningful number of systems even if they wanted to. It’s not like most countries that have a near zero chance of ever using their air defense systems on home turf. And they probably don’t really want to hand over one of the most advanced air defense systems in the world to an unstable country.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Citysnaps said:


> I'm wondering if Patriot would be reserved for what would be believed to be an incoming tactical nuclear strike; tipped off pre-launch to Ukraine from the US.  Regarding training...that may have already been underway in the US or a European ally.




I would think it would be reserved for defending against ballistic missiles, as they are the most difficult to shoot down and not covered by many of not all of the other air defense systems Ukraine. NASMS, HAWK, Buk, probably most if not all of their S-300s are not designed to intercept ballistic missiles.

Many of Russia’s cruise and ballistic missile platforms like Kalibr and Iskander are designed to carry either conventional or nuclear payloads. There seems to be some ability to track whether or not Russia is prepping to launch nukes, but I’m not sure it could be determined which incoming missiles are carrying nuclear  warheads and which are not. (Then there is the challenge to discern what to intercept if the ballistic missiles has MIRVs, multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles, usually including decoy warheads, amongst other decoys like chaff). 

For cruise missiles, I suppose you never really know what they’re targeting exactly until the last moments- unless the target is in the middle of nowhere and can be inferred. So I suppose Patriot could be a last line of defense given its costs, but then you’re not taking advantage of its long range capabilities. So I suppose it could be used to cover high value targets that are beyond short range air defense systems. 

Perhaps it may serve best as a target for Russia to waste their time and resources trying to hit its multiple components. 

If the Russians were to use a nuclear weapon, I suspect their first move would be to hit the middle of nowhere, like the middle of the Black Sea, to flex and panic the world, while also not being responsible for any loss of life. Perhaps even doing a “test” on their own territory. I think if they did this, the outcome would ultimately be very bad for them and they know this.


----------



## AG_PhamD

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/14/ukraine-smart-bomb-jdams/
		


The US may be providing JDAM kits to Ukraine. These $25,000 kits turn cheap “dumb” bombs into guided bombs with an accuracy of 1m. It also allows the bomb to glide 15 miles from where it is dropped. Considering Ukrainian airspace is too dangerous for the Russia airforce due to all the air defense systems and MANPADs/stingers, this could be a significant improvement in Ukraines offensive capabilities. 

Saab and Boeing have also created (years ago) the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb, which pairs cheap bombs with existing rockets to create a missile with 150km range, launched from HIMARS. This provides a solution to the dwindling GMLRS stock while also costing about $40,000 instead of $100,000. There is talk of supplying Ukraine with this option.


----------



## Eric

I'm convinced Putin has a direct line to Fox News.


what type of war call is this, what is their end game? from
      WhitePeopleTwitter


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> I'm convinced Putin has a direct line to Fox News.
> 
> 
> what type of war call is this, what is their end game? from
> WhitePeopleTwitter




This is such a bizarre take.

The way Carlson and some others present this, they make it sound like Christianity has been banned in Ukraine. The fact of the matter is Zelensky has supported proposed legislation to ban the Ukrainian branch of the Russian Orthodox (Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate) from being affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church.

Confusingly, there is also the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which previously split from Russia control. Zelensky has no problem with this group, or Protestants, or Catholics. This is not context provided by Carlson.

Also not mentioned, the impetus to bar the UOC from Russian influence is because allegedly UOC leaders have been supplying Russia with intel as well as protecting “dubious” people and found to be in possession of Russian military recruitment pamphlets… in other words, there is apparently evidentl w the UOC has been conspiring against Ukraine.

It’s also worth mentioning, Kirill, the Patriarch of the ROC is a complete political pawn of Putin. He is a vocal proponent of war and hate, and corrupt as they get. In fact, he has promoted this war using bigotry like homophobia and transphobia. And not respectful as possible anti-gay marriage type “homophobia”, I mean explicit hatred for homosexuality. 

I’m not sure how the proposed legislation would affect the members of the UOC who remain loyal to Russia, but as of now nothing AFAIK has been done to impede their ability to practice their beliefs.

It’s definitely a complex, nuanced issue. War and times of crisis always create issues on freedom like these. But to say there is a “war on Christianity” is totally disingenuous.

I get Tucker Carlson does not really support American involvement in Ukraine- or really anywhere else for that matter, but this is not a good argument and it’s not in good faith either.

I also can’t help to point out that calling this “Zelensky’s War on Christianity”, whether intended or not, alludes to say that Zelensky, a Jew, is trying suppress all Christianity… which will probably ignite some conspiracy theory on the antisemitic far right that relates to existing conspiracy theories about Jews allegedly suppressing Christian ideology.


----------



## Eric

AG_PhamD said:


> This is such a bizarre take.
> 
> The way Carlson and some others present this, they make it sound like Christianity has been banned in Ukraine. The fact of the matter is Zelensky has supported proposed legislation to ban the Ukrainian branch of the Russian Orthodox (Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate) from being affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church.
> 
> Confusingly, there is also the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which previously split from Russia control. Zelensky has no problem with this group, or Protestants, or Catholics. This is not context provided by Carlson.
> 
> Also not mentioned, the impetus to bar the UOC from Russian influence is because allegedly UOC leaders have been supplying Russia with intel as well as protecting “dubious” people and found to be in possession of Russian military recruitment pamphlets… in other words, there is apparently evidentl w the UOC has been conspiring against Ukraine.
> 
> It’s also worth mentioning, Kirill, the Patriarch of the ROC is a complete political pawn of Putin. He is a vocal proponent of war and hate, and corrupt as they get.
> 
> I’m not sure how the proposed legislation would affect the members of the UOC who remain loyal to Russia, but as of now nothing AFAIK has been done to impede their ability to practice their beliefs.
> 
> It’s definitely a complex, nuanced issue. War and times of crisis always create issues on freedom like these. But to say there is a “war on Christianity” is totally disingenuous.
> 
> I get Tucker Carlson does not really support American involvement in Ukraine- or really anywhere else for that matter, but this is not a good argument and it’s not in good faith either.
> 
> I also can’t help to point out that calling this “Zelensky’s War on Christianity”, whether intended or not, alludes to say that Zelensky, a Jew, is trying suppress all Christianity… which will probably ignite some conspiracy theory on the antisemitic far right that relates to existing conspiracy theories about Jews allegedly suppressing Christian ideology.



It was good to see both Democrats and Republicans stand behind Zelenskyy during his address yesterday, I get there are a few against our involvement but they seem like outliers on the fringe, like Tucker.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> It was good to see both Democrats and Republicans stand behind Zelenskyy during his address yesterday, I get there are a few against our involvement but they seem like outliers on the fringe, like Tucker.




Absolutely. A solid majority of Americans support Ukraine and supporting Ukraine financially/militarily. I think most politicians realize the importance of containing Russian’s aggression and supporting Ukraine is actually a truly incredible value for money considering what this war has done to Putin’s Russia. 

Of the politicians who don’t seem all that supportive, I think a lot of them actually do support intervention, they just want to highlight concerns they have. And then those who outright object entirely I think are a very small number- people like Tucker Carlson. From what I’ve seen he is in a minority at Fox News. When push comes to shove how many politicians are really going to piss off their defense contractor constituents?

It’s worth noting opposition does exist both on the right and the (progressive) left. I think it’s fair to say not all of their points are illegitimate (this war on Christianity certainly isn’t)… but often times I believe are not considered within the entire context of the situation. 

One valid criticism is how much other countries have spent supporting Ukraine… France, Germany. I’lll concede their economies have taken a big hit, but still. France has provided less than $1B… that’s pocket change for Europes 3rd biggest economy. 

We wasted trillions in Afghanistan over 2 decades, fighting a war without purpose for a population that largely ambivalent about the changes we tried to make. We gave billions in weapons to a paper Army that crumbled immediately, literally. Now with Ukraine, we have a population motivated to defend themselves, aspiring to modern western democratic ideals, they’re willing to fight a war alone (risking their own soldiers lives while we risk none) to defend the Western World… and yet it baffles me some people think this war isn’t worth the cost?


----------



## AG_PhamD

Here’s a story that hasn’t had really any press attention:








						Ex-Russian Space Boss Wounded by Shrapnel While Celebrating His Birthday: Report
					

Dmitry Rogozin was one of two pro-Russia officials reportedly wounded after Ukrainian troops shelled the restaurant where he was dining.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




Dmitry Rogozin… He was the bombastic former head of Roscosmos (Russian space agency) that threatened to disconnect the Russian segments of the International Space Station, refuse to boost its orbit, refuse to sell launch services for NASA astronauts, etc. He had no space/engineering background, but previously the deputy PM of defense, NATO ambassador. 

He’s been recently been cosplaying being an unofficial military official in occupied Ukraine. He and Prighozin of Wagner appear to be having a feud. Perhaps it was Wagner that leaked his location. 

Apparently despite initial claims of a small shoulder wound, he actually may be seriously injured with shrapnel to the head and spine. 








						Ex-Roscosmos head Rogozin conditions worsens, Russian media claims
					

The medical condition of former director general of Russian space agency Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, has deteriorated, Russian propaganda media outlet RIA Novosti reported on Dec. 22.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## Macky-Mac

AG_PhamD said:


> ...He’s been recently been cosplaying being an unofficial military official in occupied Ukraine. He and Prighozin of Wagner appear to be having a feud. Perhaps it was Wagner that leaked his location....




I wonder if Putin is worried about Prighozin......I suspect he should be.

Meanwhile, is Putin plotting another attempt to seize Kyiv with a new strike from forces currently in Belarus?  There's been a lot of speculation about such a move.

I suppose that fairly soon  we'll be seeing the start of winter offensives by both sides


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> I wonder if Putin is worried about Prighozin......I suspect he should be.
> 
> Meanwhile, is Putin plotting another attempt to seize Kyiv with a new strike from forces currently in Belarus?  There's been a lot of speculation about such a move.
> 
> I suppose that fairly soon  we'll be seeing the start of winter offensives by both sides




It could be possible Putin and Prighozin have some sort of agreement that Prighozin will be the successor? He is basically the only public person allowed to strongly and explicitly criticize the Russian military. I would think if Putin truly considered Prighozin a threat he would have him assassinated as he has done to countless others. Maybe he’s fearful of retribution Prighozin loyalists but The Wagner Group only exists because Putin allows it. Private military contractors are actually illegal in Russia- Wagner blatantly operates above the law. If Putin wanted to dissolve it or install a new leader, I’m sure there’s a way he could make that happen. 

Prighozin is not considered the favorite to take over from Putin, but is definitely a legitimate contender. Perhaps Putin is trying to shoehorn him into power? I’m not sure how other elites feel about him and how much influence they have. 

Wagner’s had waged a months-long relentless attack on Bakhmut that has gained little territory at the expense of many thousands of lives and tens of millions in hardware every month. Many experts seem to believe the city is of little strategic significance and postulate extensive resources are being spent to primarily achieve symbolic, propaganda win- because Russia has pretty much only lost territory since their initial invasion. If Wagner takes Bakhmut, it will be a win for Prighozin and will likely increase his social status and popularity. This could earn himself a position as defense minister, which he seems to by vying for. (Having the defense minister also be the owner of a huge private military seems like peak quintessential Russian corruption)

That said, this war drags or becomes far more disastrous than it already is for Russian and Putin is thrown out of office, Prighozin will likely lose out as well considering his involvement. 

I talked about Belarus in an earlier post, but I think it’s highly unlikely. The Belarusian civilians have no appetite for this war, The country really has nothing to gain and I don’t think they actually have that much to give at this point. They’ve already given a lot of hardware to Russia, what they do have left probably not well maintained (and old to begin with), and their army is small, probably not well trained, and lacking real world experience. At best they might be able to cause a diversion, but Ukraine has heavily fortified its border with Belarus at this point. I think Belarus is aware they would not fair well. And if they go on the attack, they open themselves up to attacks they may not be able to defend.


----------



## Huntn

AG_PhamD said:


> The US is finally seriously considering our long-range Patriot air defense system(s) to Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/13/politics/us-patriot-missile-defense-system-ukraine/index.html
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not sure if this is actually going to happen- this system is one of our premier pieces of military technology. Putting it in Ukraine risks capture from Russia (albeit highly unlikely as it will be far from the front lines) or exposing how it used operationally. It’s an extremely complex system that requires a lot of manpower and extensive training (usually 1 year+)- not just to operate but to maintain and service. Both a pro/con- the Russians will likely try to target these for a political win, which would make the US look bad if but also may divert Russia’s limited weapon supplies.
> 
> The other issue is a Patriot battery costs around $1B. Each missile costs $3-5 million so they probably won’t be used to take out $20,000 drones. It would be best reserved for ballistic missiles, aircraft, and cruise missiles.
> 
> Hopefully the Israelis will change their mind about supplying Iron Dome, which would be useful against drones and potentially rockets, and artillery if they’re located that close to the front lines.
> 
> There’s never going to be a true, comprehensive air defense system like Israel in the foreseeable future. It costs them many many billions and decades with multiple layers of systems to secure most of a country that’s the size of New Jersey. But every little bit helps I suppose.
> 
> I don’t see how supplying Ukraine with Patriot could possibly escalate the situation anymore than it has. Short of WMD’s, which I think they know would mean game over, I can’t see what options Russia has left. They’re already attacking civilian infrastructure with the intention of hurting civilians.



They are making Ukraine pay in a most war crime like manner, because Ukraine said _Fuck You Ass Holes, you are not going to have your way with us! _ I am far from an expert, but what does the United Nations do, when a war criminal country sits on the Security Council?


----------



## Macky-Mac

AG_PhamD said:


> I talked about Belarus in an earlier post, but I think it’s highly unlikely. The Belarusian civilians have no appetite for this war, The country really has nothing to gain and I don’t think they actually have that much to give at this point. They’ve already given a lot of hardware to Russia, what they do have left probably not well maintained (and old to begin with), and their army is small, probably not well trained, and lacking real world experience. At best they might be able to cause a diversion, but Ukraine has heavily fortified its border with Belarus at this point. I think Belarus is aware they would not fair well. And if they go on the attack, they open themselves up to attacks they may not be able to defend.




Certainly Belarus has been trying to stay out of the fighting, but in the initial invasion last February, Russian troops that were there on "training exercises" invaded from Belarus. And currently there are additional Russian forces that are on "training exercises" in Belarus, which is certainly part of the concern and speculation that they're now planning something.


----------



## Yoused

not a good time to be a friend of Vlad









						Puppet governor Shtepa blown up in occupied Kakhovka, Kherson Oblast
					

Andrii Shtepa, a Russian-appointed puppet leader of the village of Liubymivka, which is located on the left bank of Kherson Oblast, was blown up in the occupied city of Kakhovka. Source: Kremlin-aligned news outlet TASS Details: In particular, the "emergency services" informed the Russian mass...




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## AG_PhamD

Huntn said:


> They are making Ukraine pay in a most war crime like manner, because Ukraine said _Fuck You Ass Holes, you are not going to have your way with us! _ I am far from an expert, but what does the United Nations do, when a war criminal country sits on the Security Council?




Perhaps the even bigger question is what does the UN do when you have a “war criminal country” is also a permanent member of the UNSC and holds veto power?

The answer is absolutely nothing. There is no mechanism to remove permanent members like Russian.

The UN to a large extent is and always has always been a joke. That’s not to say they haven’t made  accomplishments, but they’re usually a useless organization when it comes to the most serious and complex matters. (And why is it so often that some of the counties with the worst offenders of human rights are on the human rights council? Some notable current members include Gambia, Somolia, Qatar, and Honduras. Seriously? It was actually surprising kind of (albeit kinda hypocritical considering some of these members) to see Russia was suspended from their position of the HRC.)


----------



## AG_PhamD

Macky-Mac said:


> Certainly Belarus has been trying to stay out of the fighting, but in the initial invasion last February, Russian troops that were there on "training exercises" invaded from Belarus. And currently there are additional Russian forces that are on "training exercises" in Belarus, which is certainly part of the concern and speculation that they're now planning something.




Yes, they’ve been a launchpad for both ground and air attacks this entire time. They have also given tanks and other weapons to Russia. They certainly are not innocent actors in this, which is why sanctions have also hit them. The Russians keep up with military activities in Belarus so they can divert Ukrainian resources to defending their shared border. Lusachenko is clearly loyal to Putin and has do the bare minimum to keep Putin somewhat appeased, but also doesn’t want to have to go war.


----------



## Colstan




----------



## Yoused

Another Russian rich guy falls out a window to his death, this one in India. Local police see nothing suspicious about the incident – presumably because the defenestration of Russian oligarchs has simply become a normal, expected thing.


----------



## Yoused

Vlad says that he is ready to negotiate. Not sure what he expects to gain (perhaps fewer attacks on Russian military bases). The shift in the make-up of the US government may seem potentially favorable to him, but the House cannot really force State or the President to the long, long table.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Yoused said:


> Vlad says that he is ready to negotiate. *Not sure what he expects to gain* (perhaps fewer attacks on Russian military bases). The shift in the make-up of the US government may seem potentially favorable to him, but the House cannot really force State or the President to the long, long table.



I suspect that he may hope to gain time, time that will allow him to regroup, - see off possible domestic challengers - and allow his battered and bruised forces time to recover, before deciding what to do, such as launching a fresh assault or attack on Ukraine.


----------



## Macky-Mac

Scepticalscribe said:


> I suspect that he may hope to gain time, time that will allow him to regroup, - see off possible domestic challengers - and allow his battered and bruised forces time to recover, before deciding what to do, such as launching a fresh assault or attack on Ukraine.




I suspect he's already decided on a fresh assault after getting time for Russia to actually prepare for war......something they failed to do while believing the special military floperation would be a huge and quick success


----------



## lizkat

Scepticalscribe said:


> I suspect that he may hope to gain time, time that will allow him to regroup, - see off possible domestic challengers - and allow his battered and bruised forces time to recover, before deciding what to do, such as launching a fresh assault or attack on Ukraine.




Well since one reads that Russia is down to troops resupply only from conscription and emptying the prisons of warm bodies able to walk,  negotiation might be a very good idea.   One can barely imagine how little enthusiasm such forces would have in advancing Russia's interests abroad in the dead of winter, so clearly they are for show while he tries to buy time and hopes for concessions from Ukraine.

But yes to use the time to look to his domestic fortunes, also a good idea.  Since Putin made it a crime even to criticize the state (a conveniently vague statute), it must be a bit difficult to take accurate popular soundings, to say the least.   So he needs to cultivate popular opinion more directly, from other than photo ops taken at end of a long table with his ministers at the other end.   He used to be out and about at openings of museums and parks or whatever, reminding people of the upside of the Russian homeland, the beauty, the generosity of spirit and all that.   Bit hard to keep that going what with this "special military operation" coming up on a year and conscripts still shipping out while coffins make the return trip.


----------



## Yoused

Scepticalscribe said:


> I suspect that he may hope to gain time, time that will allow him to regroup




The evidence suggests that three decades of the Russian MIC kleptocracy have rendered its armed forces an international punchline. Over on another forum, we have a sitcom "in development" in which a crack team of Ukrainian commandos set out to bollix up Russian military operations only to arrive just in time to see the Russians screwing themselves over before the commandos have a chance to carry out their plan.

Yes, we can imagine that Vlad wants to buy some time. But can he buy enough? A decade to undo everything that is wrong with the Russian military, in the face of continuing international sanctions, might still leave him short of what he needs, going on toward his eighties.


----------



## Agent47

Yoused said:


> Vlad says that he is ready to negotiate. Not sure what he expects to gain (perhaps fewer attacks on Russian military bases). The shift in the make-up of the US government may seem potentially favorable to him, but the House cannot really force State or the President to the long, long table.



Well, by negotiate he means „the west should accept the new reality“; i.e. what he actually wants is the west accepts that the annexed regions, including the Krimean peninsula, is now russian territory.


----------



## Cmaier

Agent47 said:


> Well, by negotiate he means „the west should accept the new reality“; i.e. what he actually wants is the west accepts that the annexed regions, including the Krimean peninsula, is now russian territory.



Das stimmt.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Agent47 said:


> Well, by negotiate he means „the west should accept the new reality“; i.e. what he actually wants is the west accepts that the annexed regions, including the Krimean peninsula, is now russian territory.



The irony is, that if he (Mr Putin) had not launched his invasion of Ukraine last February, it is entirely possible that he actually could have achieved some version of this (desired, for him) outcome. 

Had the invasion not occurred, I suspect (strongly) that - ultimately - the eventual solution would have been some version of two Ukraines, and that much diplomatic and political effort would have been expended in an attempt to achieve such an outcome (above all, much energy and effort would have gone into reconciling the Ukrainians to this outcome) which would have taken the form of some sort of political architecture designed to express the existence of two Ukraines.

However, the invasion (special military operation) has completely put paid to that.


----------



## Huntn

The man is a fountain of unique and fresh inspiration _“Commrades, we are liberating Ukraine from under Nazi control, Yes! Understand?“   _


----------



## Cmaier

https://www.bfm.ru/news/515973
		


Good news, everybody! Yeah, your Russian bank’s ios app has been banned from the App Store, but all you have to do is bring your phone to the bank and we’ll…install it for you.  Yep, we’ll just side-load that bad boy right onto your iPhone for free!


----------



## Agent47

So what exactly are they doing? Installing a web version?


----------



## Cmaier

Agent47 said:


> So what exactly are they doing? Installing a web version?




I suspect they are misusing enterprise certificates and side-loading.


----------

