felltoearth wrote:TIL Canada’s GDP is 3x Russia’s GDP. They don’t have the resources for a long, drawn out conflict especially in the face of sanctions.

My prediction is that they will fuck up a bunch of infrastructure to disrupt the economy and destabilize the country, enter “talks” to discuss withdrawal and then withdraw a few weeks later. It will be a diplomatic triumph.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Does not look like Putin wants to give up on the so-called separatist republics, Luhanks and Donetsk, but a "triumph" he seems to be aiming for no matter the costs. I mean, what happens if he does not give up and will want to do the Krym thing again? Surely Ukraine cannot agree with that or?

felltoearth wrote:If only we hadn’t banned Mike_L we’d be getting the real truth from RT.

...which is that Russia is not attacking anyone. It is merely reclaiming an area that always belonged to the country. The Bolsheviks are to blame for the splintering of Russia 40-odd years ago. From the official translation of Putin's 55 minute address a couple of days ago:

Even two years before the collapse of the USSR, its fate was actually predetermined. It is now that radicals and nationalists, including and primarily those in Ukraine, are taking credit for having gained independence. As we can see, this is absolutely wrong. The disintegration of our united country was brought about by the historic, strategic mistakes on the part of the Bolshevik leaders and the CPSU leadership, mistakes committed at different times in state-building and in economic and ethnic policies. The collapse of the historical Russia known as the USSR is on their conscience.
...
Ukraine actually never had stable traditions of real statehood.
...
A stable statehood has never developed in Ukraine

It's all a pretext of course. The real reason is power politics. Most of Putin's address details the threat, both potential and real, that NATO/USA's military machinery pose.

They've captured Chernobyl.

I've a feeling that the Ukrainians won't mind if they keep it.

From the BBC news feed:

More than 1,700 people have been arrested during anti-war protests across dozens of cities in Russia, an independent monitor reports.

More than 900 were arrested in Moscow and over 400 in Saint Petersburg, according to OVD-Info, which tracks arrests at opposition rallies.

Thousands gathered near Pushkin Square in central Moscow, while up to 1,000 people gathered in the former imperial capital Saint Petersburg, the AFP news agency reports.

This in a country where the population know that protesting means that they will be arrested and locked up.

It'll be interesting to see how many are out on the streets over the weekend after people have had time to organise.

I'm also wondering if it was part of the masterplan to have what must be dozens of paratroopers surrounded and cut off after 24 hours outside of Kyiv at Antonov airport. I am not getting the impression that this will be a short victorious war.

Edit:

Definitely not a short victorious war:

All day long the Russian troops have been trying to take over an airfield at Hostomel, on the northern outskirts of the Ukrainian capital.

This airfield is of strategic importance: if captured it could become a springboard for the Russian army into Kyiv.

Judging from verified videos, at least two Russian helicopters were shot down over it. Journalists from CNN filmed a group of Russian paratroopers landing there while the Bellingcat investigative website said it had intelligence that 18 war planes with reinforcements were heading towards it from Russia.

Later in the evening it became clear that a heavy battle for Hostomel was raging and Ukrainian forces were using both airstrikes and artillery.

By 11pm Kyiv time (21:00 GMT) an official statement was released, saying that the airfield was back in the Ukrainian hands.

I know Putin doesn't give a shit, but I can't see the Russian public feeling the same way when those body bags arrive back home.

I dunno about those body bags actually. I mean this comes largely from ignorance but "body bags" work perhaps in US or UK but in Russia? They seem so proud (nice generalization bro). Same with sanctions. While Putin acts as a dictator, it's up to Russians to put him in the mausoleum. Sure there is opposition and sure its being persecuted but still. Does not seem that many Russians hate him with passion, at least not passion causing revolutions.

Hermit wrote:

felltoearth wrote:If only we hadn’t banned Mike_L we’d be getting the real truth from RT.

...which is that Russia is not attacking anyone. It is merely reclaiming an area that always belonged to the country. The Bolsheviks are to blame for the splintering of Russia 40-odd years ago. From the official translation of Putin's 55 minute address a couple of days ago:

Even two years before the collapse of the USSR, its fate was actually predetermined. It is now that radicals and nationalists, including and primarily those in Ukraine, are taking credit for having gained independence. As we can see, this is absolutely wrong. The disintegration of our united country was brought about by the historic, strategic mistakes on the part of the Bolshevik leaders and the CPSU leadership, mistakes committed at different times in state-building and in economic and ethnic policies. The collapse of the historical Russia known as the USSR is on their conscience.
...
Ukraine actually never had stable traditions of real statehood.
...
A stable statehood has never developed in Ukraine

It's all a pretext of course. The real reason is power politics. Most of Putin's address details the threat, both potential and real, that NATO/USA's military machinery pose.

Well, what to say. Nagorno-Karabakh war is one of the most recent example of such thinking. It's an argument. It's (perhaps?) not a valid argument in the context of the world we live in, international law, but from let's say a philosophical point of view, it can be argued. Of course, this does not help to calm things down, until it's put to rest somehow, but it's not the same as making shit up for example.

---
edit: found the debate I was referring to.



Once I listened to this and let's say we don't know anything about those people, we are observers, and listen to their arguments. Listen and fact-check. I can't help myself but conclude that it's not for me to judge, hence a law (arbiter) of some kind.

If it was up to me, every street could be independent if the people living there wanted it. Sure there is always the Cui bono thing but to me, it's about the people. It sounds simple, of course, it is not, because how?

side note: to us, hairless monkeys, land seems to be worth a lot.

tuco wrote:I dunno about those body bags actually. I mean this comes largely from ignorance but "body bags" work perhaps in US or UK but in Russia? They seem so proud (nice generalization bro). Same with sanctions. While Putin acts as a dictator, it's up to Russians to put him in the mausoleum. Sure there is opposition and sure its being persecuted but still. Does not seem that many Russians hate him with passion, at least not passion causing revolutions.

They were certainly the source of anguish during the Afghan and Chechnya campaigns, to the extent that the Russian government actively covered up the number of dead from their relatives (especially after disasters like the Battle of Grozny). Remember also that the bulk of Russian forces are conscripts rather than volunteers (the same is true of the Ukrainians, but they are quite literally fighting for their own homes).

Remember too that it was on the back of mass protests that the Soviet Union disintegrated. Putin most certainly does remember this, which is why protest in Russia is illegal. In such an environment it's only sensible for people to profess enthusiastic loyalty to the dear leader. Right up until they string him up from a lamp-post.

Edit: The wikipedia article on the Dissolution of the Soviet Union is well worth a read since it was from that environment that Putin emerged (at the time he was a Lieutenant Colonel in the KGB), especially if you aren't an old git like me who remembers it.

There are a lot of sources claiming putin has solved this problem by deploying mobile crematoria with the troops.

No body bags. No problem.

In Putin Russia problem solve you.

I was not trying to say that casualties will have no effect. Of course, they do as casualties have families and belong to communities. Just perhaps Putin has them, and also sanctions, analyzed as reasonable risks. He can also censor media in a way it would not be possible in US/UK. After all, as you said, he is former KGB. However, I am speculating, and as noted my speculations are not that well informed.

Hermit wrote:

felltoearth wrote:If only we hadn’t banned Mike_L we’d be getting the real truth from RT.

...which is that Russia is not attacking anyone. It is merely reclaiming an area that always belonged to the country. The Bolsheviks are to blame for the splintering of Russia 40-odd years ago. From the official translation of Putin's 55 minute address a couple of days ago:

State Dept is pushing a story about "kill lists"... would be cool if such lists included some of the higher ranking Nazis on the US payroll.

Even two years before the collapse of the USSR, its fate was actually predetermined. It is now that radicals and nationalists, including and primarily those in Ukraine, are taking credit for having gained independence. As we can see, this is absolutely wrong. The disintegration of our united country was brought about by the historic, strategic mistakes on the part of the Bolshevik leaders and the CPSU leadership, mistakes committed at different times in state-building and in economic and ethnic policies. The collapse of the historical Russia known as the USSR is on their conscience.
...
Ukraine actually never had stable traditions of real statehood.
...
A stable statehood has never developed in Ukraine

It's all a pretext of course. The real reason is power politics. Most of Putin's address details the threat, both potential and real, that NATO/USA's military machinery pose.

Anyway, yes ^this. It's hard to take seriously from a comfy western suburban couch, especially in N.America & Britain, where people still get the soylent green. The threat of US/NATO expansion is armageddon. Putin lays out the future plainly (not just regional history). The kind of "NATO" the ghouls in my neighborhood have in mind for Europe - the kinds of installations it involves - requires the Russian military to put itself on a nuclear hair trigger, Putin or no Putin. One could argue submarine platforms will be how WW3 ends - but land positioning will be how it starts. If you're a sane person who still thinks it's possible for humans to defy the odds, you balk at "NATO" expansion, and then you put the EU governments who don't have the balls to defy DC, out of a job. Anyway, depending on the outcome of this "incursion", Putin may be doing those ball-less bureaucrats, and the rest of the world, a favor.

Of all the shitholes for DC to stick its finger into, Ukraine was the most serious. Anyway, the ghouls would be content to scuttle Nord Stream 1, which was probably the real goal. If it happens, it'll divert Russian LNG to China, the abused spouse syndrome EU countries will make do with a shittier deal, and the money bags around DC will cash in. A few more of these sociopathic neoliberal adjustments, and we're not going to beat the odds.

I don't see NATO annexing sovereign nations.

Going to need a hit on the Stockholm Syndrome Bong.

felltoearth wrote:If only we hadn’t banned Mike_L we’d be getting the real truth from RT.

Turns out he was superfluous to requirement anyway.

Spearthrower wrote:I don't see NATO annexing sovereign nations.

Neither does Putin. Read his address. While it is spattered with bullshit, his details about the threat, both potential and real, that NATO/USA's military machinery poses cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Hermit wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:I don't see NATO annexing sovereign nations.

Neither does Putin. Read his address. While it is spattered with bullshit, his details about the threat, both potential and real, that NATO/USA's military machinery poses cannot be dismissed out of hand.

I listened to like 5 mins and it was like I remember what was on TV in 1980s. I could not listen to it then. Thank others for a summary.

IIRC he also said that NATO cannot be trusted. Now what does it mean? Did you hear the pres saying NATO cannot be trusted? And who cannot be trusted should be feared.

Then again, remember the Iraq invasion speech? I do.

Agi Hammerthief wrote:this would be the perfect time for the USA to see how many troops they can fit into Alaska.

„what? invade Siberia?
of cause not, we are just doing a winter maneuver as far away from Ukraine as possible.“

Yes a joke, but... you're joking, right? Parody only works if there's a kernel of reality in it. For one thing, Romania is not Alaska. Also "troops" aren't the problem, and the phase in US hegemony that relies on US troops is over, it's now about proxy armies and war toys.

Look past the official messaging about troop maneuvers, and take seriously for a moment what Ukraine in NATO actually means in historical context. NATO is a military alliance. Yanukovych's ouster was triggered essentially by a sane reluctance to commit to the stealth NATO membership in that 2013 "trade agreement". In a country as patchwork as Ukraine, he had the right idea - i.e. staying allied with both the EU and Russia. No one in the last 8 years who gives 2 fucks about Ukraine *not* imploding sees the forces that guaranteed what happened in the next few months as anything but callous enemies of humanity.

quas wrote:

Tortured_Genius wrote:the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Philippines (by shooting down flight MH-17 with 298 fatalities)

I don't think there is a lot of anti-Russian sentiment in these countries. Especially not in ASEAN countries.

It's fluff, it usually is. There's a willful ignorance of how 3/4 of the world lives and thinks, and the gaps are generally filled-in with cotton candy. Old colonial power is a kaiju and cotton candy media is the myelin tissue protecting its nervous system as it makes its tortuous centuries-long retreat back into its hole.

Hermit wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:I don't see NATO annexing sovereign nations.

Neither does Putin. Read his address. While it is spattered with bullshit, his details about the threat, both potential and real, that NATO/USA's military machinery poses cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Of course military machinery poses a threat - that's implicit; it's the entire purpose of such machinery.

But the only active threats it poses to Russia is to crazed Putin's territorial acquisitions, to limit his strong-arming, and threatens Russia's ability to launch missiles at other nations.

If it's such a serious threat - why is he invading Ukraine? How is that resolving the threat? How is that not generating a threat? How is it not justifying NATO's existence?

It makes no sense at all. It's gobbledeegook, of exactly the flavour you always see from autocratic belligerents.

Oh and I can't be bothered to type a post about how unique I am compared to all you sheep, but let's just pretend I did so I can claim license in having my unfettered imagination deemed as deep truths.

Matt_B wrote:I especially liked the bit where Sergei Naryshkin let slip that he wanted Donbas to become a part of Russia rather than merely be recognized as an independent state.

So much for the self-determination narrative.

Self-determination for most of them = Russian republics, but I get your point. I think the distinction is almost meaningless, it's partly a framing tool vs the European parts of NATO as NATO stands now. But it's mostly a framing for a "united" Ukraine. Autonomous Donetsk/Luhansk could coexist with a regionally neutral Ukraine, which... any sane person who stares at that idea comes away wishing it were true. A regionally neutral Ukraine - governed by people eager to have normal relations with the EU and Russia and beyond - is a big, bountiful buffer against armageddon. A dream now. But also, several thousand dead civvies over 8 years, plus many of the levers being pulled by actual Nazis, apparently means it's an idea that has to be shoved down European leaders' throats.