That appears to be the meaning of the announcement of referenda in regions of the former Ukraine, as expanded by President Putin and MoD Shoigu early today. As we discussed yesterday, Russian Gamechanger, the referenda, by which at least four former Ukrainian oblasts will end up joining the Russian Federation, will also change the terms of engagement. The referenda provide the legal foundation for the new war going forward. It’s important to understand this—everything that Putin does is done in accordance with legal norms—the Russian constitution, Russian laws, and last but by no means least, international law. Please note that the US Rules Based Order doesn’t enter into this, because it is based not in law and right but in raw power. This step by step approach according to legal norms is very characteristic of Putin, and Andrei Martyanov explains its importance in understanding everything that Putin does (video at link):
For people interested, there is new trend in the evolution of the implementation of a "state" , free book (i'm not affiliated with the book) : thenetworkstate.com
" Technology has enabled us to start new companies, new communities, and new currencies. But can we use it to start new cities, or even new countries? This book explains how to build the successor to the nation state, a concept we call the network state. "
If this concept was completly mature now , Putin would have other options than war to create buffer states. But then China (and frankly most nations) would have troubles maintaining control over its population.
“Novorossiya, a territory of the Russian Empire—it was never a part of a Ukrainian entity until assigned as such by the Russian Empire.”
Don’t mean to be a quibbler, but the attachment of Novorossiia to Ukraine was a consequence of the 1917 revolution. The Bolsheviks codified this incorporation upon the establishment of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. In other words, as with Crimea much later, it was gifted to Ukraine by the Soviet regime.
Wow! Will people living in the new annexed territories be allowed to emigrate to Ukraine if they choose not to accept Russian Citizenship? I doubt it ...
The more operative question is, will Russian speakers (i.e., ethnic Russians) remaining in the rump state of Ukraine be allowed to migrate to Novorossiia? It’s easily imaginable that the Kiev regime will make it difficult for them to do so.
I didn't say anything absurd. Many people live in an area that was part of Ukraine.
If this area is annexed, some people may not want to stay and accept Russian governance or citizenship. Will they be allowed a choice? May they emigrate?
This is a legitimate question, and I do not have the answer. Do you?
It's a really stupid question. Many people have already voted with their feet, so to speak, in both directions. There are numerous videos, especially from Mariupol, demonstrating this.
1. The Kiev regime exhausted any goodwill among the populace of eastern Ukraine by shelling the Donbas over the past six years. At the same time some areas have been occupied and terrorized by literal (and by “literal” I don’t mean “virtual”) Nazi-inspired military units. Realistically, how many people do you think have warm fuzzy feelings about Ukraine at this point?
2. Rump Ukraine will be (is already) an economic and political basket-case going forward. Russia is a model of stability and prosperity by comparison. Why would anyone in their right mind want to choose the former over the latter?
3. Nothing in Russia’s policy thus far would indicate any animus toward the ethnic Ukrainian population, and thus any desire to punish or otherwise treat them harshly. On the contrary, the Russian authorities have explicitly justified their “go easy approach” in this military operation by declaring (to anyone who would listen) Ukrainians to be a kindred people. Why on earth would they prevent such from freely moving to Ukrainian controlled territory?
4. To refer to what’s about to happen as an “annexation” betrays a woeful ignorance of what has transpired in Ukraine since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 and, more recently, since the 2014 Maidan coup. The populations in the areas Russia is about to “annex” have consistently expressed a desire to reunite with the mother country. Crimea, for instance, declared itself independent of Ukraine during the Soviet collapse, but was forced to remain in Ukraine. How’s that for being “allowed a choice?” As for today, anyone who thinks Russia needs to rig a “sham” referendum has, at best, not been paying attention. Protestors in Odessa who dared to express their displeasure with the Maidan regime’s hostile moves against ethnic Russians were locked in an office building and burned alive. How’s that for being “allowed a choice?”
I forget who recommended the book, but I managed to get a reasonably priced used copy of When Titans Clashed: How The Red Army Stopped Hitler, and I'm finding it an engrossing read. Despite the title it's even handed. Many partisans of the Red Army Won The War school don't give credit where it's due. While D-Day didn't happen until half way through 1944, the North Africa campaign gobbled up scarce German reserves and airplanes--both transports and escorts. The same goes for our strategic bombing campaign. Even when it seemed of dubious benefit, the Germans were losing far more airplanes defending in the West than in the East, and the East was getting starved of replacements at the very time the Soviets were finally achieving parity. Among other things, Lend-Lease provided 2/3 of Red Army trucks. Without all this, once the Red Army definitively switched to the offensive they would have moved far slower than turned out to be the case, and would have incurred even heavier losses. None of that detracts from their sacrifices and achievements, nor that they shouldered the heaviest burden. Just perspective, which is what I was looking for in the book. It's an overview type account, rather than a who struck John detailed history.
Interestingly, in the conclusion the authors maintain that the understandable "never again" mentality engendered by the war ultimately led to the downfall of the Soviet economy and state, which was unable to support the strategy of buffer states and overseas attempts to detract from US global dominance. Presumably Putin has internalized these lessons, as his actions indicate.
I think, too, that the almost incredible--literally--suffering of the peoples of the USSR have contributed greatly to the far more cautious approach that Russia has adopted in its SMO. The crusade to defeat Nazi Germany, by its nature, was going to be costly in human lives, but mistakes were made that the later Russian military has no doubt studied in great detail.
There is no question that the fate of Poland under German and Soviet occupation was harsh. Of all the nations of Europe, Poles suffered the highest per-capita losses, with 1 in every 5.9 persons being killed as a result of the conflict, most under the brutal rule of the German security and police forces. Alongside this cruel reality, Poles pride themselves on the fact that their nation was the only one not to collaborate with the enemy. ...
There existed in Poland, as in nearly every other region of Europe during the timeof WWII, a distinct group that was ripe for voluntary or conscripted service within or alongside the Reich. This group was known as the Volksdeutsche.Volksdeutsche were historic ethnic enclaves resident beyond the German border that ... were considered a part of greater Germany. It was from among these groups that the Germans first gathered volunteers from Poland. ...
"Yes some of the Poles were of German, Volsdeutsche"heritage,"
No--Polish citizens included Germans who had no loyalty to Poland and did not identify as Polish. They lived in areas that had been part of Germany until 1919--just 20 years before the outbreak of WW2.
"Polish citizens of diverse ethnicities served in the Wehrmacht and the Waffen-SS, in particular in parts of Poland annexed by Germany"
What that means is that residents of areas that up to 1919 had been part of Germany and which were reincorporated into the Reich in 1939 were drafted into the Nazi German military:
"Service in the German military was universal in nature in these areas" IOW, it was a draft.
Those residents who had formerly been Polish citizens included many of German ethnicity.
Your original statement read:
"Polish allies who fought with the deutcher nazis in both national formations and part of SS units."
That's a lie, as is attested in your sources:
"Although the Waffen SS on the Eastern Front contained a sizable number of non-Germans, no Polish-based unit was ever formed. Some other minorities, such as Polish citizens of Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian, and Lithuanian origin, served both in the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS."
Regarding the Schutzmannschaft units you also lie, as documented at the Wikipedia link:
"Germans attempted to organize police battalions in occupied Poland, but did not find volunteers and had to use force in forming the single Polish Schutzmannschaft Battalion 202."
The Ordnungspolizei were German police formations, as is explained in Wikipedia.
If you attempt to repeat any of your lies you will be banned.
Regardless of which players one suspects to be pulling which strings and why, the net effect, as it seems pretty much always to be for many long years now, is that things play out in favor of China and against the U.S. pretty much exactly as if China's leaders had scripted it all themselves.
I'm not suggesting there is only one true puppet master (China) nor that much of this could not be due to some unholy alignment of interests between our power wielders and those of China (as opposed to ours being straight up Chinese puppets), but every single move we make plays right into China's hands, and it sure is tough to believe the people making these moves don't know exactly what they're doing in this regard.
Do they really and truly believe that driving Russia into the hands of China is good for us and bad for China? Do they really and truly believe that sabotaging our own energy production while letting China drastically increase theirs year after year is good for us and bad for China? Do they really and truly believe that a woke military is good for us and bad for China? Of course they don't, and I could go on for days with such examples.
Anyway, I just think we should never lose sight of the China angle - it sure as hell never loses sight of us.
PS: Huge thanks to Mark for what must be daily herculean efforts to pull so much material together and present it in such concise, value-added ways.
As the Russiagate scandal unfolded a few years ago, many of us began to watch and listen to Dan Bongino, who helpfully got out in front on disclosures of this hoax. I still frequently watch Bongino. Today, Bongino went out on a long limb predicting that Putin is losing the war badly and the worse it goes, the more likely it is to lead to nuclear conflict.
At 21:40 Bongino goes into a lengthy explanation why "Vladimir Putin is in a world of hurt", why Russian elites won't back Putin, that the war has gone wrong for him, why the war is Putin's "deluded project", that Putin is proposing "sham referenda" and a "fake vote", etc, etc. He then references Holman Jenkins at WSJ (and implicates others) suggesting that the worse it goes for Putin the more likely we end up in World War 3.
Obviously, Bongino's view of the Ukraine conflict is diametrically opposed to most of the perspectives Mark lists above.
I am not commenting on this because I agree with Bongino. Rather, I'm just pointing out (again) what a terrible job the media (and the opinion tellers) are doing collectively in getting to the truth of what's happening in Ukraine. Of course, this is not a surprise, because we've known for quite some time that the media is not trying to get to the truth of what's happening in Ukraine.
Bongino got the vaxx. He recently admitted it as one of his biggest mistakes.
I make this point not as an ad hominem, but to show that the man has clear faults in his worldview, the way he absorbs and ascribes import to various levels of information.
Seeing as the purpose of this blog to ascribe meaning to history and arrive at the closest semblance of truth possible whilst in this mortal coil - it behoves us to let go of faulty sources.
I like Bongino and definitely consider him worth listening to. But unfortunately, like most people, his conception of patriotism is instinctively the “my country wrong or right,” zero-sum game sort.
We and NATO opened this pandora’s box when we sponsored (forced through?) Kosovo’s independence from Serbia. I distinctly remember cooler heads warning as much at the time. Of course their message was overwhelmed by a deluge of yadda-yadda about democracy, freedom, etc. Don’t blame Russia now for operating according to historical precedent that we established.
A scary thought is that it is difficult to even imagine a group more foolish than that currently in control of the US. The world will I'm afraid be very fortunate if it manages to avoid a large-scale war while these lunatics are in charge.
Anyone still in thrall to the standard anti-Putin slurs or just struggling to gain a reasoned view of Putin would do well to watch Lex Fridman’s interview with Oliver Stone. Start around the 26 minute mark.
1. I am pretty sure that — in stark contrast to our own… uh… “leaders”— Putin writes a lot of his own stuff.
2. After 5+ years of propaganda narratives, especially the Russiagate charade, what makes you so sure the Putin-as-murderous-thug trope is actually true?
Plenty of murderous thugs with US and European addresses. One of these thugs masquerades as a philanthropist and is lauded by all leftists as a great humanitarian whereas in reality he is simply lining his pockets like all his Khazarian Mafia friends including the esteemed Neocons. There is a lot more to admire about Putin than a George Soros, IMHO.
Just a guess on my part, but Putin had limited intentions when he went into the Ukraine, but has expanded his goals as this is playing out in his favor. I'm not surprised that the Russians are mobilizing and the Russians are fearful, all of which gives the impression that Russia is weak and in danger of losing. America and NATO are encouraged and are likely to continue and even escalate the conflict. They are losing and will continue to lose, and in the process are weakening themselves militarily and economically. Putin is playing us for suckers. All out war? Nuclear? Putin is not interested in that, and the West is not capable.
I'm not so sanguine. The US's overall military capabilities may be in the toilet, but they still have a dangerous mix of a strong nuclear arsenal and a bunch of neocon loons who seem determined to push for war.
My 2¢. I agree with you that Putin had limited intentions when he went into the Ukraine. I don't disagee that he may be expanding his goals as the war is playing out in his favor...if it is playing out in his favor. But I would add that I think the war has proven to Putin what he might have already known in his heart of hearts...that Western support for Ukraine is all about bringing Putin and the Russian regime down. Ukraine is just the current game. The goal is Russia. Under these circumstances I find it impossible to believe Putin will concede anything.
I think he knew that from at least 2014. He had little choice but to attack Ukraine. I hope he has a cooler and saner head than our so-called "leaders"
Reading the casualty figures in this article, and considering the available manpower of the Ukraine as opposed to that of all Russia, and the fact that Putin is occupying some prime real estate I would presume the war is playing out in his favor. Next consider the economic consequences for NATO and even America as opposed to Russian resources and I would conclude we have a problem. We are face to face with reality, something the Biden administration seems to overlook.
On this note Senator Warren tweets: "I’ve been warning that Chair Powell’s Fed would throw millions of Americans out of work — and I fear he’s already on the path to doing so." But as quoted in Zerohedge "during the Congressional hearings this morning, JPMorgan CEO offered a reality check for policy-makers and pollyannas: "I don't think you can spend $6 trillion and not expect inflation".
It is not Powell but our Congress that is out of control.
Saw this posted at CFP. Not being familiar with today's Russian news media, The Moscow Times must be one of the left leaning outlets in this one-sided article.
Dems will run on the righteousness of the war this November (and in 2024; what else, other than Orange Man Bad, do they have to run on?) and the GOPe is afraid to stand up and call out the manifest stupidity of Western policy for fear of being labelled anti-war pussies. Tulsi Gabbard is undoubtedly right, but look how many followers she has...
Yes. And their language is Orwellian doublespeak. We hear from Biden, Blinken and Nod that Russia is a fascist and criminal regime led by a madman who is determined to rule the world. Really?
For people interested, there is new trend in the evolution of the implementation of a "state" , free book (i'm not affiliated with the book) : thenetworkstate.com
" Technology has enabled us to start new companies, new communities, and new currencies. But can we use it to start new cities, or even new countries? This book explains how to build the successor to the nation state, a concept we call the network state. "
If this concept was completly mature now , Putin would have other options than war to create buffer states. But then China (and frankly most nations) would have troubles maintaining control over its population.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-threatens-5-year-prison-sentence-anyone-voting-sham-referendums
“Novorossiya, a territory of the Russian Empire—it was never a part of a Ukrainian entity until assigned as such by the Russian Empire.”
Don’t mean to be a quibbler, but the attachment of Novorossiia to Ukraine was a consequence of the 1917 revolution. The Bolsheviks codified this incorporation upon the establishment of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. In other words, as with Crimea much later, it was gifted to Ukraine by the Soviet regime.
Wow! Will people living in the new annexed territories be allowed to emigrate to Ukraine if they choose not to accept Russian Citizenship? I doubt it ...
The more operative question is, will Russian speakers (i.e., ethnic Russians) remaining in the rump state of Ukraine be allowed to migrate to Novorossiia? It’s easily imaginable that the Kiev regime will make it difficult for them to do so.
Why would you say something so patently absurd?
I didn't say anything absurd. Many people live in an area that was part of Ukraine.
If this area is annexed, some people may not want to stay and accept Russian governance or citizenship. Will they be allowed a choice? May they emigrate?
This is a legitimate question, and I do not have the answer. Do you?
It's a really stupid question. Many people have already voted with their feet, so to speak, in both directions. There are numerous videos, especially from Mariupol, demonstrating this.
It’s absurd for at least the following reasons:
1. The Kiev regime exhausted any goodwill among the populace of eastern Ukraine by shelling the Donbas over the past six years. At the same time some areas have been occupied and terrorized by literal (and by “literal” I don’t mean “virtual”) Nazi-inspired military units. Realistically, how many people do you think have warm fuzzy feelings about Ukraine at this point?
2. Rump Ukraine will be (is already) an economic and political basket-case going forward. Russia is a model of stability and prosperity by comparison. Why would anyone in their right mind want to choose the former over the latter?
3. Nothing in Russia’s policy thus far would indicate any animus toward the ethnic Ukrainian population, and thus any desire to punish or otherwise treat them harshly. On the contrary, the Russian authorities have explicitly justified their “go easy approach” in this military operation by declaring (to anyone who would listen) Ukrainians to be a kindred people. Why on earth would they prevent such from freely moving to Ukrainian controlled territory?
4. To refer to what’s about to happen as an “annexation” betrays a woeful ignorance of what has transpired in Ukraine since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 and, more recently, since the 2014 Maidan coup. The populations in the areas Russia is about to “annex” have consistently expressed a desire to reunite with the mother country. Crimea, for instance, declared itself independent of Ukraine during the Soviet collapse, but was forced to remain in Ukraine. How’s that for being “allowed a choice?” As for today, anyone who thinks Russia needs to rig a “sham” referendum has, at best, not been paying attention. Protestors in Odessa who dared to express their displeasure with the Maidan regime’s hostile moves against ethnic Russians were locked in an office building and burned alive. How’s that for being “allowed a choice?”
Why would Russia want to keep them in? Why would the Ukraine want to keep them out?
I forget who recommended the book, but I managed to get a reasonably priced used copy of When Titans Clashed: How The Red Army Stopped Hitler, and I'm finding it an engrossing read. Despite the title it's even handed. Many partisans of the Red Army Won The War school don't give credit where it's due. While D-Day didn't happen until half way through 1944, the North Africa campaign gobbled up scarce German reserves and airplanes--both transports and escorts. The same goes for our strategic bombing campaign. Even when it seemed of dubious benefit, the Germans were losing far more airplanes defending in the West than in the East, and the East was getting starved of replacements at the very time the Soviets were finally achieving parity. Among other things, Lend-Lease provided 2/3 of Red Army trucks. Without all this, once the Red Army definitively switched to the offensive they would have moved far slower than turned out to be the case, and would have incurred even heavier losses. None of that detracts from their sacrifices and achievements, nor that they shouldered the heaviest burden. Just perspective, which is what I was looking for in the book. It's an overview type account, rather than a who struck John detailed history.
Interestingly, in the conclusion the authors maintain that the understandable "never again" mentality engendered by the war ultimately led to the downfall of the Soviet economy and state, which was unable to support the strategy of buffer states and overseas attempts to detract from US global dominance. Presumably Putin has internalized these lessons, as his actions indicate.
I think, too, that the almost incredible--literally--suffering of the peoples of the USSR have contributed greatly to the far more cautious approach that Russia has adopted in its SMO. The crusade to defeat Nazi Germany, by its nature, was going to be costly in human lives, but mistakes were made that the later Russian military has no doubt studied in great detail.
"Polish allies who fought with the deutcher nazis in both national formations and part of SS units."
Can you document that slander?
https://www.feldgrau.com/WW2-German-Wehrmacht-Polish-Volunteers/
There is no question that the fate of Poland under German and Soviet occupation was harsh. Of all the nations of Europe, Poles suffered the highest per-capita losses, with 1 in every 5.9 persons being killed as a result of the conflict, most under the brutal rule of the German security and police forces. Alongside this cruel reality, Poles pride themselves on the fact that their nation was the only one not to collaborate with the enemy. ...
There existed in Poland, as in nearly every other region of Europe during the timeof WWII, a distinct group that was ripe for voluntary or conscripted service within or alongside the Reich. This group was known as the Volksdeutsche.Volksdeutsche were historic ethnic enclaves resident beyond the German border that ... were considered a part of greater Germany. It was from among these groups that the Germans first gathered volunteers from Poland. ...
You're an idiot.
"Yes some of the Poles were of German, Volsdeutsche"heritage,"
No--Polish citizens included Germans who had no loyalty to Poland and did not identify as Polish. They lived in areas that had been part of Germany until 1919--just 20 years before the outbreak of WW2.
"Polish citizens of diverse ethnicities served in the Wehrmacht and the Waffen-SS, in particular in parts of Poland annexed by Germany"
What that means is that residents of areas that up to 1919 had been part of Germany and which were reincorporated into the Reich in 1939 were drafted into the Nazi German military:
"Service in the German military was universal in nature in these areas" IOW, it was a draft.
Those residents who had formerly been Polish citizens included many of German ethnicity.
Your original statement read:
"Polish allies who fought with the deutcher nazis in both national formations and part of SS units."
That's a lie, as is attested in your sources:
"Although the Waffen SS on the Eastern Front contained a sizable number of non-Germans, no Polish-based unit was ever formed. Some other minorities, such as Polish citizens of Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian, and Lithuanian origin, served both in the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS."
Regarding the Schutzmannschaft units you also lie, as documented at the Wikipedia link:
"Germans attempted to organize police battalions in occupied Poland, but did not find volunteers and had to use force in forming the single Polish Schutzmannschaft Battalion 202."
The Ordnungspolizei were German police formations, as is explained in Wikipedia.
If you attempt to repeat any of your lies you will be banned.
Regardless of which players one suspects to be pulling which strings and why, the net effect, as it seems pretty much always to be for many long years now, is that things play out in favor of China and against the U.S. pretty much exactly as if China's leaders had scripted it all themselves.
I'm not suggesting there is only one true puppet master (China) nor that much of this could not be due to some unholy alignment of interests between our power wielders and those of China (as opposed to ours being straight up Chinese puppets), but every single move we make plays right into China's hands, and it sure is tough to believe the people making these moves don't know exactly what they're doing in this regard.
Do they really and truly believe that driving Russia into the hands of China is good for us and bad for China? Do they really and truly believe that sabotaging our own energy production while letting China drastically increase theirs year after year is good for us and bad for China? Do they really and truly believe that a woke military is good for us and bad for China? Of course they don't, and I could go on for days with such examples.
Anyway, I just think we should never lose sight of the China angle - it sure as hell never loses sight of us.
PS: Huge thanks to Mark for what must be daily herculean efforts to pull so much material together and present it in such concise, value-added ways.
Thanks Brad.
Thanks.
Ditto what Brad and KLG said -- thanks, Mark, for all your tremendous effort!
As the Russiagate scandal unfolded a few years ago, many of us began to watch and listen to Dan Bongino, who helpfully got out in front on disclosures of this hoax. I still frequently watch Bongino. Today, Bongino went out on a long limb predicting that Putin is losing the war badly and the worse it goes, the more likely it is to lead to nuclear conflict.
See: https://rumble.com/v1kyug5-a-dramatic-escalation-involving-nuclear-war-ep.-1856-the-dan-bongino-show.html
At 21:40 Bongino goes into a lengthy explanation why "Vladimir Putin is in a world of hurt", why Russian elites won't back Putin, that the war has gone wrong for him, why the war is Putin's "deluded project", that Putin is proposing "sham referenda" and a "fake vote", etc, etc. He then references Holman Jenkins at WSJ (and implicates others) suggesting that the worse it goes for Putin the more likely we end up in World War 3.
Obviously, Bongino's view of the Ukraine conflict is diametrically opposed to most of the perspectives Mark lists above.
I am not commenting on this because I agree with Bongino. Rather, I'm just pointing out (again) what a terrible job the media (and the opinion tellers) are doing collectively in getting to the truth of what's happening in Ukraine. Of course, this is not a surprise, because we've known for quite some time that the media is not trying to get to the truth of what's happening in Ukraine.
Bongino got the vaxx. He recently admitted it as one of his biggest mistakes.
I make this point not as an ad hominem, but to show that the man has clear faults in his worldview, the way he absorbs and ascribes import to various levels of information.
Seeing as the purpose of this blog to ascribe meaning to history and arrive at the closest semblance of truth possible whilst in this mortal coil - it behoves us to let go of faulty sources.
I like Bongino and definitely consider him worth listening to. But unfortunately, like most people, his conception of patriotism is instinctively the “my country wrong or right,” zero-sum game sort.
The real disappointment there is Bongino's failure to grasp the continuity between Russiagate, COVID, and Ukraine.
Good point.
Its all of a piece.
If the Taiwanese want to be independant (almost guaranteed) and are attacked then Russia will not back China ?
If Catalonia wants independance from Spain and some sort of armed conflict emerges, Russia will support it ?
What a mess.
We and NATO opened this pandora’s box when we sponsored (forced through?) Kosovo’s independence from Serbia. I distinctly remember cooler heads warning as much at the time. Of course their message was overwhelmed by a deluge of yadda-yadda about democracy, freedom, etc. Don’t blame Russia now for operating according to historical precedent that we established.
Why would Russia care about Catalunya?
Russia will do what is best for Russia - Spain, whilst a belligerent, is not consequential to Russia. China is.
I’m reminded of a recent book read, “Sleepwalkers”. It’s about the fools who gave us World War One.
My reading led me to believe that it was the last Hurrah for the European Royals, though England was drug into it.
A scary thought is that it is difficult to even imagine a group more foolish than that currently in control of the US. The world will I'm afraid be very fortunate if it manages to avoid a large-scale war while these lunatics are in charge.
I only mention this as an aside, but Putin, murderous thug though he may be, has a pretty good speechwriter.
Anyone still in thrall to the standard anti-Putin slurs or just struggling to gain a reasoned view of Putin would do well to watch Lex Fridman’s interview with Oliver Stone. Start around the 26 minute mark.
https://youtu.be/ygAqYC8JOQI
1. I am pretty sure that — in stark contrast to our own… uh… “leaders”— Putin writes a lot of his own stuff.
2. After 5+ years of propaganda narratives, especially the Russiagate charade, what makes you so sure the Putin-as-murderous-thug trope is actually true?
Plenty of murderous thugs with US and European addresses. One of these thugs masquerades as a philanthropist and is lauded by all leftists as a great humanitarian whereas in reality he is simply lining his pockets like all his Khazarian Mafia friends including the esteemed Neocons. There is a lot more to admire about Putin than a George Soros, IMHO.
Very good documentary on a murderous thug:
https://www.magnitskyact.com/
My recollection is that the documentary ultimately vindicates Putin, doesn't it?
absolutely - much to the surprise of the documentarian
Just a guess on my part, but Putin had limited intentions when he went into the Ukraine, but has expanded his goals as this is playing out in his favor. I'm not surprised that the Russians are mobilizing and the Russians are fearful, all of which gives the impression that Russia is weak and in danger of losing. America and NATO are encouraged and are likely to continue and even escalate the conflict. They are losing and will continue to lose, and in the process are weakening themselves militarily and economically. Putin is playing us for suckers. All out war? Nuclear? Putin is not interested in that, and the West is not capable.
I'm not so sanguine. The US's overall military capabilities may be in the toilet, but they still have a dangerous mix of a strong nuclear arsenal and a bunch of neocon loons who seem determined to push for war.
@perle
My 2¢. I agree with you that Putin had limited intentions when he went into the Ukraine. I don't disagee that he may be expanding his goals as the war is playing out in his favor...if it is playing out in his favor. But I would add that I think the war has proven to Putin what he might have already known in his heart of hearts...that Western support for Ukraine is all about bringing Putin and the Russian regime down. Ukraine is just the current game. The goal is Russia. Under these circumstances I find it impossible to believe Putin will concede anything.
I think he knew that from at least 2014. He had little choice but to attack Ukraine. I hope he has a cooler and saner head than our so-called "leaders"
Reading the casualty figures in this article, and considering the available manpower of the Ukraine as opposed to that of all Russia, and the fact that Putin is occupying some prime real estate I would presume the war is playing out in his favor. Next consider the economic consequences for NATO and even America as opposed to Russian resources and I would conclude we have a problem. We are face to face with reality, something the Biden administration seems to overlook.
On this note Senator Warren tweets: "I’ve been warning that Chair Powell’s Fed would throw millions of Americans out of work — and I fear he’s already on the path to doing so." But as quoted in Zerohedge "during the Congressional hearings this morning, JPMorgan CEO offered a reality check for policy-makers and pollyannas: "I don't think you can spend $6 trillion and not expect inflation".
It is not Powell but our Congress that is out of control.
Saw this posted at CFP. Not being familiar with today's Russian news media, The Moscow Times must be one of the left leaning outlets in this one-sided article.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/09/21/i-dont-want-to-be-cannon-fodder-panic-and-fear-as-russia-begins-mobilization-a78853
Another outstanding analysis and marshalling of relevant sources. Thank you!
Totally agree.
"the extent to which CIA linked up w/the Banderites."
CIA was totally in bed with them, and protected some of the leaders in the US who were known war criminals.
Just a note from "Captain Obvious"...these same career US corruptocrats lied to us about Iraq, Syria, Libya and for 20 years lied about Afghanistan.
It's pretty sad, but I believe Putin at this point more than my own Government...
That's what is so scary. There is no-body - no-body - in the higher reaches saying "What the hell is going on here?" and pushing for negotiations.
Dems will run on the righteousness of the war this November (and in 2024; what else, other than Orange Man Bad, do they have to run on?) and the GOPe is afraid to stand up and call out the manifest stupidity of Western policy for fear of being labelled anti-war pussies. Tulsi Gabbard is undoubtedly right, but look how many followers she has...
Yes. And their language is Orwellian doublespeak. We hear from Biden, Blinken and Nod that Russia is a fascist and criminal regime led by a madman who is determined to rule the world. Really?