The familiar sound of war drums are beating again. Rare bipartisanship.

What's the deal here? Why would Russia invade Ukraine? And why should the US get involved?

They claim it is because Ukraine wants to join NATO. But it seems like NATO members do not really want to add Ukraine into the fold. That should it it, right? No conflict.

Can anyone explain what's going on? And do you think the US should intervene?

The US cares more about Taiwan than Ukraine but allowing Russia to take over Ukraine would embolden China to do what they've wanted to do for a long time.

https://www.google.com/search?q=all+your+base+are+belong+to+us&sxsrf=AOaemvKPq4VUUfNkIE9NKzKbppCOwmja3A:1642797547287&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&vet=1&fir=ZNuxDBdH3gsdmM%252C1XfMWms8WhopCM%252C%252Fm%252F0cs52%253B7u008V2fM5q1GM%252CzCYnrIIXkB74gM%252C_%253B24r8yh2PWadiaM%252CRguIO8nit9SxBM%252C_%253B0_QIlt1NOAs_JM%252CEr4nTyE6jemYIM%252C_%253BaZNpDM5QQi6N4M%252C4iQb7XX26VJkbM%252C_&usg=AI4_-kQKUP3Gw_PQOGfjt01lYXxldvrMtg&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwiYnfnh2cP1AhU6yIsBHWvuAXcQ_B16BAgYEAE#imgrc=ZNuxDBdH3gsdmM

my dad who is extremely leftist anti-american mentioned to me recently that he sees how the US has been going. Economy pull back, covid surges, and slumping Biden approval. he says he wouldn't be surprised if a war breaks out soon.

This was about 2 or 3 weeks ago he told me this.

this post just reminded me of him saying this

https://www.patreon.com/posts/61378892

this all seems to be very intense and serious challenge to US imperialism and its influence.

https://en.desk-russie.eu/2021/12/30/what-does-the-russian-ultimatum.html

"The Russian blackmail is explicit and is directed at both the Americans and the Europeans. If the West does not accept the Russian ultimatum, they will have to face “a military and technical alternative”, according to Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko: “The Europeans must also think about whether they want to avoid making their continent the scene of a military confrontation. They have a choice. Either they take seriously what is put on the table, or they face a military-technical alternative.”

After the publication of the draft treaty, the possibility of a pre-emptive strike against NATO targets (similar to those that Israel inflicted on Iran), was confirmed by former Deputy Minister of Defense Andrei Kartapolov (Duma Defense Committee): “Our partners must understand that the longer they drag out the examination of our proposals and the adoption of real measures to create these guarantees, the greater the likelihood that they will suffer a pre-emptive strike.”

To make things clear Russia fired a “salvo” of Zircon hypersonic missiles on December 24. Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, commented on this event: “Well, I hope that the notes will be more convincing”. Editorialist Vladimir Mozhegov added: “What are our arguments? First and foremost, of course, our most reliable allies — the army and the navy. To be more precise, the hypersonic Zircon missile (the “carrier killer”, as it is affectionately called in the West), which makes it absurd for the United States to have a fleet of aircraft carriers. The impact of the Zircon cracks a destroyer like a nut. Several Zircons will inevitably sink an aircraft carrier. The Zircon simply does its job: it methodically shoots huge, clumsy aircraft carriers like a gun at cans.”

An article in the digital newspaper Svpressa eloquently titled “Putin’s ultimatum: Russia, if you will, will bury all of Europe and two-thirds of the United States in 30 minutes” dots the i’s: “The Kremlin will have to prove its position with deeds. It is probably only possible to force the “partners” to sit at the negotiating table by coercion. Economically, the Russian Federation cannot compete with the West. There remains war.” Military expert Konstantin Sivkov believes that “to bring the United States and NATO to the negotiating table, some kind of super weapon is needed. For the moment, Russia does not show this potential to its adversaries. But it exists. Russia has the capability to use superpowered munitions with a capacity of up to 100 megatons. We must repeat that we are not interested in a world without Russia, as Putin once said, and demonstrate our determination to strike if NATO expands. After that, I can assure you that they will be afraid. Nothing else can stop them. It is naive to rely on diplomatic procedures. Russia’s move is a signal that already radical measures are going to be taken. You refused, so you will have yourselves to blame…”


What is at stake

Reading the Western press, one is under the impression that nothing is happening. Westerners do not seem to understand what is at stake. They think that only the fate of Ukraine is being decided, which is of less concern to them than that of Armenia, judging by the pilgrimages of our presidential candidates. Many French officials find it normal that Russia should claim a sphere of influence. They resemble those who in 1939 believed that Hitler’s demands would be limited to Danzig. However, one only has to look at the texts proposed by Moscow to understand that the stakes are quite different.

The Russian ultimatum demands that “the following be legally established: the renunciation of any enlargement of NATO , the cessation of military cooperation with post-Soviet countries, the withdrawal of American nuclear weapons from Europe and the withdrawal of NATO armed forces to the borders of 1997”. "

And part of that includes being able to join NATO which Putin obviously does not want.

Also it’s hilarious and pathetic watching both American leftist tankies AND the Tucker Carlsons of the world trying to spin this into the US/NATO being the bad guy here.

Especially given the escalations this week (eg. citizens being evacuated from the border region - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/shelling-breaks-out-east-ukraine-west-moscow-dispute-troop-moves-2022-02-17/).


Yes the NATO issue is tricky, but there's also a lot of doublespeak going on as well so wtf knows (note: bear in mind I have no ties to the region or this topic professionally, this is just my political junkie perspective so take with a grain of salt).


There's been open courtship between NATO and Ukraine for many years now (eg. I read recently that joining the alliance was even incorporated into Ukraine's National Security Strategy and Constitution couple of years ago), and the right of any nation to try to join is enshrined in NATO's founding treaty (an open door policy the US hasn't shied away from exploiting to antagonize Putin, especially since Bush-Cheney). But NATO expansion is def controversial in that part of Europe because of Russia, not NATO membership (i.e. there *has* been slight pushback to applicants over the years, but that's mostly been more of a procedural concern bc a prospective country must have members' unanimous support to join).

The far, far, bigger challenge is that Russia demands not only that expansion stops but that NATO retreat to its pre-90s/pre-EU architecture: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/History_of_NATO_enlargement.svg/1095px-History_of_NATO_enlargement.svg.png , which would essentially halve its membership, and Putin says he'll drop a nuke if Ukraine joins NATO (eg. from press conf after talks with France last week - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10488413/Vladimir-Putin-warns-nuclear-war-break-Ukraine-joins-NATO.html?ito=video_player_click). This is bc all these central, eastern, and baltic european states joining the alliance limits Russia's sphere of influence, and the membership of border states would (understandably) be viewed as an existential threat.

So the tightrope facing the West involves not only a (so far unsuccessful) strategic aim of deterring Russian aggression (bc it undermines NATO's sphere of influence) but an optical one, since Russian supremacy over NATO would totally weaken current and prospective members' confidence in the alliance. That's why there's been all this confusing:

* "We must protect Ukraine!" from the West (meanwhile Ukraine's pres was like everybody pls chill);
* "We're not trying to start a war!" from Russia (meanwhile Putin sent 100,000+ troops to their border as well as hard weaponry, medics, and blood for transfusions);
* "Putin, calm tf down man!" from the US (meanwhile Biden sent thousands of troops to the region and keeps escalating the West's rhetoric)
* "Ukraine's not part of NATO and won't be for the forseeable future!" from NATO members (meanwhile joining NATO is part of Ukraine's National Security Strategy and codified into their constitution);

etc etc. Almost every state actor in this crisis is giving mixed signals. So imho if this war pops off (which is looking increasingly likely) it'll be one of the worst-timed and worst-executed diplomatic failures in recent history.

.

just needed to vent

people are (understandably) very distracted

but it feels a bit like our leaders our taking advantage of that

to a core problem.

Which is that Putin's simply an imperialist, and likely views himself as some Ivan the Great type figure who can resume the territorial expansions pursued by (imperial) Russia centuries ago and restore its former glory. There's territory/people he believes should belong to Russia for historical and ethnocultural reasons, and he despises the way Gorbachev capitulated to the West and enabled the territorial loss in the Soviet Union's collapse. That's all this really boils down to imho. He's also like 70 yrs old, alleged to be in poor health (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13253481/putin-cancer-parkinsons-emergency-surgery/ , https://lansinginstitute.org/2021/09/29/putins-worsening-health-set-to-be-a-determining-factor-in-russias-policy-over-the-next-four-years/), and prob willing to die for this cause.


The unfortunate thing tho is Putin's also a way smarter tactician than any of our leaders in the West, he def seems to KNOW this (and them), and he most certainly timed this escalation taking the following into account:


* this is a terrible fucking time for *us* to go to war. Seriously. Like, we're the worse off hemisphere BY FAR wrt covid (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1101373/novel-coronavirus-2019ncov-mortality-and-cases-worldwide-by-region/); social cohesion is so bad right now multiple anti-gov protests have been erupting all over the place (eg. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59363256 , https://www.npr.org/2022/02/14/1080632899/bank-freezes-funds-canadian-border-protest); and these issues present a vulnerability/operational risk for the troops/human resources necessary to even staff a war (eg. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/02/02/army-begins-discharges-for-covid-vaccine-refusing-soldiers/);

* people are ALREADY getting crushed by near double-digit inflation; some store shelves are ALREADY running bare on the regular; oil and gas prices are ALREADY at record highs, etc. Economic history demonstrates that wars are inflationary and wreak havoc on global supply chains, which would only exacerbate these issues (especially the energy markets considering Russia is one of the world's top suppliers of oil and gas);

* judging from the way Russia's been kicking the West's ass in spheres like cyber in recent years (eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_federal_government_data_breach), Putin's hybrid/irregular warfare capabilities appear superior to ours right now. Imagine the crazy covid variant Russia's prob cooked up for NATO troops to bring home;

* the West's - and particularly the US' - relationship with China is the most fraught it's been in a long time (eg. the US withdrawing from Beijing Olympics). This imho weakens the West's threats of economic sanctions, since China's who Russia can turn to if the West cuts them off and China's still the world's 2nd biggest economy, NOT crippled by covid, and powers ~30% of the planet's manufacturing output.


It's also worth mentioning that the nationalists the West has been arming over there includes literal fucking neo-nazis (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right-fighters-ukraine-neo-nazis , https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/ , https://www.euronews.com/2022/02/13/ukraine-far-right-group-offers-training-to-civilians), who are now littered throughout Ukraine's formal gov and military as well as an accepted paramilitary.
Additionally, the territories under dispute (the Donbas region = the unrecognized Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_People%27s_Republic#/media/File:Map_of_the_war_in_Donbass.svg) are actually majority PRO-Russia. Like, they literally DECLARED INDEPENDENCE from Ukraine after Ukraine's 2014 regime change, over half the population is ethnic russian, russian is the most predominantly-spoken first language in the region, and they wish they could join Russia like the Crimeans lol (Putin shrewdly doesn't officially recognize the LPR and DPR, but started enabling other forms of integration like providing them Russian passports and driver's licenses). But unfortunately for the people in Donbas, their region is also resource-rich and an industrial centre (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donbas#Economy), which is what (imho) seems to be driving Ukraine's and by proxy the West's resistance to letting these people align with who they want.

So given all the above, the questions that annoy me are 1. Which side looks like it's reactively taking bait and not very well-positioned to back it up? and 2. Which side looks like it's at a clear strategic and tactical advantage? I don't think the answers to these questions favor us at all. I've also been reading recently that the US political establishment always thought Obama was too easy on Putin after he annexed Crimea (eg. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/03/05/dont-rehabilitate-obama-on-russia/). But ffs the Crimeans VOTED to join Russia in a (admittedly shady) referendum and at least we weren't staring nuclear war/WW3 in the face.

I'd take Obama-era restraint over this East v. West tough guy bullshit any day. Did I miss when Europe fucking collapsed over Crimea? Smh. I think both Putin and we are doing too much right now.

Obviously if Putin wasn't looking to take Ukraine all would be well.

Since he is, it is different than Crimea no? Do people in Ukraine want to be a part of Russia?

It kind of seems like people are saying "Yeah we see Russia will invade Ukraine, oh well, let them deal with it. If anything let Europe handle it."

It seems like things would escalate and we would end up getting involved later anyway. What is the best case of US and Europe just ignoring it and letting Putin do as he pleases?

To be clear, I am anti-war. I just don't know what could be done differently from the US side.

So your first concern about this differing from the Crimea situation bc Putin wants to annex all of Ukraine is based on a false premise (that's been perpetuated by Western media).

Ukraine has 24 oblasts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblasts_of_Ukraine), of which the territories currently under dispute account for only 2 small eastern ones that border Russia (Donetsk and Luhansk): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporarily_occupied_territories_of_Ukraine#/media/File:Russo-Ukraine_Conflict_(2014-present).svg. These territories declared independence from Ukraine in 2014 along with Crimea (also shaded pink in the linked map but further south) and like I described above are majority pro-Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya_(confederation)), ethnic russian, predominantly russian speaking, carry Russian passports and driver's licenses, etc. For all intents and purposes the Donbas region has already unofficially joined Russia.

When our media talks about Russia invading Ukraine, they make it sound as if Putin's goal is to swoop in American style and topple the government in Kyiv (like Libya, Iraq, etc). But the Ukrainian government itself hasn't supported that assessment (eg. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/28/ukrainian-president-downplays-imminent-invasion-00003219 ) and has cautioned the West against alarmism.

I think Putin wants to annex Donbas but is exploiting NATO's eastward expansion as pretext/justification for militarizing the shared border with Ukraine. This way, Russia is simultaneously prepared for any response it may provoke with its land grab (bc Putin knows circumstances have changed since he got away with annexing Crimea) and maximizing pressure/deterrence about NATO.

As for what the US should do differently, I don't know but I really don't think further escalating is the way - especially since NATO is unwilling to appease Putin's concerns about expansion. By egging him on, the US is accelerating a moment that Putin has been waiting his entire life for to bomb/humiliate/exact vengeance on the West. I doubt a diplomatic solution will be easy, especially since NATO can't really turn back the hands of time on its expansion. But the fire and fury talk is super irresponsible. I much prefer Obama's restraint in response to Crimea.


Also re: the other question you pose, about whether people in Ukraine want to be a part of Russia, I think Ukraine's recent political context is helpful:


* Ukraine's current pres Zelensky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volodymyr_Zelenskyy) is young,chill, West- and EU-friendly, but has only been pres of Ukraine since 2019. He was elected on a platform emphasizing unity and rooting out corruption, and a big thing he's done is codify Ukraine's intent to join NATO into their constitution and initiate first steps.

* Before Zelensky, Ukraine was led 2014-2019 by a staunchly nationalist West- and EU-friendly oligarch named Poroshenko (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Poroshenko) who was elected/installed as an independent and was a LOT more antagonistic towards Donbas separatists (calling them terrorists, pirates, etc). A big thing that he did was sign the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement which was viewed as a first step towards Ukraine joining the EU.

*Before Poroshenko, and preceding Ukraine's 2014 regime change/"revolution" (in quotation marks bc some believe the Ukraine revolution was not organic but rather a West-backed regime-change op to install a more West/EU/NATO-friendly Head of State), Ukraine was led 2010-2014 by long time Prime Minister-turned-President Yanukovych (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych) who was from the Donbas region, ethnic russian, and somewhat neutral in the sense that he was slightly nationalist but also pro-Russia in policy orientation (eg. a big thing he resisted was signing the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement, and he also sought to align Ukraine more with Russia instead of NATO). Yanukovych was deposed during Ukraine's controversial regime change/"revolution."


I think this electoral history is important, bc the fact that a Russian-Ukranian pres (Yanukovych) from the Donbas region was not only democratically elected by the people of Ukraine but appointed Prime Minister/Head of Parliament 3 times by multiple presidents speaks to the size and influence of the ethnic Russian/pro-Russian population there. Then, after Yanukovych was deposed during Ukraine's regime change/"revolution", the subsequent pres (Poroshenko) was kind of like a Trump (even employing Paul Manafort as a consultant according to his wiki lol) - very brash and nationalist and oversaw great instability due to his antagonism of Russia and Donbas separatists. Ukrainians then chose not to re-elect Poroshenko and instead elected current pres Zelensky, who ran as a progressive unifier (so I'm guessing still EU friendly but no so nationalist that he alienated Ukraine's ethnic Russian and/or anti-EU population). And as we've seen in this current crisis, Zelensky is much more peace-oriented than his predecessor (even trying to get the West to cool down our rhetoric https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/27/politics/biden-zelensky-call/index.html). So from all of this, my take is that the people of Ukraine want peace most of all, and don't seem to want to go to war over issues like EU membership, NATO membership, Russian ethnicity or affinity, etc. The Ukrainians who are die-hards about these issues seem to be fringe minorities, with the most die-hard Pro-Russians going as far as forming separatist Republics, declaring independence from Ukraine, and seeking closer alignment with Russia - which has contributed to the current crisis.

thanks

the weekly analysis provided by Sarah Kendzior and Andrea Chalupa is unmatched when it comes to global authoritarianism and autocracy. Chalupa is Ukranian, as well.

the worst day in history, according to Putin, is when the Soviet Union fell/dissolved/ended (etc etc).

That tells you everything you need to know about what he wants, and why Ukraine is just the first step.

d

"I don't speak to provoke. I speak because I think our time on Earth is short and each moment that we are not our truest selves, each moment we say what we do not mean because we imagine that is what somebody what's us to say, then we are wasting our time

I keep meaning to check it out lol

thanks for the reminder

at least then, the bloodthirsty hangover of 9/11 still lingered.

But this? NO ONE wants this. The president of Ukraine doesn't want this, and worse yet it seems he doesn't think this is as dire as Biden and co are saying this is. This is appalling.

>at least then, the bloodthirsty hangover of 9/11 still
>lingered.

^^^ specifically this part.


>But this? NO ONE wants this. The president of Ukraine doesn't
>want this, and worse yet it seems he doesn't think this is as
>dire as Biden and co are saying this is. This is appalling.

woulda thought he would wait til late 2023 for that second term.

>woulda thought he would wait til late 2023 for that second term.

Also, the midterms are arguably far more important.

last time a dem president was in office.

in february of that midterm year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation


anyone thinking biden is provoking the war is obviously ignorant of the reality of the situation.

Of course the Ukraine president doesn’t want this and it is in his best interest to downplay this as much as possible but you can’t ignore, and I think it is naive of him to try to ignore the 130,000 troops that currently surround his country.

It does seem that Putin does want this or else he wouldn’t have taken Crimea, supporting separatist in the east and move all those troops to the boarder.

unless youre referring to russia launching false flag ops and using disinformation as a fabricated pretense to make it look ukraine is the aggressor and a russian invasion is just a response/defense.

190k troops to the border of ukraine. clearly the agressor.

false flag ops and social media disinformation pretending like ukraine is attacking russia/separatists (even tho russia has been building up its military presence on the border for the past few months unprovoked lol).

biden admin laid out intelligence that said russia was gonna do literally what it is doing right now. and people still fell for it lol.

putin literally did this same shit like 7 years ago (when obama was in office). literally around the same exact time in a midterm year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

and people are still falling for it lol.

putin literally doing what putin has always been doing and people still find some way to try to rationalize something to the contrary.

this is all putin. it has nothing to do with ukraine joining nato. or bombings in donbas. or whatever else russia says (and people still fall for it lol).

putin believes he/russia is entitled to ukraine. and hes been focused on annexing it into russia for the longest.

if theres a war its because putin started a war.

Territory back together again.

Putin sees Ukraine drifting more towards the west/EU sphere of influence. I honestly think if the US/NATO said they would never accept Ukraine to NATO, the next demand will be that Ukraine doesn’t join the EU.

I don’t see Biden moving 6,000 troops to NATO countries as remotely close to what putin has done with moving 190,000 troops.

Putin bullshitting saying he's pulling back troops? We respond with what actual intelligence sources are seeing on the ground

Throwing out possible invasion dates and possible pretexts for invasions that the Russians might use here.


The onus is .. on the guy who amassed 150K+ troops on the border of a sovereign democracy.

this warmongering as 'Effective Putin Management'. He's literally conducting nuclear drills with hypersonics that can hit Western soil right now:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-oversee-nuclear-drills-ukraine-crisis-mounts-2022-02-19/

https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-threatens-to-deploy-tactical-nuclear-weapons-/6354408.html

https://spectrum.ieee.org/russia-china-the-us-who-will-win-the-hypersonic-arms-race

Things never escalated this badly/quickly bc of Crimea.

So ya, a response like Obama's to the lead-up and aftermath of Crimea's annexation is preferable to this inflammatory mess. The only reason Americans talk the kind of exceptionalist bullshit you've typed here is bc the war you clamor for is always fought on other people's soil. Against smaller countries with weaker infrastructure, governments, and resources, who lack the capabilities to bring the fight back to your doorstep.

Threatening "swift and severe" military escalation with Russia only increases the likelihood of a nuke hitting Western soil if war breaks out bc as soon as Putin assesses the US might nuke Russia anyway, he def isn't going down without deploying the most giant fuck you possible to the West for history's sake. Russian vengeance against the West is at the core of Putin's worldview. He's been waiting his entire career for the moment to humble us, and Biden and Blinken accelerating the arrival of that moment is, imho, wildly irresponsible. There IS no scenario where the US/NATO deploys a "swift and severe" military response to Russia annexing Donbas and Putin retreats, it's either diplomacy or mutual death and destruction.

im not even sure who you got that from (maybe someone other than me?).

you seem to be operating under the assumption that putin isnt already decided or leaning towards invasion.

youre treating putin like some chess piece without his own will and agenda.

dude has already been caught using a blatant false flag op and disinformation campaign to try to spin the narrative on violence in donbas.
https://twitter.com/RichardEngel/status/1494770294271225861
https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1494793525875118085

fake videos and pictures fabricated before the violence even began.

so clearly this was premeditated (exactly what biden and our intelligence services *said* he would do).

my only point is that putin is the aggressor. if he wants war...then its on him solely. if he doesnt invade then there is no war. nobody else is escalating the situation. hes the one already in complete war posture with the massive troop/weapons buildup (75% of the entire russian active duty military is on the ukraine border now).

what about this is 'american exceptionalism' or me clamoring for war? that sounds like some stock canned response you already had on deck for this debate regardless of who you were actually debating with. i said nothing even approaching that. i didnt even mention the american military or our response to putins actions lol. so you grabbed that out of thin air.

and how do you justify saying the only reason people clamor for war is because its always fought on other peoples soils with weaker capabilities but i havent seen you take issue with russia continually waging unnecessary war and invading smaller/weaker/non-aggresor ukraine. what about those people? you believe everyone should sit around and let them be slaughtered and have their country overrun and ruled by pro-russian forces (which they roundly reject in democratic elections)?

i have no idea why you find anyone elses words/actions anywhere near as objectionable as putins (who is the only one who has amassed his military in the region and begun electronic/cyber attacks on ukraine) but it is what it is i guess.

your demeanor on this is really weird. to the point youre inventing stances that people didnt even take just to rationalize some of your prearranged talking points.

what are you talking about

The DPR and LPR are legit unrecognized states that declared independence from Ukraine in 2014 the same time Crimea did, they just never ended up joining Russia. They've held their own elections since then and everything (eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Donbas_general_elections).

Pres Zelensky started raising the alarm abt Putin coming back to annex the remaining separatist territories last year:
https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraine-sees-russias-issuance-passports-eastern-ukraine-step-towards-annexation-2021-05-20/

Any invasion and annexation concern coming out of Ukraine has always been abt Donbas. This narrative that Putin's trying to annex all of Ukraine is an artifact of the West. Putin's an imperialist but he's not a dumbass. He didn't even try annexing all of Ukraine when he invaded and annexed Crimea, so why would that be his objective now with Donbas as he faces even greater hostility from the West?

Separate from the Donbas issue, Putin's broader problem with Ukraine/Ukraine's gov/Kyiv is 100% about NATO; he's openly established Ukraine joining NATO (and any further NATO expansion) as a red line. Again, this is him saying so in no uncertain terms last week after (failed) talks with Macron:

https://videos.dailymail.co.uk/video/mol/2022/02/08/5984255003370174117/960x540_MP4_5984255003370174117.mp4


That imo is what all the positioning around Ukraine (that's been plastered all over the news) is about, to serve as the ultimate deterrent. But Putin also seems to be exploiting the NATO issue to advance his territorial interests, since the positioning around Ukraine can be multi-purposed to fend off Western countermeasures if he annexes.


What the US and its media have done is conflate all these issues and establish a countering red line of (poorly defined) "invasion", so now even if Putin only tries to annex Donbas - which, just like Crimea, the DPR and LPR actually want - the US will treat it like an annexation of all of Ukraine even tho Russia's annexation of Donbas would be as inconsequential to world affairs as the annexation of Crimea.

That's the unnecessary escalation from the West, imo. Pres Zelensky not wanting to lose Donetsk/DPR and Luhansk/LPR to Russia is understandable, bc what Head of State wants to lose territory under their watch. But in the grand scheme of things, all of these regions - Crimea, Donetsk/DPR, Luhansk/LPR - they are the equivalent of toenail clippings to Ukraine. They are NOT worth risking nuclear war or any other escalated human and economic waste. Zelensky has signaled he knows this by stating willingness to hold a nationwide referendum on Donbas or negotiate a (new) peace deal (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-does-not-exclude-holding-referendum-crimea-donbass-2021-12-10/), meaning the disputed territories would prob serve as a bargaining chip to get Putin to chill about NATO. Ukraine has been the only cool-headed state actor in all of this.

My gripe with our leaders in the West is this: Why not simply stall this mf out. Putin is a 70yr old man with alleged health problems lol. With any luck, he's probably not going to head Russia for much longer (tho he signed a constitutional amendment into law so that allows him to remain pres until he's almost 90yrs old - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/vladimir-putin-president-russia-signs-law-allowing-2-more-presidential-terms/).LET HIM have Ukraine's toenail clippings. Has nobody contemplated that Ukraine could simply join NATO after this madman is no longer running Russia? He's literally amending Russia's constitution so he doesn't miss out on the opportunity to destroy us, like come on smh


>
>this is all putin. it has nothing to do with ukraine joining
>nato. or bombings in donbas. or whatever else russia says
>(and people still fall for it lol).
>

Putin could easily live for another 10-15 years. Waiting for a world leader to die is not good foreign policy.

its either completely naive or intentional reality defying spin that completely ignores the entire history of putins actions.

its soooo weird from anyone who even pretends to be objective and non biased.

i mean...just *last year* putin signed a law changing presidential term limits to allow him to stay in power til 2036.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/vladimir-putin-president-russia-signs-law-allowing-2-more-presidential-terms/

'just wait for him to die' lol.

im sorry but you gotta have a more mature argument than that.

that also completely ignores his continued military aggression *right now* (the whole point of this post! lol)

plus...everyone is just supposed to wait out putins death...let him continue to wreak havoc across the world...and wait for him to die...like the next russian president is gonna come in on some kumbaya shit? lol.

once again...either really naive or intentional spin.

i love the queen kfine but this aint her best moment.

Especially given the developments this weekend


If, on any issue, the West can't resolve things diplomatically with him


then yes, I'm sorry, I'd rather we stall him out than engage in armed or nuclear conflict


I think you're misunderstanding my intent tho

I'm not advocating complete and total capitulation so much as handling him like a psych patient


10-15 years isn't actually that long, especially in contrast to the number of years it would take our continent to recover if he succeeded in nuking us


But it's also possible he could die sooner than that if he's assassinated during war

and it was explicitly recognized as a sovereign nation by russia in 1994.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

according to you there are several 'disputed territories' in ukraine that want independence from this sovereign nation.

and according to you (for some odd reason) this is rationalization/justification for *another* country waging war and invading this sovereign nation.

and also according to you...this sovereign nation wanting to join a multinational organization under its own free will...is somehow a logical reason for putin to want to wage war against it.

but werent you just trying to lecture folks on 'american exceptionalism' and clamoring for war?

russia waging war and invading a free country on behalf of separatist territories...isnt that the same as america invading countries like iraq, vietnam, korea, etc on behalf of anti-regime groups, anti-communist allies, 'democracy', etc?

(answer: yes it is lol)

how do you explain away the obvious hypocrisy and contradiction here?

you speak of these russian 'annexes' like corporate mergers lol. these are violent wars and takeovers of other countries. wheres that anti-war anti-imperialist energy from you on russia tho? are the russians fighting for these other peoples freedoms? lol.

and im still waiting for you to elaborate on why youre so critical of everyone *but* the specific person who is initiating this war lol. you accuse everyone else of escalation but putin (who...once again...is the only one massively building up his military on the border of another country). its so weird.

youve taken up this delusional stance that it is everyone elses responsibility to not make putin take militar action that he has already been building up towards for months unprovoked.

you asked if putin wanted ukraine why would he 'only' invade crimea in 2014? what a weird ass question. well...why would he invade crimea at all? lol. once again...your perspective on this is approaching pro-putin gaslighting.

btw...bringing it back...as a condition of ukrainian independence, acknowledgement of its territorial integrity, and freedom from military aggression by russia...ukraine gave russia its nuclear weapons and signed a non-proliferation agreement with countries *including russia*.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

so ukraine unilaterally disarmed itself of the type of weapons that historically deter invasions (with the assurance russia would never attack it). russia violated this clear agreement with the invasion of crimea in 2014 and is on the verge of doing it again.

care to speak on that? (or is it everyone elses fault for making putin violate that agreement lol)

>
>according to you there are several 'disputed territories' in
>ukraine that want independence from this sovereign nation.
>
>and according to you (for some odd reason) this is
>rationalization/justification for *another* country waging war
>and invading this sovereign nation.
>
>and also according to you...this sovereign nation wanting to
>join a multinational organization under its own free will...is
>somehow a logical reason for putin to want to wage war against
>it.
>
>but werent you just trying to lecture folks on 'american
>exceptionalism' and clamoring for war?


Let me help you out:

1. I don't agree with the persistent refusal to recognize those separatist territories' independence; I don't believe that NATO expansion should be non-negotiable; and I don't support Putin's current war against Ukraine (which is clearly a proxy conflict about so much more than Donbas). Just bc you and I disagree on one or more of these points doesn't mean I support Putin and this war. Stop trying to force everything into stupid binaries.

2. As I mentioned elsewhere, those territories want nothing to do with Ukraine lol. They've held referendums affirming their declarations of independence, formed their own parliaments, held general elections, adopted the Russian legal system, etc. Even as this current crisis escalated, the civilians in those territories evacuated to Russia not Ukraine (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/18/russian-backed-separatists-announce-evacuation-from-east-ukraine). So, especially after this past week's events, how can anyone argue that holding on to these territories isn't more of a liability to Ukraine than letting them go? I think Ukraine's policy should have focused on legalizing/finalizing peaceful separation from the beginning - just like Boris Yeltsin did for Ukraine in 1991 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_of_Ukraine#International_recognition) - rather than this pipe dream of re-integration (one of few areas I think Zelensky fucked up by not distancing himself further from previous pres Poroshenko's heavy-handed nationalism). But apart from that, all of this is pretty important context that the West insisted on downplaying, in favor of a narrative justifying some supposedly inevitable East v. West showdown with Putin if he dared cross the border into Donbas. A dare we watched this maniac swiftly take up since he's obsessed over Russia winning that showdown his entire life.

3. Yes, I do think you should check your American Exceptionalism. What makes those territories' Declarations of Independence any less meaningful than America's Declaration of Independence when it sought to separate from Britain? Or Ukraine's own Declaration when it sought to seperate from the USSR? If the separatist territories haven't considered themselves part of Ukraine since 2014, then neither do I; not unlike how I recognize the State of Palestine even tho it's still not recognized by Israel. I should prob also mention that I'm only one generation out of Africa and decolonization wasn't that long ago; and for this and other reasons I view declarations of independence, pursuits of statehood, and the right to self-determination as extremely sacred.



>
>russia waging war and invading a free country on behalf of
>separatist territories...isnt that the same as america
>invading countries like iraq, vietnam, korea, etc on behalf of
>anti-regime groups, anti-communist allies, 'democracy', etc?
>
>(answer: yes it is lol)
>


American imperialism doesn't validate Russian Imperialism tho. Also, if the DPR and LPR *requested* Russia's military presence eg. https://www.dw.com/en/russia-says-donbas-separatists-ask-putin-for-military-support/a-60893224 (whether or not they knew it was for a dubious reason), then in my perspective Putin didn't invade and wage war on Ukraine until he LEFT the DPR. Your argument only makes sense if one doesn't recognize DPR and LPR independence, and if one thinks the Donbas issue centres Putin's gripe with Ukraine as opposed to the NATO issue and other grievances pertaining to Western influence. I don't believe such assessments are true.


>how do you explain away the obvious hypocrisy and
>contradiction here?
>
>you speak of these russian 'annexes' like corporate mergers
>lol. these are violent wars and takeovers of other countries.
> wheres that anti-war anti-imperialist energy from you on
>russia tho? are the russians fighting for these other peoples
>freedoms? lol.
>
>and im still waiting for you to elaborate on why youre so
>critical of everyone *but* the specific person who is
>initiating this war lol. you accuse everyone else of
>escalation but putin (who...once again...is the only one
>massively building up his military on the border of another
>country). its so weird.
>

One of my first responses to this post was a damn near essay ranting about Putin's imperialism, but nice try. As for this crisis, I've voiced multiple times in this post my disappointment in BOTH Putin's and the US' incendiary postures in the months leading up to this crisis. I have the right to feel that way about political affairs that can affect me and people I care about without fielding baseless accusations from you and your little gang of okp thoughtpolice.


>youve taken up this delusional stance that it is everyone
>elses responsibility to not make putin take militar action
>that he has already been building up towards for months
>unprovoked.
>
>


Engaging meaningfully with a volatile adversary to avert nuclear war/WW3 is called DIPLOMACY - literally one of the most crucial portfolios of any political leader. You, imho, are the one being delusional if you honestly think the US - permanently represented as Supreme Allied Commander as well as NATO's top supplier of funding and troops - didn't bear an outsized role in the alliance's refusal to consider basic concessions with Russia about concerns wrt eastward expansion (eg. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/biden-putin-meeting-nato-ukraine/2021/12/06/71225812-5677-11ec-8396-5552bef55c3c_story.html). It's beyond obvious that Biden's leveraging Putin's megalomania as cover for his and Blinken's failure to neutralize Putin's threat (eg. all that "he alone" and "unprovoked" talk). And now, as a result of their diplomatic failure, EVERYONE in the West - not just Americans but Canadians, Brits, Germans, Central Europeans, and most importantly Ukrainians etc - are getting dragged into potentially cataclysmic conflict that could have been avoided.



>btw...bringing it back...as a condition of ukrainian
>independence, acknowledgement of its territorial integrity,
>and freedom from military aggression by russia...ukraine gave
>russia its nuclear weapons and signed a non-proliferation
>agreement with countries *including russia*.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
>
>so ukraine unilaterally disarmed itself of the type of weapons
>that historically deter invasions (with the assurance russia
>would never attack it). russia violated this clear agreement
>with the invasion of crimea in 2014 and is on the verge of
>doing it again.
>
>care to speak on that? (or is it everyone elses fault for
>making putin violate that agreement lol)
>


Well, you're kinda mixing things up here. Ukraine's been independent since 1991 - after declaring it's own independence, holding a referendum, and forming a government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Independence (note: not unlike what Crimea, DPR, and LPR have done). It disarmed and sought security assurances in that ---> *1994* <--- Budapest agreement because it wanted "accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons/NPT" (https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf). So the first error in your premise is that Ukraine's independence was conditioned; it was essentially a peace agreement.

From what I understand, the (imho weak) legal argument that Putin and Lavrov tried to make is that Russia's recognition of and cooperation with Crimea, DPR, LPR, etc are not an affront to Ukraine's sovereignty, territorial integrity, or treaty commitments bc after the territories in question declared independence and formed their own governments, they were no longer represented by the Ukraine government (eg. https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-698237). I think I read at least one intl law expert allude to a similar interpretation, but even assuming that's total bullshit MY position is that the dispute was clearly a legal quagmire that could've been settled btwn the separatist territories and Ukraine alone. WITHOUT American or Russian warmongering, threats of "swift and severe" escalation, etc.

Now had your question been whether I think Russia violated the Budapest agreement by venturing beyond the separatist territories to invade/attack Ukraine "proper" I would be more resolute in my "yes". But even then, Russia is hardly the only signatory of the Budapest Agreement or the NPT that's disregarded a peace agreement. So as long as you KTSE for the US (or other violently imperialist states like Israel who are not a signatory of these particular instruments but similarly obscure their nuclear programs, disregard peace agreements, and pursue relentless expansion of their sphere of influence) then I'm with you. But you're not about to have me condemning Crimea, DPR, and LPR for cooperating - as newly formed states/governments trying to find their footing - with their only major ally just bc we don't like their ally, or framing such cooperation as a justification for war.

We have a clear aggressor who is clearly in the wrong, and for once it isn't us.

This is a different beast.

liberal 'pinkos' used to (supposedly) have pro-russian sympathies based on socialism/communism/anti-capitalism/greed/downward wealth distribution/etc.

but russia today is an outright kleptocracy/oligarchy where a handful of literal robber barons suck up all of the countrys wealth into their own pockets (most notable the president).

its not even income inequality like uber-capitalism. its straight up income larceny where the government and wealthy tycoons (theres a lot of overlap) control all the money and stomp out any class mobility. violently too.

pretty much the embodiment of the complete *opposite* of democratic socialism and economic justice.

it seems like everyone on the left should hate russia and treat it as pretty much the standard of greed and inequality. but thats not the case.

was it really about economics or is it just about being anti-(domestic)authority/anti-establishment no matter what/who the other side of the coin is?

I don't see any pro Russia sympathy from the "left."

I see a SHIT TON for Republicans and right wing media.

Got some examples of main stream left being pro Putin's 2022 Russia?

just like the pro-communists werent the mainstream left.

i think most people know the segment of the left im talking about.

the same people who deny russia interfered in the 2016 election.

jacobin, dore, theintercept, etc crowd.

of what im referring to.

https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1495522137209294854

says than what the people actually in power are doing/not doing?


Why is this relevant right now?


Its shit like this that makes folks call you an op. When your team is fucking up, you are ghost. Straight up. Nothing to say.

But you make weird distraction posts like you are fighting some proxy war against "the left"...when no one in here even brought it up. Completely irrelevant.

Why should any of us care more about shit on Jacobin than the actual failures of the administration?


Jacobin didn't let the child tax credit expire. Jacobin didn't drop the fucking ball on COVID. It wasn't Jacobin who wasn't able to keep Dems on track. Its not Jacobin downplaying inflation. Jacobin isn't keeping kids in cages.


But you want us to give a shit what "the left" is saying about Russia on Twitter?

smh.


And you get aggy when people call you out on this shit?


PS...you have like 10+ posts just in here frantically defending Biden at all costs...if you aren't getting paid I would say you need to "seek help"...

so im bringing up 'completely irrelevant' shit (that actually applies to the subject matter within the post) but you bring up covid, the child tax credit, inflation, and kids in cages (which apparently are fair game in your mind)?

and apparently i go ghost when 'my team' is fucking up but im also in here with 10+ posts frantically defending biden?

a reply with nothing but incoherent craziness outta you but im the aggy one.

you havent even added anything of substance or relevant to the actual post.

you just ran in with your only reply to dickride me like a stalker.

from now on i gotta start sidestepping you weirdo niggas like scorned females.

or needs to be.

...without saying you cant debate me on the facts (c)

And it appears to be working well. They’re influencing a segment of our population’s opinions on this critical treaty we signed.

NATO is responsible for the relatively world stability since WW2

like those arent the exact things that have prevented a third world war.

.

haven’t seen the “left” doing it

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1495562132947095557

I'm not sure what's happened in the past 75 years that would make people think we were capable of military intervention that didn't make things worse. Or would make people believe anything US authorities say about our motivation and capabilities.

The good imperialist nation(s) fighting the bad imperialist nation(s) is a pretty familiar story at this point. And we already know the winners are the military industrial complex and whichever horrifying rightwing weirdos we empower in the country we're ostensibly helping.

I don't know man. Kind of feels dumb to have this argument again so soon after 2002-2003.

I think NATO is a large part of that.



>I'm not sure what's happened in the past 75 years that would
>make people think we were capable of military intervention
>that didn't make things worse. Or would make people believe
>anything US authorities say about our motivation and
>capabilities.
>
>The good imperialist nation(s) fighting the bad imperialist
>nation(s) is a pretty familiar story at this point. And we
>already know the winners are the military industrial complex
>and whichever horrifying rightwing weirdos we empower in the
>country we're ostensibly helping.
>
>I don't know man. Kind of feels dumb to have this argument
>again so soon after 2002-2003.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

And we
>already know the winners are the military industrial complex
>and whichever horrifying rightwing weirdos we empower in the
>country we're ostensibly helping.


yes Zelensky the "right wing weirdo"


Ukrainians like this are who we empower: https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/st1jxx/women_who_previously_worked_in_clinical_research/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

https://twitter.com/berniesanders/status/1495175761032101889?s=21

on a serious note...its notable (and under-discussed) how far outside the mainstream a lot of bernie supporters have moved past bernie on a lot of issues.

russian defense minister has a watch on that shows it actually took place about 4 hours earlier lol.
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1495775697121517570

stating the obvious...but the whole thing was staged propaganda.
https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/1495772414113943557

president of estonia on the blatant premeditated escalation being carried out by putin.
https://twitter.com/AlarKaris/status/1495509829691006978


kinda hard to continue to act like its anyone else fault for escalation at this point. this has all been comically obvious that putin is wagging the dog. they dont even care enough to cover their tracks.

https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/1495830963884068874

dude is waxing nostalgic about the old days of the soviet union and saying ukraine is inherently part of russia. he said ukraine was never a true nation.

clearly laying the nationalistic pretext of russia being the rightful 'owner' of ukraine to justify invading it.

he even says lenin was wrong for creating ukraine and the ussr should have never let soviet republics to leave during the breakup of ussr.
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1495838531268321282

this is straight up czar shit. not even cold war shit.

another reminder...

ukraine is a free independent nation recognized by russia itself and guaranteed security from russian invasion in exchange for ukraine handing over its nuclear weapons to russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

putins invasion of ukraine in 2014 and potential invasion now are both violations of this agreement.

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1495848602027110401

https://twitter.com/LukeDCoffey/status/1495888926908821519

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1495846129086480395

the effect of the russian security meeting and putins speech signaling the likelihood of war.

*if* theres one thing that might stop all of this...its the russian oligarchs losing a shitload of wealth because of putins megalomania.

eu already said they were slapping sanctions on russia for deeming 2 separatist regions of ukraine as independent.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1495859020795723776

https://twitter.com/biannagolodryga/status/1495872841484488708

its playing out *exactly* how our intelligence agencies said it would.

Biden while Putin is pushing this and further escalating things. He keeps antagonizing and trying to force the US, EU, NATO and Ukraine to do something so that he can “blame” them for the war.

But you keep getting accused of being in Biden’s payroll for calling a spade a spade.

Like you said above, I could understand some of the leftist defending of Putin/Russia if Russia were a communist/socialist state still but that isn’t the case so you can’t defend this on some ideological lines/philosophy.

thats really all they have cuz reality aint working out well for them.

They are full on authoritarian cheerleaders now.

The hard left is basically buying into Russian propaganda, both sides, and “but Iraq WMDs” to bend themselves into pretzels to blame Biden for recognizing something as radical as Ukraine sovereignty.

The center truly cannot hold any longer.

the fringes regularly arrive at the same destination via different routes.

its amazing how effective propaganda is.

https://twitter.com/KareemRifai/status/1495883578365952006
-----
It really took Vladimir Putin saying verbatim that he's sending in the troops for people on the fringe to consider that the US intelligence community knows more about the situation in Ukraine than their favorite Youtubers.
-----

But then people get upset because Russia didn’t attack when Biden said they would! That’s the point, let Putin know that we know his bullshit and air it out before hand so he can’t do a false flag or concoct some sham excuse to invade. Beat disinformation by getting out and ahead of it.

If we followed the old playbook and didn’t say anything or preemptively put out that intelligence then putin would have invaded Ukraine weeks ago.

It got putin to the point where he had to go on TV for a highly choreographed propaganda piece to admit why he is going into Ukraine.

To distract from Hunter Biden!

I can brush it aside for domestic news; becomes something completely different when its international relations.

It is tough to point to any one particular culprit affecting our body politic. I've mentioned what TYT and the Secular Talk are doing. But IG and Tik Tok have an effect on people's opinions too. You can find influencer 20somethings giving their "take" on the situation -- regardless of the truth in their take, it is about 8 steps removed from the original source material.

What they lazily blanket as "corporate news" also has foreign war correspondents and reporters embedded in the damn region. This is also not an entertaining way to deliver the news as... other options.

During the most recent Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we all saw the effect of our news diets play out.

If I really wanted, I could draw a straight line for folks between those types of sources ^^ and the HATE CRIMES we saw here on American soil against Jewish people.

a lot of cold takes about his intentions got obliterated literally overnight.

matt taibbi just sent this tweet less than a day ago.
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1495540540330360835

putin didnt even give them some lead time to pretend they were right for a while lol.

He won’t and can’t stop now without taking all of Ukraine. It makes no sense at all to not take the rest of Ukraine because if he doesn’t then Ukraine will try to fast track NATO membership and NATO would more than likely approve it.

absolute clown show

vs mocking people's reaction to Putin is almost poetic timing.

not even saying you can't be critical of Trudeau but jesus.

and Taibbi is someone I always liked. it's been a genuine bummer to watch the last couple years. .

somewhat surprised by his takes here.

In fairness I think it’s hard to be an expert on both domestic and intl news. It’s just too much to follow and keep up on to have an informed opinion

because he lived there 5 or 6 years

and he notably pushed back so much against all the russiagate stuff. While i appreciated him calling out the msm for reating psychos like Louise Mecnch as credible, he always makes it a point to go extra hard on this topic. Now he's brushing off Putin, while at the same time comparing Trudeau to Romanian dictators.

I don't know if I believe that, but i wouldn't be shocked if it ever came out.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1496064055286632451

theyre not even just talking about the 'independence' of pro-russian areas. and theyre not even just talking about ukraine cant join nato, eu, etc or do trade deals or receive weapons/training from the west.

theyre now straight up saying ukraine isnt a legitimate free country with real rights.

theyre basically saying ukraine is still an part of russia and russia is entitled to do whatever it wants with ukraine.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1496080150085177344

*if* anything compels russia to change course...its gonna be shit like this the shakes the markets and hurts their economy.

maybe putin dont gaf tho.

on the other side...gas prices are gonna shoot up even further as the russian supply becomes more unstable/unpredictable (and/or if russia cuts production on its own).

https://twitter.com/BloombergUK/status/1496104684897153027

https://www.reddit.com/r/MURICA/comments/synqm2/not_even_government_owned_banks_would_hold_an/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf


Good example of one here on Carrie Lam. The CCP Hong Kong shill.

No financial institution will fuck with you in fear of them secondary sanctions.

Edit: wrong spot. Meant to put this as a new reply.

a war".

The political spectrum must be a circle because the far right and far left find a way to meet way to often.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://twitter.com/jakluge/status/1496521293126066181

cmon lol.

https://twitter.com/howardfineman/status/1496555084708290560

obviously its difficult to criticize someone in such a sensitive position as this but...

he was so focused on not wanting to provoke a war that he failed to take this time to fully prepare and build up his military resistance capabilities because he thought the hardened posture would incite putin.

but putins mind was already made up (which the biden administration tried to inform him of).

and a lot of valuable prep/drill time was lost (while russia was spending months doing drills and steadily building up its military capabilities.

dude spent much of the time chastising western countries for being too confrontational/inflammatory in their approach to russia. he said america was stoking panic about a russian invasion.

but then when its was clear russia was about to light that ass up...he went to the munich security conference and criticized the west for being too soft on russia smh.

It is hard to blame him, as he was in a very tough position. I hope he did take that time to prepare for this invasion. Biden and the US probably bought him an extra month of time to prepare all his military forces and create some fall back plans.

Sounds like Russia is going to invade in the next 48 hours.

https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/1496648570447011842

Ukraine can’t stop that, they can only hope to slow it and allow citizens to evacuate and leave. Best case scenario is they grind the Russian army to a slow and painful advance with heavy losses.

It's got people so hyper-focused on "winning" (or more appropriately the other team losing). I'm convinced people would accept their own country being harmed as long as they can own the other side.

Republicans taking this moment to push pro Putin propaganda is mind boggling. Team party politics got them so hyper-focused on "winning" (or more appropriately the other team losing). I'm convinced they would accept their own country being harmed as long as they can own the libs.


Tucker talking about what's so bad about Putin anyways, while describing Ukraine as an illegitimate client state of the (Democrat's) US State Department and Hunter Biden.

Many prominent republicans following Trump's lead giving Putin props for this as a segue to diminish Biden. The more meek ones simply deflect with whataboutisms about Biden.

I'm curious if the tone changes when Putin inevitably doesn't stop with Ukraine.

Most Americans, even the GQP voters know Poland has been its own nation and might be able to pick it out on a map.

I guarantee no GQP voter can name a single Balkan nation or know where they are located on a map.

Most Americans probably don’t even realIze that Ukraine has its own language, history and that the Ukraine/Kiev predated Russia/Moscow.

https://twitter.com/pbump/status/1496682719841071121

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1496684066137071616

Seems like Putin is throwing down potential nuclear retaliation if the US/NATO intervenes.

Biden and his admin did a good job of buying Ukraine time, consolidating NATO/Europe solidarity and forcing Putin to show his hand as the authoritarian, Make Russia Great Again imperialist that he truly is.

he gave us real time intelligence spotlighting what russia was doing and planning to do.

he tried his best to warn folks.

how everyone reacted and drew up their own personal narratives was on them.

hopefully they learned a valuable lesson and dont make the same mistake in the future.

(i still cant believe people compared this to iraq and said biden was pushing for war)

On his bullshit.

I feel bad for all the women, kids and men that are going to lose their lives for Putin’s version of making Russia the Soviet Union again.

>I feel bad for all the women, kids and men that are going to
>lose their lives for Putin’s version of making Russia the
>Soviet Union again.

If war is really on the horizon, why does it matter what some Twitter fingers are conjuring up?

If the intelligence assessment is that war is imminent, why do you care what Breitbart says??

Random Tweets are not responsible or at all accountable for wars. Biden "warned folks?" Who did he warn? What does that mean?

Can Breitbart commentators stop a war? Can @MAGA_Matt make a policy difference in Ukraine?

Isn't the responsibility of the POTUS a bit bigger than just warning internet commentators so they come up with better personal narratives? Shouldn't he be more focused on, I dunno, maybe STOPPING WAR instead of correcting our online opinions?


A few threads up ya'll say MAGA is all about "owning the libs" but this message reads a lot like the same - "hopefully they learned a valuable lesson." Why does the lesson of internet trolls matter in the middle of bombs dropping?

Public opinion for those that read them. If people are divided on the reasons for things, they will be divided on the response.

I am not saying we need to be 100% in agreement but right now we aren’t even in 75% agreement on Russia/Ukraine when the GQP, Cucker listeners and others are basically pro Putin and sympathize with Russia.

Or to important people making important decisions?

To me it seems POTUS should be working on finding a way to stop this war. He should have been working full time on avoiding it. He didn't make that happen, unfortunately.

But he WON bc a few MAGA tweeters now learned their lesson? Owning Matt Taibbi is more important than evading war?


We don't need agreement amongst the twitterverse to avoid war. We don't need consensus in the court of public opinion, although public opinion is probably 99% in agreement - NO WAR

That should be the priority and the only thing that matters. IMO he could have done all the little things right - intelligence leaks, sanctions, etc - but he still LOST the one and only objective.

Today we are at war, Ukraine is being attacked, and none of those little wins or twitterverse owns matter.

https://twitter.com/Caucasuswar/status/1496683512920956928

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1496688200399704067

had this been a (non-russia-appeasing) repub president in office...dems would feel pressure to line up behind him and present a unified front against putins aggression. no doubt that repub president would receive a lot of support (and a bump in approval) from the general public (and the media).

but repubs go straight to attack mode (on a dem prez...not the real enemy) and the media will largely amplify/echo those attacks. and this war will be yet another polarized issue with mixed to bad public reaction/sentiment toward the presidents words/actions.

if 9/11 happened under a dem president...his party would have been destroyed in the midterms and he would have been driven from office in the next prez elections because of the worst intelligence failure in american history, every single death being pinned on him, the left turning on him for the civil liberty encroachments of the patriot act, plus going too hard (angry left) or too soft (angry right) on muslim citizens.

but you see how everything played out with a repub president.

https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1496692266408325127

dude aint even tryna convince people.

just give his supporters/apologists memes to parrot.

https://twitter.com/Mikel_Jollett/status/1496693948684718092

https://twitter.com/DanaHoule/status/1496685448936239110

All this non sense about Biden trying to distract from some non sense like Durham or Hunter, this being good for him and the mid terms (LOL, like the GQP rallies around Dem Presidents during such things) or Biden blowing this out of proportion and other Putin apologist BS was really something to read.

across the entire political spectrum.

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1496695830715142148

knowing full damn well ukraine wanted to join nato as a deterrent to shit like we are seeing now.

and niggas shitted on *hillary* for it?

of her show tonight with trump? Fuck her and Fox News with a dirty bag of dildos for the rest of her life.

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1496694820869451779

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

video is on nytimes.com front page right now.

https://twitter.com/MMFlint/status/1494062815929266177

did he ever explain why...outta the blue in an election year in the middle of global pandemic...he just decided to drop a documentary attacking renewable energy?

https://twitter.com/verge/status/1265530937099669507

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMWV04BVgAM6hsp?format=jpg&name=large

something like $300,000,000,000 in wealth wiped out in a few hours.

If the purpose of NATO is to balance the power in Europe between East and West, admitting Ukraine seems like it would upset that balance.

Why couldn't the deal be, we will not let Ukraine into NATO as long as you agree to not invade Ukraine. Was that ever seriously discussed?



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

You can't let Russia tell you what countries can and cannot be a part of a National Alliance of free countries.

The only purpose of NATO at this point is to contain Russia (& China). I think Russian has a reasonable concern about being encircled by Nuke equipped alliance put together solely for Russia.

Look at it another way, US was exactly right to say that Russia could not form an Alliance with Cuba that allowed them to put Nukes 90 miles from this Country. Its irrelevant if a major tenant of the Warsaw Pact (or any Treaty CUba and Russia came up with) is any country worried about the US could join. Allowing Russian missiles in Cuba would have caused War because it would have upset the balance and stalemate between US and Russian aligned countries. Likewise, it was a good resolution of the Cuban Missle Crisis for the US to compromise by removing U.S. nuclear missiles out of Italy and Turkey to maintain the balance and stalemate (regardless if the NATO pact allows us to put missles there).

I firmly believe there has ben 75 years of relative Peace in Europe because of the balance and stalemate between Western and Russian aligned countries. Now that Russia is on the decline of influence it seems not wise to grow a military alliance that threatens them. Let them into the EU. Form a new alliance, but the choice can't be down to either do or do not let them into NATO.

We got to remember that the purpose of all these pacts and treaties is to maintain peace and mutual protection. Going to war just to blindly follow a pact or a treaty is what started WWI. Its ironic but its very possible that entering a peace treaty and start a war.

So yeah there may be a good reason to allow Ukraine into NATO, but to me because NATO's charter says they can really isn't a compelling reason to me.


>You can't let Russia tell you what countries can and cannot
>be a part of a National Alliance of free countries.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

It’s mission. It should rebrand as the Democratic Alliance Treaty Organization. Which would allow it to say it will defend any and all democratic nations that wish to join against authoritarian aggression. This would allow countries like Japan, Australia, SK and others to join.

It isn’t just about NATO. Putin doesn’t believe Ukraine is a real state and a sovereign state. If Ukraine said it would never join NATO, that still would not be good enough. If Ukraine decided to join the EU, Putin would object. Putin wants to put the old Soviet Union back together again and believes that Ukraine is a part of Russia. He views Ukraine as a renegade province much the same way China views Taiwan.

now you gotta explain why hungary, turkey, poland, etc are in it lol.

>now you gotta explain why hungary, turkey, poland, etc are in
>it lol.

I would honestly take the opportunity to fully explain what membership requirements are and what defines a functional democracy for membership. Give those 3 countries 5 years to come into compliance and if the do not, kick them out.

Back to my original point, it has always been about containing certain spheres of influence.

We need to get out of the geo-political framing of Democracy/free market v. Communism/Authoritarians.

We can look back at the Cold War and where these countries are today and its clear that its not about political or economic philosophies. The Chinese and Russia love Capitalism. It's about geopolitical spheres of influence. Its the US & Western Europe Aligned Countries and Russia OR Chinese aligned countries.

When we start talking about fighting for democracy anywhere in the world then you start to sound like NeoCons.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

A democratic government. I’m talking about a Democratic government deciding to join an alliance with other democratic countries for defense.

Neocons want to proactively and preemptively go into countries like Iraq and Afghanistan to install democracies or friendly governments and try to nation build. I’m not advocating something like DATO do this. DATO sets up a list of democratic standards a country must meet in order to join it via a vote by their citizens. DATO would fight to defend existing democratically aligned nations.

It's just not NATO's job to defend any and all democracies around the word to the point where we will promise to go to war with anyone who invades a democratic country. If Kazakhstan decided tomorrow they want to be a democracy and Russian doesn't want it to happen, then there is nothing we can or should do about it. It's just not worth risking having direct conflict with Russia and risk nuclear war over.



>A democratic government. I’m talking about a Democratic
>government deciding to join an alliance with other democratic
>countries for defense.
>
>Neocons want to proactively and preemptively go into countries
>like Iraq and Afghanistan to install democracies or friendly
>governments and try to nation build. I’m not advocating
>something like DATO do this. DATO sets up a list of democratic
>standards a country must meet in order to join it via a vote
>by their citizens. DATO would fight to defend existing
>democratically aligned nations.
>


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Russia doesn't just want to stop at not letting the Ukraine in. They want NATO to drastically decrease membership to bring it back to pre-1990 size:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/History_of_NATO_enlargement.svg/1095px-History_of_NATO_enlargement.svg.png

If NATO let Russia dictate Ukraine not joining it sets precedence for Russia's argument of control over who can and can't be part of NATO. Russia's next step would be not acknowledging the Baltic states as part of NATO (or to that point, their independence as nations at all) and then you have a MUCH, MUCH bigger problem.

Like we negotiate all the time with people who want more but are willing to accept less.

I will admit, I am greatly influenced by this substack:

https://nonzero.substack.com/p/why-biden-didnt-negotiate-seriously?utm_source=url

May be a Russian Asset but it sounds right.

Appeasement has us so shook that it might have never made us actually considering striking a deal in which UKraine doesn't join NATO. BTW, what is the great upside for allowing Ukraine to join NATO? We get to say Russia doesn't get to tell us what to do?

We didn't strike a deal and Putin invades the Donbas region. Would striking a deal have stopped him from doing that? Maybe. Do we care that the Russian parts of Ukraine that voted to align with Russia have been invaded by Russia? IDk. But to put another way. If this ends today with the only result is Russia now having the Donbas region wouldn't that be a win and a relief for everyone?

I really don't think you can enter these sort of negotiations overly focused on "well what are they going to do or want next?" All the near nuclear strikes that almost happened through out history were because one side wanted to take pre-emptive steps before the other side launched (like Crimson Tide and the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I think the biggest advantage the US has over Russia is time. The longer we keep a stalemate going, the sooner Putin dies, and the sooner folks from Eastern Boarder countries see Russian style economies do not work. That is why Putin is panicking, he is old and sees the direction Eastern Europe is heading. When Russia's strength is as a military power in a world run by economic power, he has to think a military conflict are betters terms for conflict then economic .

But again, Kfine is a rockstar. I do not think I am disagreeing with what he said, just going in a different direction.





**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

I think it's naïve to say you can't be thinking about what the next move is, and the reasons behind WHY they are making their current move. Anticipating future moves on the chess board is a big reason why the Cuban Missile Crisis (and others that we don't even know about) didn't go nuclear.

>I really don't think you can enter these sort of negotiations
>overly focused on "well what are they going to do or want
>next?" All the near nuclear strikes that almost happened
>through out history were because one side wanted to take
>pre-emptive steps before the other side launched (like Crimson
>Tide and the Cuban Missile Crisis).

Crimson Tide? The movie?

I see a lot of twitter advice saying we shouldn't negotiate with Putin because Putin would never negotiate which I think is silly.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Taking territory of sovereign neighbors by force should not be acceptable in the post WW2 era.

They already did it recently in 2014 taking Crimea, and folks just effectively let it slide. And from the looks of things, it doesn't look like Putin is satisfied with just a small piece of territory this time.
He's declared the entire country of Ukraine to be illegitimate. There are military operations throughout the country.

That makes a big difference.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

We have been told by Putin and separatist that they wanted to join Russia but I don’t recall any election being held to vote on this. For all we know a small minority wanted to join Russia.

That territory is (was) still Ukraine even though it is populated by separatists. Until the domestic issue is resolved (through civil war or otherwise), Russia should not be in the fight.

If folks in El Paso wanted to join Mexico, and the Mexican army swooped in to help, there'd be a problem.

Russia does to eastern Ukraine.

>If folks in El Paso wanted to join Mexico, and the Mexican
>army swooped in to help, there'd be a problem.

why hasn’t it happened yet?

I do think an outcome that isn't out the realm of probability is coup takes him out.

TO my other point, Dude is 70 and apparently in bad health. Why not say, Yeah Putin Ukraine can't join NATO then wait for him to die and then reconsider?

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

and I’m not talking some movie type sniper fire

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>TO my other point, Dude is 70 and apparently in bad health.
>Why not say, Yeah Putin Ukraine can't join NATO then wait for
>him to die and then reconsider?

i dont feel like scrolling up and finding it on my phone tho lol.

and hasten his timeline to wage war and consolidate these former ussr regions.

i mean...look how fast/sloppy he was in setting the pretext to war here. dude had like a 48 hr false flag operation with a bootleg media dog and pony show where even his most staunch allies couldnt pretend to fall for it.

False flag and BS reasons for invasion. Putin had to reach back into Nazis running Ukraine and genocide against Russian speakers as a reason.

So first it was Ukraine can’t join nato, then it was Ukraine isn’t a real and sovereign state as it is historically part of Russia, lastly it was Nazis running Ukraine and committing genocide.

just flood the zone with a bunch of bullshit as a means of information chaos.

it takes a lot more time/effort (and gets less reach) to debunk multiple streams of disinformation.

people just get exhausted and dont know what to believe.

putin is known for it.

it was also adapted by steve bannon and much of the trump sphere (and basically the entire conservative right).

that the real Putin is dead and that the current Putin is a body double. Russian mafia is controlling the country...

Seriously.

?

Is Putin any worse than Obama?

>Is Putin any worse than Obama?

economy in Africa was destroyed by Obama's administration so my question remains...

AND

that was just one country...

although I assume you mean Libya.

And the answer to your question is yes.

How can they square those two positions at the same time?

do their voters even care?

(we already know the answer to this lol)

Other than sending in troops, there is nothing to do.

I thought MAGA/America First was done with foreign wars and spending US money and blood to fight for other countries.

and get involved with the same russian billionaire (and son) who helped cultivate trump into a russian asset (and spearhead the failed trump tower russia deal). kanye said he wanted russia to be his 'second home'.

https://www.billboard.com/music/rb-hip-hop/kanye-ye-russia-putin-trip-sunday-service-1235017604/

this is all while kanye continues to call himself baby putin.

damn i cant find the post on here...but there was one where a few of us were talking about how kanye flew to russia 2 weeks before he went to trump tower and officially endorsed trump. and we got called crazy for bringing it up (same way i did when i said kanye was helping to mainstream the alt right).

i would not be surprised if he posted some weird ass pro-russia/putin statement on ig at some point lol.

https://twitter.com/EilishHart/status/1496903893812396039

and it look like kyiv is about to fall pretty quickly.

its amazing how fast this whole thing turned.

only days ago people were talking about russia just invading the disputed/separatist regions.

them niggas went right for the heart.

Can't do anything but hope the Russian army gets stuck in the mud and has to fight a war of attrition rather than the blitz they're attempting now.

I hope the sanctions will actually be as tough as they're saying. It's going to mean my energy bill will explode even further, but I'll happily take cold showers for a couple of years if it means Putin & Co. get everything taken from them.

Also, I'm glad that clueless tankie leftists are a pretty rare sight over here.

Back to refreshing the news pages..

(edit) fuck me: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/24/kyiv-furious-as-eu-wavers-on-banning-russia-from-swift-payment-system

Spineless fools.

https://twitter.com/XSovietNews/status/1496912799934603276

Looks to be the direction this is headed jn

Even the most dickish of Dictators can’t sustain a prolonged insurgency

for breaking up an illegal astroturfed 'convoy' of 10s of truckers in 1 city.

but they have zero smoke for putin who is violently quelling the peaceful anti-war protests of 1000s of russians in 50 cities.

https://twitter.com/jbendery/status/1496969867840348167

right now theyre calling for the 25th amendment to remove biden.

our democratic allies are authoritarian.

no word on russia tho.

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1496925513688006660

https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/1496980430280708096

dont know how widespread this is but something to keep an eye on.

https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/1496977466908459012

https://twitter.com/JoshNBCNews/status/1496884570716835840

would be dope if a ton of russian soldiers deserted.

I heard reports that Russian soldiers are poorly trained. I can’t imagine going to “train” or do an exercise and then realizing its a fucking war.

https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1496985043314651138

https://twitter.com/Speakingup_/status/1496973645234806786/photo/1


I get the intention as goofy as it is but...he fundamentally fucked up the metaphor since the supportive friends were the ones screaming get out of the house and Zelensky kept telling everyone to chill and stop worrying so much.

~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

especially because on my phone I had to scroll down to see the whole photo and his eyes looked at me like an infomercial.

Russians haven't progressed as quickly as expected.

The vibe seems like there would be a massive civilian insurgency even if Russia does take hold. They are being armed. The govt is instructing them to make Molotov cocktails

https://twitter.com/olliecarroll/status/1497096089517772804?s=20&t=YK0pqrY-tEDqzxvQcmI7NA

has to be frustrating to drive a tank and use gps to find a way over a river.

cause aint no fucking way..

and even if I did it, how could I not get involved if I saw a child dying or at gun point?

they built different.

and I always say the camera crew is more at risk. I’m dropping equipment when shit getd real.

>cause aint no fucking way..
>
>and even if I did it, how could I not get involved if I saw a
>child dying or at gun point?
>
>they built different.
>
>and I always say the camera crew is more at risk. I’m
>dropping equipment when shit getd real.

all of them, bombs are dropping all around them, do the Russians know American reporters are here so don't drop bombs?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2022/02/25/russia-invasion-ukraine-bans-male-citizens-leaving/6936471001/

https://twitter.com/ukraine/status/1496837835743133699?s=21

https://www.tiktok.com/@mrgunn4/video/7067964274773134598



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/t1aakn/zelensky_with_aides_prime_minister_state_their/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Apparently I’m supposed to believe these are Nazis though

dude was a comedian on a show about a regular citizen who became an overnight sensation for a social media video criticizing corruption in the government. he went on a meteoric rise to becoming the president.

then he ran a real life presidential campaign that many believe was a initially a promotional stunt (he named his party the same title as the show).

and he caught fire and actually won lol.

now dude is one of the most important leaders in the world at a time that could decide the geopolitical direction of much of the world for the next several decades.

its a pretty amazing story (and would be more amazing if he can hold off russia).

the rich uncle to help bankroll his possibly fictitious campaign.

his background as a comedian and his rise

Thanks tho, Reeq. That is a pretty amazing story considering everything that has happened since then

but Ukraine does have a Nazi problem

https://jewishunpacked.com/can-ukraine-have-a-nazi-problem-with-a-jewish-president/

in a country of 44 million.

and the entire far right political coalition in ukraine got 2% of the vote last election and got completely locked out of parliament without a single seat.

the far right equivalent of nazis in america win elections...control state governments...occupy the white house...etc.

the talking point is based on a military alliance with far right militias against russian aggression.

if another country were to violently invade america...the military, liberals, conservatives, and far right militias (like oath keepers) would be locking arms to defend the country too.

putting up Nazi collaborator monuments, renaming streets, going on police patrols.

>
>the talking point is based on a military alliance with far
>right militias against russian aggression.
>

That's part of it, but they do have a history.

>if another country were to violently invade america...the
>military, liberals, conservatives, and far right militias
>(like oath keepers) would be locking arms to defend the
>country too.

Come on you can't believe that given 9/11 , Pearl Harbor, even during the so called "Greatest Generation's" time, Nazi POW's were treated better than Blacks in the armed forces. oath keepers locking arms lol nah

>in a country of 44 million.
>
>and the entire far right political coalition in ukraine got 2%
>of the vote last election and got completely locked out of
>parliament without a single seat.
>
>the far right equivalent of nazis in america win
>elections...control state governments...occupy the white
>house...etc.
>
>the talking point is based on a military alliance with far
>right militias against russian aggression.
>
>if another country were to violently invade america...the
>military, liberals, conservatives, and far right militias
>(like oath keepers) would be locking arms to defend the
>country too.

So true on this last point. Even the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese Nationalist stopped fighting each other and joined forces once Japan invaded. Nothing unifies a country and it’s people like an invasion. It’s like family beef, I can talk shit about my dead beat uncle but if someone else tries to lay hands on him we will have a problem.

https://twitter.com/MehdiHasanShow/status/1497012581218885637

We could all stand to get CLOSER to the source material in war time

For example, reporters with Kevlar vests on right now.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1497199646699102209

https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1497226967724265479
https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1497277060288548875

https://twitter.com/akarl_smith/status/1497248046450712609

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1497216837364375552

clearly the miscalculated public sentiment and are looking to pivot.

if dems dont queue up every single pro-russia pro-putin word that republicans ever said in the past few years and hammer them with it...

Dems needs to hit them hard on this for the mid terms.

In the midterms

The are so fucking inept at messaging that even this cherry on top of the last few years of bullshit still won't help them.

You literally had a President tell a mob to storm the Capitol Building and somehow we are sitting here wondering if they can hold water in the midterms.

https://twitter.com/SenRonJohnson/status/1496873022023557122

that was some wild shit. just flaunting whiteness.


peace & blessings,

x.

www.twitter.com/poetx

=========================================
I'm an advocate for working smarter, not harder. If you just
focus on working hard you end up making someone else rich and
not having much to show for it. (c) mad

by the United States and Europe when they gave nuclear capability in exchange for protection?

Not sure which country's propaganda I'll be accused of spreading lol, but here's my personal (anti-war, non-expert) opinion:


No. I don't think history should look poorly on Ukraine for choosing disarmament, which remains the noble position.

Especially during that time. Modern Ukraine's early years were among it's most corrupt. They could've gone a different way for sure and adopted a posture more like Pakistan.

Ukraine ultimately sought assurance in the agreement you're talking about (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances) to become a signatory of the NPT/Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/documents/infcircs/1970/infcirc140.pdf).

And I think nuclear states who are signatories of the NPT but who constantly fund, instigate, perpetuate, or industrialize war present more danger to not just Ukraine but the world... by repeatedly creating armed conflicts that can escalate to nuclear warfare. So I'd much prefer history look poorly on them.

Just my 2 cents. I'm sure it's not the consensus on okp tho

On his assessment.

Ukraine was very corrupt and very much in transition after the fall of the USSR. Furthermore, my understanding is that Ukraine had the missiles but didn’t have the launch codes or ability to launch them as that stayed in Moscow.

Maybe I'm reading the wrong (too optimistic) analyses, but it looks like Russia is fucking up on the logistics side (pushing in hard without setting up solid supply lines) and underestimated Ukrainian morale.

Lots of reports of Russian soldiers bein baffled they met any resistance at all, instead of being hailed as liberators.

Big Russian transport planes being shot down, failing to hold on to strategic positions such as airfields, lots of casualties.

China keeping its distance. Kazakhstan refusing to offer military support (despite having a Putin-backed regime).

Crackdown on social media in Russia (not something you if you think you're winning, right?).

Obviously I don't know shit and Ukraine can still fall, but it's a markedly different vibe from the first two days.

hopefully this exposes how false that is.

And would largely just lay down and give up like they did in Crimea.

and as such I can never tell what information is real or fake.

So I have no idea how this shit is actually going. On paper I can't see how the Ukraine can overcome an all out assault from Russia unless they use guerilla tactics and make this a protracted war

Russia is cutting off social media, while there's a non-stop stream of video from the Ukrainians, showing Russian armor and supply vehicles stuck in the mud, blown up by Javelins, or simply abandoned roadside after running out of gas.

Every time there's reports of Russian advances, there's a message a couple of hours later saying the situation is under control again. When media are saying that Russian troops are in Kiev, Kharkov, etc. it's often a bunch of units cut off from supply lines, slowly getting ground up by local defenses.

Even more conservative sources such as Britain's MoD are stating that Russian forces are having logistics issues and trouble dealing with dug-in and highly motivated Ukrainian forces.

Even if you cut all the numbers from Ukrainian sources in half, it's clear the price of this invasion is much higher than anticipated by the Russians.

The big question is how long both parties can last, and whether Putin is prepared to escalate further and focus on terrorizing civilians to break morale, etc. If he manages to take out Zelensky somehow, that would probably deal a massive blow to Ukraine.

But Russia is getting booted from Swift and barely has international support, while Germany has done a U-turn on weapons exports and now pretty much all of Europe is sending weapons and supplies to the Ukrainians.

It's obviously too early to tell, but a week ago pretty much everyone thought Ukraine would fall over in case of an invasion, and the current situation seems nowhere near that point. So yeah, I'm a little optimistic (for lack of a better word), even if there's no guarantees whatsoever that things will turn out ok.

https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1497570179026403329

russian duma (parliament) members saying they supported military action because they were convinced it was in defense of pro-russian regions from attacks by ukraine. not a full pro-active invasion of the country.

russian military members are communicating with family members and saying they had no idea they were going to be part of a war.

maybe this really is like iraq? (the other way around) lol.

i have no idea what putins aim here was but he clearly miscalculated.

it also looks like he knows hes losing the information war because hes banning facebook/twitter and looking to shut down all russian outlets that arent pushing his preferred narrative.

Seems like maybe he thought when he was putting troops around the border he was hoping Ukraine would “go first” so then they’d have a claim — and probably more Russian citizen support.

When that didn’t happen - he moved in hoping Ukraine would maybe be more offensive (to get the same big reaction) vs Ukraine bunkering down which makes him look like the clear aggressor

https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2022/02/26/6219757d22601d2e038b45bf.html

shot down 6 russian planes in one day. Some say its an urban legend, the President claims he is real. Regardless.. this is the type of shit that gives people hope.

so they will grow flowers when they die

https://youtu.be/L17Bi7zBJHI


gangster shit.

https://people.com/politics/soldier-blew-himself-and-bridge-up-to-defend-ukraine-against-russia/

gangster shit

The guy who built his brand on exposing abuses of imperialist superpowers.


Not. A. Single. Tweet.

https://twitter.com/SaoSasha/status/1497311531041640450

As the background music to that video.

https://twitter.com/Westandwith2/status/1497498849199501313

https://twitter.com/terrelljstarr/status/1497514654242910209

https://www.instagram.com/p/CadKpu3uvbe/?utm_medium=copy_link

https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1497688675777490949

theres prolly embellishment on both sides but i think the real count is closer to the ukraine side of things lol.

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1497721454250508288

from just day ago, back at her.

the same guy they shitted on when he refused to be extorted by trump for nonexistent dirt on biden?

https://twitter.com/SebGorka/status/1497489054119743491
https://twitter.com/laurenboebert/status/1497620660935442439
https://twitter.com/MonicaCrowley/status/1497445662216146945
https://twitter.com/trish_regan/status/1497424835735085058

no mention of trump hiding in an underground bunker when there were too many protesters outside an already gated off and heavily secured white house.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-putin-puts-nuclear-forces-high-alert-2022-02-27/

I upped this post only a week ago, and my outlook was grim but never would I have imagined the current state of affairs arriving so quickly.

I'll eat my miscalculation that Putin wouldn't try to overthrow Kyiv - I was wrong; and I let the fact that I trust US gov narratives about as little as I trust Russian gov narratives get the better of me.

But the more I see or read anyone boast about how there was all this intelligence that Russia was one step away from waging Nuclear War/WW3, all I wonder is wtf every diplomatic effort imaginable wasn't made to avert conflict in the first place. I think Buddy's questions and comparison to the Cuban Missile Crisis are exactly right.

If diplomacy isn't about dialogue with our most menacing adversaries, to calm tensions and protect us from attack, then what in the entire the fuck do they do. It's like our leaders only know how to talk and negotiate with each other, in their little elitist cliques. Hobnobbing in Davos and staging photo-ops, rather than successfully engage in difficult negotiations with the actual mfs who want to blow us up.

And now - despite the NATO alliance encompassing almost all of Europe, despite one member's military budget accounting for 70% of NATO's collective defense expenditure (https://www.visualcapitalist.com/this-is-how-much-nato-countries-spend-on-defense/) - here we are sitting just as susceptible to nuclear attack as if this alliance didn't exist.

In response to Putin's bait, the NATO response force was activated a few days ago. Today, Putin put his nuclear forces on the highest level of alert (likely to use as leverage if the talks scheduled at Belarus' border go south). But does ANYONE feel adequately prepared by our governments right now? For evacuations, for the airstrikes and catastrophic harm (https://www.icanw.org/catastrophic_harm, https://www.icanw.org/modeling_the_effects_on_cities) Putin has *repeatedly* threatened? This is not a joke - if this east v. west showdown begins, Putin is much more likely to nuke Washington DC than Ukraine to "win" and decimate the pulse of NATO; and he warned as much (https://time.com/6150787/putin-us-risk-ukraine-war/). Depending on how powerful his nukes are (the ones America dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima are now considered "low-grade"), a really powerful one could basically vaporize the capital, level buildings across the entire NE US, leave millions of people with burns and radiation poisoning, and cause a nuclear winter that decimates agriculture and weather systems on our whole CONTINENT.

Our leaders knew sooo much more than us (eg. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/25/us-intel-predicted-russias-invasion-plans-did-it-matter.html), and yet STILL failed to effectively manage Putin (eg. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/biden-putin-meeting-nato-ukraine/2021/12/06/71225812-5677-11ec-8396-5552bef55c3c_story.html); then decided at that NATO meeting a few days ago on OUR behalf that they'd rather risk nuclear attack than actually talk this warlord off the ledge with the most basic concessions ever about NATO expansion. I am actually more disappointed and disgusted in our leaders than I've ever felt in my life and that's real fucking talk. And I feel very sorry for the Ukrainians, and any other future casualties, suffering the impact of our failed diplomacy.

East coast OKPs, and especially those in DC or NY, please monitor the news closely and pay attention to the outcome of the upcoming talks at the Belarus border. Do not assume we could never get attacked on western soil - this is the monster who would do it, NATO expansion is an issue he would do it over, and he has the capabilities (eg. hypersonics that can evade missile defence systems) to do so. Praying this nightmare ends soon.

It is clear that the only compromise that Putin would accept is to role back NATO to its 1990 levels and let Putin reclaim Eastern Europe under a new Warsaw Pact 2.0.

Putin miscalculated the US, NATO and more importantly Ukraines response to this and now he is acting even more dangerous because things aren’t going the way he thought/wants.

Accept a compromise or diplomatic solution.

Putin wants what he wants and will use any means necessary to get it. He decided in 2014 he wanted Ukraine so he took Crimea, now he wants all of Ukraine.

to finally force serious negotiation.

Putin has an entire ideology (about the West) underpinning his issue with NATO expansion. Good diplomacy would have effectively managed those risks.


And also, if we're nuked it's not going to be about that territorial dispute.

People keep refusing to accept that those territories want nothing to do with Ukraine. They have moved on. It might even be more far gone than the Palestine situation. They've each held high-turnout referendums affirming their declarations of independence, formed their own parliaments (especially significant since Ukraine's system of gov is unitary), held general elections, adopted the Russian legal system, etc. Even as this current crisis escalated, the civilians in those separatist territories evacuated to Russia not Ukraine (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/18/russian-backed-separatists-announce-evacuation-from-east-ukraine).

That territorial dispute is also an example of failed diplomacy, but on the part of Ukraine and long before Zelensky. He should have followed his instinct tho (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-does-not-exclude-holding-referendum-crimea-donbass-2021-12-10). Putin wouldn't have been able to exploit it as easily.

>to finally force serious negotiation.

They were trying to negotiate with Putin for the last month a peaceful solution. What did Ukraine do over the last 6 months to trigger Putin to amass 190,000 troops on its border?

Putin’s reasons have shifted during this whole time, which shows he was just looking for a reason to invade:

1. No NATO expansion to Ukraine
2. Ukraine isn’t even a real state and is historically part of Russia
3. We just want to ensure the peace and stability of the eastern breakaway regions of Ukraine
4. Ukraine is ran by a bunch of drug cartels & Neo Nazis
5. Ukraine government was committing genocide against ethnic Russians and Russian speakers

Putin can’t keep his story or excuses straight.

>Putin has an entire ideology (about the West) underpinning his
>issue with NATO expansion. Good diplomacy would have
>effectively managed those risks.

You are right he does have his issues with this and he has made them very clear. He wants NATO to fall back to its 1990 membership and expel all the old Warsaw Pact counties from NATO. No diplomacy in the world could have managed this. Tell me, what in your opinion would good diplomacy look like? NATO agreed to take all the nukes out of those countries? NATO agrees to take all the soldiers out of those countries? What does Putin and Russia give up in return? It would have be more than just not invading Ukraine.

>And also, if we're nuked it's not going to be about that
>territorial dispute.
>
>People keep refusing to accept that those territories want
>nothing to do with Ukraine. They have moved on. It might even
>be more far gone than the Palestine situation. They've each
>held high-turnout referendums affirming their declarations of
>independence

You are going to have to provide links to these high turnout referendums. The answer to this is basically we should divide up Ukraine in an east/west model like Germany? Or perhaps north/south like Korea? Look how well that turned out.
>
>
>That territorial dispute is also an example of failed
>diplomacy, but on the part of Ukraine and long before
>Zelensky. He should have followed his instinct tho
>(https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-does-not-exclude-holding-referendum-crimea-donbass-2021-12-10).
>Putin wouldn't have been able to exploit it as easily.
>

If Putin just took the eastern parts, like he did with Crimea, he probably could have gotten away with it but he wants all of Ukraine. Him sending in troops to the eastern part didn’t trigger Ukraine to respond with escalation. He crossed the Rubicon into Ukraine and that’s what triggered Ukraine to fight and defend itself.

Isn’t a one time thing, that’s why they worked on it in 2014 with the Minsk Agreement and continued right up Russia invaded Ukraine.

Diplomacy also isn’t one sided and involves compromise. That compromise shouldn’t be, “give me everything I want or else I go to war”.

I'm just being more selective with my time

act like the previous US president who just left office barely a year ago wasn't buddy buddy with Putin and still supports him along with a significant number number of "radical" politicians on the right and even some on the left even though most of them have backed down now. I've been critical of too many old people in national politics but some of these younger folks think this shit is a game and its not.

Its crazy now unless you watch the national news programs its like the majority of the US is oblivious to what's going on over there and what is potentially at our door.

I've been
>critical of too many old people in national politics but some
>of these younger folks think this shit is a game and its not.
>
>Its crazy now unless you watch the national news programs its
>like the majority of the US is oblivious to what's going on
>over there and what is potentially at our door.

even after everything we have seen so far with this premeditated invasion based on completely false pretenses? (he couldnt even credibly convince his own fanbase...even they are jumping ship)

the fact that long time allies of russia are even abandoning them or refusing to support should let you know who they blame for *all* of this.

not even the snowdens and taibbis of the world are on social media using the level of mental gymnastics and narrative shoveling you are now.

this enablist mentality you have with putin continues to be one of the weirdest revelations on this board.

its really disturbing.

youre hellbent on portraying him as some rational statesman whose 'better angels' can simply be reasoned with and appealed to.

even after whats going on in front of your face right now!

after being dead wrong about the invasion...youre doubling down on a new goalpost.

why?

like...even tulsi gabbard has given up the schtick.

that should be a major cue for you to just cut bait and move on.

i thought it was really weird before but its still getting weirder.

have you always been like this?

go gargle Biden's nuts

>go gargle Biden's nuts

Amazing how your parrot pro-Russian propaganda while professing to be anti-war.

Twisted.

While giving Vladimir fucking Putin the benefit of the doubt here.

This is actually a question of allegiance

distracts from a lot of ineptitude in our upper echelons of power and diplomacy, and its def used to an advantage.

You guys think only one side pushes propaganda and its so cute.

>
>This is actually a question of allegiance

Lol get real

I know where I stood then and still stand now


again, a question of allegiances.

sometimes it's your side being the murderous thug

and it's ok to oppose war then too

equating pacifism to treason is terrible logic

is because they dont have a filibuster in russia.

yeah.

i hate the fact we gotta depend on some of these people to have the good sense to protect this country from outright fascists lol.

Not sure who all needs to hear that.

And I'm not wading through anymore of this post's twitter spam to see who else has been accused of this absurdity.


But it's not 'delusional', 'pro-putin gaslighting', 'russian propaganda' or whatever else you might get called to think critically about:


-the rights and status of a people deeply committed to their self-determination and pursuit of statehood

-the costs of war

-the encouragement of war

-the impacts of war

-diplomacy failures that may have precipitated war

-the motives of ANY political leaders who have a track record of hawkish policy and/or advocating war

-the risks in dismissing concerns of dangerous adversaries explicitly THREATENING war

-the veracity of claims made by state actors notorious for covertly or overtly fomenting war

-the validity of narratives disseminated by state actors notorious for witholding contextual info and/or conducting psyops


Expressing concerns about such things doesn't mean you endorse or sympathize with Putin's ideology, actions, imperialism; or the fall of sovereign nations, in ANY WAY. Don't let some fucking BOOTLICKERS taunt you out of expecting elected leaders to PRE-EMPTIVELY keep you out of harm's way.

Y’all made your bed

We can read, and have a memory.

these people are pretty solidly simple-minded, unfortunately

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMn7ctoX0AQZsDf?format=jpg&name=medium

even his generals looking at him like...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMnRpZjXoAYT3A_?format=jpg&name=medium

>https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMn7ctoX0AQZsDf?format=jpg&name=medium
>
>even his generals looking at him like...
>https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMnRpZjXoAYT3A_?format=jpg&name=medium

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1497935791095435268

Paris or Geneva. Russia is not to be trusted and could pull a Red Wedding event on Ukrainian representatives.

>Russia is not to be trusted and could pull a
>Red Wedding event on Ukrainian representatives.

I wouldn’t even meet face to face

send me a zoom link

https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1497915356433858561

read that again.

With the truth, which limited Putin’s misinformation campaign and we are seeing the results of that work now.

Putin orders Russia’s nuclear deterrent forces on alert l ABC News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPmLIwUe924

Kevin Story

1 hour ago

Russia is not doing so well in Ukraine, kinda makes them look weak and open to invasion hence the nuke threat.




Sir Xi Gutierrez von Wallenstein VI

56 minutes ago

Yes. The argument can be, if you couldn't crush the Ukrainians, you just exposed certain weaknesses of the Russian army to the world. Especially to US intelligence who is likely taking notes. And reading that the Americans had spy planes peeking into Ukraine from a safe distance, probably so.


Alexander Robins

33 minutes ago

If the largest army in Europe is unable to conquer an impoverished nation, NATO would make Hitler’s invasion look like child’s play. I only hope the USA and NATO have an anti-missile defense/plan that would nullify Russia’s hyper sonic missiles.

--------------=


that's the key

Seeing a united NATO and world response to aggression

It won’t deter them from doing what they ultimately want with Taiwan. But I have to think it gives them nervous about what will happen

Not only a United from but if Ukraine forces can Mount this kind of resistance, imagine what Taiwan could do. Taiwan has been receiving weapons, training, submarines from the US/West for decades now. An amphibious invasion is much more difficult to pull off than a land invasion.

A Chinese military buildup would be seen well in advance and would immediately start to take losses the minute those Chinese ships start to head towards Taiwan.

https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1498049577131208705

a lot of other people need to do the same thing.

After reading that I’m actually worried for him

As I do for anyone living in an autocracy

"I don't speak to provoke. I speak because I think our time on Earth is short and each moment that we are not our truest selves, each moment we say what we do not mean because we imagine that is what somebody what's us to say, then we are wasting our time

increase fighter pay lol.

https://twitter.com/ErinBurnett/status/1498067760013889546

Chechnya is supposedly sending troops as well. I’m surprised Kazakhstan hasn’t done so as well, since they clearly owe Putin for his help in January.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ukrainian-forces-destroy-convoy-of-56-chechen-tanks-kill-general-near-kyiv-report/

interestingly enough...the leader of chechnya and one of his top military personnel were caught on intercepted audio discussing invasion plans (so basically western intelligence is listening to these communications and notifying ukraine). also...outside of the chechen leaders close circles...it appears that other commanders were completely caught off guard with deployment orders like a week ago.

https://twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1497632971548856322

as far as kazakhstan...they outright refused to send troops for russia. they also refused to recognize the independence of the 2 ukrainian territories that russia used as a pretext for war.
https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1497368313873133570

As weak as the turd that hangs from Putin’s ass that we’ve always known him

I’m hoping all of this has unintended consequences on that regime

Dude is the Devin Nunes of Putin's butthole

I didn't think any black people were over there

Apparently, Ukraine has been a popular spot for Nigerian students in particular for awhile now. Somebody told me once that it was a common location for medical and engineering students around the world, generally. I'd be curious to hear how the relationship with Nigeria started, specifically - though I imagine it's one of those things where a few students did it awhile ago, had a good experience, and Nigerian secondary schools eventually joined in and started advocating it more commonly.

If students have been heading there for more than a generation now, I'd bet there's also a fair amount of expats who ended up staying.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/27/im-very-worried-african-students-caught-in-ukraine-russia-war

The Nigerian students caught in the Russia-Ukraine war
Students scramble to leave Ukraine as the conflict intensifies, reaching new cities.

By Hamza Mohamed
Published On 27 Feb 2022
27 Feb 2022
Lolade Lawal’s life has been turned upside down in a way she never imagined.

The third-year medical student from Nigeria is coming to terms with the effects of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that started last week.

“It is scary, very scary. I’m very worried. People are running for their lives. We are hiding in groups so we can keep an eye on each other,” Lawal told Al Jazeera over the phone as she sheltered with other students at a safe bunker in the northeastern city of Sumy.

Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered what he said was a “special military operation” against Ukraine on Thursday. A full-scale invasion followed, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy declaring martial law, saying his country would defend itself.

On Saturday, fighting reached the streets of Ukraine’s capital Kyiv as Russian troops pressed ahead.

According to the US military, Russia now has at least 50 percent of its estimated 150,000-strong invasion forces in Ukraine.

The conflict has so far killed more than 200 civilians, including three children. Nearly 1,100 have been injured in the conflict, including 33 children, according to Ukraine’s health ministry.

The United Nations estimates more than 100,000 people have been displaced within the country since the conflict started.

“There’s no escape. Trains have stopped working. Most supermarkets are closed and those that are opened are running very low on food stocks. ATMs are not working and everyone is desperately looking for money,” Lawal said, as sirens went off in the background.

There are no official figures on the number of African students currently studying in Ukraine but Lawal said “there are hundreds of us in our city”.

“At my university, there are about 100 Nigerian students. I’m sheltering with some of them,” Lawal added.

Some students have managed to cross the border into Poland.

“I live in Kyiv. I have been living here since March last year,” Somto Orah, a student at State University of Telecommunications in Kyiv, told Al Jazeera.

“We have received no support from any government authorities. The school only gave us bomb shelter to hide when the air raid siren is on. The sirens came on and off for about five times yesterday before I left,” Orah, a Nigerian national, added.

“There is little food. I couldn’t access cash for two days now. Every ATM on the road has no cash.”

Others have had even less luck.

Samuel George, a first-year software engineering student, fled Kyiv after the shelling and sirens got too much for him to handle.

“I drove from Kyiv. We are trying to survive. We don’t want to die in a foreign country,” George said.

As he neared the Polish border, Samuel’s luck ran out. He said he had a minor road accident with a vehicle carrying Ukrainians because the road was narrow.

He said they took his money and stopped him from driving any further.

“They are not officials, police or military. They are normal citizens who stopped us Africans from driving to the border. They let Ukrainians pass through but not us,” George said.

“I’m now walking to the border. I have no other option. I don’t know how much further the border is. They even took our money. It is like they are not human beings,” George said, adding that he could no longer talk on the phone because his hands were freezing in the sub-zero temperature.

But for Somto and several other students, crossing the border into Poland has not been easy.

“I will be heading to Nigeria from Poland if I’m able to cross. But if I see a school offer around Schengen, I will take it up because I don’t want my school life to be disrupted,” he said as he joined the queue at the border gate.

Follow Hamza Mohamed on Twitter: @Hamza_Africa

he said his team didn’t think there would be a war. He said they didn’t take it seriously. I woulda said fuck all yall and bounced.


another black player for a different team made it home but he said he had to wait at the boarder for 14 hours.

bc even when helping those fleeing an imperial fascist, there's always room to be racist smh



https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/africa/africans-trying-to-flee-ukraine-complain-of-being-blocked-and-of-racist-treatment-1.4813571


Africans trying to flee Ukraine complain of being blocked and of racist treatment

Black students say they have been stopped from boarding trains, and abused by police


African students trapped in Ukraine say they face extra challenges as they try to escape the war, including being blocked from getting off trains or barred from crossing borders to neighbouring countries.

“My boyfriend is stuck in Ukraine and his phone is not reachable for the past two days. The last time we spoke he said he’s waiting for the train from Lviv to Poland, ” said a Nigerian woman who asked to go just by her first name, Precious. “He said they didn’t allow them to board the train. Only white people and his phone had low battery so he had to go offline.”

Roughly 20 per cent of Ukraine’s foreign students are African, including 4,000 Nigerians. African activists and students have been raising awareness of their plight through the Twitter hashtag #AfricansInUkraine, as well as creating group chats on WhatsApp and Telegram to organise assistance.

At least one Telegram group for stranded African students now has more than 3,500 members. Members have been sharing videos, including several that appeared to show Africans being blocked from boarding trains towards the border, which The Irish Times could not independently verify.

Hundreds of Africans – including some in Ukraine, people in countries including Nigeria and Ghana and members of the diaspora in Europe – also talked for more than 16 hours in an online discussion held through Twitter spaces, sharing advice on logistics and strategising about how to help.

‘Racist officers’
In less than 24 hours, more than €23,500 was raised by organisers who connected on Twitter. “There are still many black students and families who live and work in Ukraine who are stuck there,” the description for the campaign read. “Many more have made it to Poland to face horrific anti-blackness and racist Ukrainian and Polish soldiers and police officers.”

African embassies came in for early criticism for not planning to evacuate their citizens. One Nigerian medical student, who had been studying in Dnipro and asked not to be named, said the British students he studied with were bused to the Polish border by university authorities, while Africans were left behind. By Sunday he was driving in a four-car convoy towards Romania, where they heard they would be allowed to cross. “The black students, the African students are completely neglected. We are humans too,” he said.

“When the shelling started, a lot of people made their way towards Poland as an impulse reaction ... When they got to the border they realised it was just Ukrainians getting access into Poland ... We tried contacting the embassy but we got no reply. We just need to cross the border and know that we’re safe and within a short period of time we will find our way back to our country.”

‘Gravely concerned’
Polish authorities have said publicly that third-country nationals will be allowed to enter. On Saturday, the Nigerian embassy in Poland also said it would have staff waiting at four locations to meet its citizens with buses and vans.

On February 24th, the Ghanaian ministry of foreign affairs tweeted that it was “gravely concerned” about the security and safety of our over 1,000 students and other Ghanaians in Ukraine. It later gave contact numbers for officials who could help them cross borders, while warning citizens to “be wary of unscrupulous persons posing as designated officials for the evacuation exercise”.

At least 368,000 people have fled Ukraine to countries including Poland, Hungary, Romania and Moldova, according to Filippo Grandi, the UN high commissioner for refugees. On Sunday afternoon, a Nigerian student in Poland told The Irish Times that many Nigerians who had been waiting had finally managed to cross the border that morning.

black people from getting on the train to leave, if so fuck Ukraine

https://meaww.com/outrage-footage-africans-stopped-trains-ukraine

https://qz.com/africa/2134765/africans-in-ukraine-say-theyre-stranded/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/africa/africans-trying-to-flee-ukraine-complain-of-being-blocked-and-of-racist-treatment-1.4813571

https://www.tmz.com/2022/02/27/racism-claims-emerge-ukraine-border-africans-denied-access-flee-trains/

towards non-white immigrants in general that's widespread across Europe (and elsewhere).

Additionally, citizenship laws in some parts of Europe are quite different to what we practice in US and Canada. We have a system that's predominantly 'jus soli' or birthright citizenship. In contrast, many european countries have a system based on 'jus sanguinis' which predicates citizenship on descent from parents who are natives of the country, and sometimes language proficiency requirements and other nativist conditions.

This ends up codifying 'othering' and reinforcing a view that non-white people can not be Ukrainian or treated the same as Ukrainians or whatever. Which has created problems as Black Ukrainian citizens and residents try to access the same asylum provisions neighboring countries have said they're offering to the (assumed) White Ukrainians fleeing the war.

Racist as fuck

Other countries like Norway, France etc are not handling the diversity well

racism doesn't exist.

Selective sympathy is a motherfucker.
One guy actually came out and said it, this shouldn’t be happening to blue eyed blondes( I’m paraphrasing but not exaggerating).
This aggression should not happen to white Christian democratic countries.
The dismissal of racism against African students, the mother with her two month old left in the freezing cold , almost makes me want to say Fuck Ukraine .
I won’t, no country deserves to be invaded.
But please keep this same energy for when this happens to the rest of us.

...

but some people in thread want to sweep it under the rug.

just sayin’

We have God fearing christian progressives who are racist af.

>just sayin’
>
>We have God fearing christian progressives who are racist af.
>


True

was deleted.

There is a Neo Nazi group that is part of the Ukrainian Military, and
they are allowed to march and have rallies while wearing Nazi emblems.

Every year hundreds of Ukrainians do Nazi marches with no resistance from
the government.

And those Neo Nazis do Attack Russian separatists in the Ukraine.

Now why does a Jewish Leader allow a Nazi group to be part of the Military
and have Nazi rallies? .....because they are patriotic and are willing to kill Russians
who live in the Ukraine.

Facts.

>was deleted.
>
>There is a Neo Nazi group that is part of the Ukrainian
>Military, and
>they are allowed to march and have rallies while wearing Nazi
>emblems.
>
>Every year hundreds of Ukrainians do Nazi marches with no
>resistance from
>the government.
>
>And those Neo Nazis do Attack Russian separatists in the
>Ukraine.
>
>Now why does a Jewish Leader allow a Nazi group to be part of
>the Military
>and have Nazi rallies? .....because they are patriotic and
>are willing to kill Russians
>who live in the Ukraine.
>

Willing to kill Russians but they will not stop there.
>Facts.

>There is a Neo Nazi group that is part of the Ukrainian
>Military, and
>they are allowed to march and have rallies while wearing Nazi
>emblems.
>
>Every year hundreds of Ukrainians do Nazi marches with no
>resistance from
>the government.
>
>And those Neo Nazis do Attack Russian separatists in the
>Ukraine.
>
>Now why does a Jewish Leader allow a Nazi group to be part of
>the Military
>and have Nazi rallies? .....because they are patriotic and
>are willing to kill Russians
>who live in the Ukraine.
>
>Facts.

*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

Should he Step up the bombing campaign on their major cities?

Maybe use a thermobaric bomb

Nukes so that the re-named streets and Nazi collaborator monuments are destroyed.


Seriously this is not either/or and it's not a team sport.

It's ok to call out Putin and Ukraine racism at the same time.

Starting with Ukraine. Then do it in the rest of the former Soviet blocs who fought and died for their freedom

Carry on thinking about this strictly through the prism of American domestic policy though.

Continue to use Team Putin vs Team Drake to avoid talking about Ukraine racism.

https://twitter.com/VeraMBergen/status/1498334352870150146

it looks like those earlier reports of soldiers abandoning their units because they thought they were just doing a training exercise are true.

putin got these young dudes out here dying in a war that they didnt even know they were fighting. dude is a straight movie villain.

Media: Ukraine isn’t Afghan or Iraq. These are people that look like you
and me getting in the same cars that we drive to resist an evil country.

Since middle eastern people are brown, I guess they are not seen
as people or less than people. And Afghan and Iraq were peaceful countries
before they were invaded.

Media: Ukrainian people making Molotov Cocktails is seen as resistance.


But when Palestinians and Afghanis did it it was written as terrorism, or when Mandela
and his movement were doing it to fight Apartheid it was seen as terrorism.


America and he UK illegally invaded Iraqi and killed an estimated 2 million Iraqis. They stole resources and obliterated a country that is still in devastation to this day, and no
one gave two focks about it. America wasn’t under threat and no one was expanding onto its borders.

No one gave 2 focks about Rwanda or Ethiopia or South Africa....

The polkadot elephant in the room.

While I agree about the obvious racism we also have to remember we are rooting for the Ukraines so of course they will be presented as hero’s.

Its crazy how easy it is to turn a citizen into a hero when you want them to win..

and then turn right around and call them terrorist when your country is the one invading.

What a wild turn of events.

Wonder what else today will bring.

They just repeat what the media tells them. They didnt give a fuck about a war until they were told to, and now any point thats anti-war or at all skeptical of the American/European narrative is "pro-Russia."

No nuance. No history, no details, just full blown Western propaganda regurgitated.

We are 250+ posts in and not one post about the GAS situation. No mention of Nordstream. No need to get into conspiracies but all wars are over resources/power...you don't think the Americans want to control Europe's gas and end the Russian monopoly? Is that not a threat to Russia? The Hunter Burisma scandal was only a few months ago...my guess is that if his name was Hunter Trump there'd be at least 75 posts making some connections and following the money.

Nazi post deleted and called a Kremlin talking point, although it's been identified by Western media during this ONGOING WAR for over a decade.

But hey, Biden is doing great - he's bumrushing the internet with intelligence reports!!!

The pics of Zelensky are from years ago.

The pics of Klitschos are from years ago.

The Ghost of Kyiv vids are from a video game.

Shit, half the footage on mainstream media is from video games and old shit.

Must be the Russians...

at least get YOUR “facts” straight

>The pics of Zelensky are from years ago.
>
>The pics of Klitschos are from years ago.
>
>The Ghost of Kyiv vids are from a video game.

Just not with you and AllStah, because experience tells me it would be a waste of time.

It caught the actual aggressors here off guard and fucked up their narrative. While talking heads on YouTube questioned the authenticity of these reports.

Some of you still swallow kremlin talking points of course because that’s just who you are.

Hunter Biden. Is there really anyone that gullible to believe that there is really anything there?

I stand corrected.

Yall the worst.

The thing is there are smart informed people, asking smart informed questions that require nuance and recognizing there is propaganda on both sides, but this ain't it.

Yall got to do more than watch youtube videos for info.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

and even less geo-political awareness.

..

>Media: Ukraine isn’t Afghan or Iraq. These are people that
>look like you
>and me getting in the same cars that we drive to resist an
>evil country.
>
>Since middle eastern people are brown, I guess they are not
>seen
>as people or less than people. And Afghan and Iraq were
>peaceful countries
>before they were invaded.
>
>Media: Ukrainian people making Molotov Cocktails is seen as
>resistance.
>
>
>But when Palestinians and Afghanis did it it was written as
>terrorism, or when Mandela
>and his movement were doing it to fight Apartheid it was seen
>as terrorism.
>
>
>America and he UK illegally invaded Iraqi and killed an
>estimated 2 million Iraqis. They stole resources and
>obliterated a country that is still in devastation to this
>day, and no
>one gave two focks about it. America wasn’t under threat and
>no one was expanding onto its borders.
>
>No one gave 2 focks about Rwanda or Ethiopia or South
>Africa....
>
>
>

its from a distance but I can’t imagine seeing this from my apartment window.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/t3edql/kharkov_grads_they_are_shelling_the_whole_city/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

https://time.com/6152143/russian-protests-ukraine/


Risking their lives and freedom in an autocratic regime. In some cases the freedom of their loved ones too

Send military equipment and cheer on Ukraine until the inevitable happens?

Sad situation…

They aren’t going to get involved militarily unless Putin crosses the Rubicon into a NATO country.

The next World War will absolutely involve Nuclear Weapons. You do what you have to in order to avoid that. Russia's economy is literally collapsing. The short term loss of Ukraine is hard to watch, but the long game, bringing down Putin, will prove successful.

https://www.independent.co.uk/world/ukraine-racism-refugees-russia-war-un-b2025771.html

https://twitter.com/Nadine_Writes (writer of the piece)

https://twitter.com/LHreports/status/1498333865148133386?cxt=HHwWlMC9scetk8spAAAA

There's at least one Black journalist on the ground:
https://twitter.com/terrelljstarr (he's not at the border though)

This is just from a cursory glance at social media I've been following. I'm sure there's more info out there.

From a Dutch paper, but Google translate did a pretty neat job.

https://www.volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/waarom-gaan-grenzen-nu-wel-open-vluchtelingen-die-op-ons-lijken-zien-we-als-echte-vluchtelingen~b54c5b4c/


-----

Why are borders opening now?
'We see refugees who look like us as real refugees'

Where Syrian and Afghan refugees often received a cold reception in recent years, Europe is now throwing the door wide open for refugees from Ukraine. What explains this new solidarity?

Iñaki Oñorbe Genovesi March 1, 2022 , 3:00 PM

Authoritarian leaders at Europe's external borders regularly made it a habit: to drive a wedge between EU member states by triggering a flood of refugees into Europe. Recently, think of the Turkish president Erdogan or the Belarusian dictator Lukashenko. Remarkably, Russian President Putin seems to be failing to do this.

In fact, with hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion of their country and moving to neighboring countries, but also to Western Europe and the Netherlands, there seems to be unprecedented unity and solidarity. Even in Hungary and Poland, where until recently refugees and also their helpers were denounced and opposed. citizens are called on to show sympathy for the displaced from Ukraine.

Nowhere in the EU is the venomous anti-immigration rhetoric so often heard from populist politicians when large groups of Syrians and Afghans fleeing Assad and the Taliban arrive. But the indifference to the fate of, for example, Eritreans fleeing the brutal dictatorship in their own country, also contrasts sharply with the dozens of applications that citizen initiatives such as Onderdak Ukraine and RoomforUkraine now receive daily from Dutch people who want to receive Ukrainian refugees in their homes. .

Why is it easier to show solidarity with the Ukrainian refugees than with refugees from the Middle East or Africa? And will this new solidarity also lead to a fair European division of responsibilities when it comes to refugees?

Thea Hilhorst, professor of humanitarian aid at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
'Solidarity with refugees from Ukraine is an impressive relief after the indifferent chill that has become increasingly prevalent in recent years. I think we have to go back to the refugee flow from the former Yugoslavia of the 1990s to find a similar response. What's up? Ukrainians are Europeans, our history is intertwined. The shock of the sudden war has the effect of a natural disaster, which always evokes more solidarity than a prolonged conflict.

'The question is what this will mean for all those other refugees. The chill surrounding migration has to do with geographical and cultural distance, habituation, and mistrust. Are they really refugees? It has undertones of racism and Islamophobia. Above all, migration has become a political issue. It is forgotten that research shows time and again that citizens across Europe show more solidarity than their governments. Perhaps this crisis will further fuel solidarity with refugees.

“However, it is also likely that the crisis in Ukraine is diverting attention and resources to refugees from elsewhere. That would be bad news for Afghans, Uyghurs, Syrians, Yemenis and all those other people who have nowhere to go.'

Nanda Oudejans, senior lecturer in philosophy of law at the University of Amsterdam. She obtained her PhD with a dissertation on the international protection of refugees.
'Refugee law is a battleground in which conflicts about identity and the distribution of power are fought. The 1951 UN Refugee Convention was already called a Cold War document: every refugee from the former Eastern Bloc was seen as a sign of the failure of communism and as a victory of the West. The intuition that refugee law revolves around 'The Other', the stranger who disrupts our identity with his arrival, is wrong. Because time and again we appear to be especially willing to receive refugees who look like us. Refugees who look like us are seen as real refugees who deserve our protection.

'Refugee law therefore mainly confirms who and what we are. It is difficult to recognize people fleeing war who are not like us as real refugees worthy of our protection. They belong in the region to which they must return as soon as possible. Contrary to what you might think, our interaction with refugees, after all, perpetuates the dichotomy between our own and the foreign.

"I have little hope that the responsibility we rightly take for Ukrainian refugees will lead to a new solidarity with refugees from other continents."

Leo Lucassen, director of the International Institute of Social History and professor at Leiden University.
'History shows that it is easier to identify with people from the same region and who you think - wrongly or not - have roughly the same culture. Especially if such agreements are emphasized by the media and politicians ('they are Christians'). Closely related to this is that these refugees are the result of a political conflict that affects us directly as a member of the EU and NATO and that has deep roots in the Cold War. There was also a lot of compassion for Hungarians in 1956 and the Czechoslovaks in 1968 who fled the communist regime.

'It is at least as important that we cannot separate this solidarity from the xenophobic and Islamophobic climate of recent decades, in which refugees from Islamic countries or with a different skin color in particular are wrongly portrayed as a major cultural threat. Whether this will lead to new solidarity is therefore highly questionable. The fact-free ideas trumpeted by radical right-wing politicians such as Wilders, Baudet and Eerdmans that half of Africa is about to move in this direction and that refugees with an Islamic background do not share 'our values' – also politically – are already too much. established.'

Eduard Nazarski, former director of the Dutch Council for Refugees and Amnesty International Netherlands.
'In its annual report for 1999, the Council for Refugees noted that the 4,000 Kosovars in the Netherlands who had fled the Serbian violence and the NATO bombing were bombarded with attention and hugs. Now we see a similar compassion towards people fleeing Ukraine. Common factor in these situations: a common enemy, a clear aggressor. This factor applies much less to other situations of war or oppression. That is why I do not think that the now usual anti-migration discourse will give way to solidarity with all refugees, although refugee law prescribes this.

'It is conceivable that the EU is now entering a phase where the stalled discussion about the redistribution of refugees will receive a new impulse. That discussion started from the northwest of the EU, and led to a situation where the southern countries were left on their own. If indeed several million people are going to flee Ukraine, then Poland and Hungary, hitherto staunchly against redistribution, will urge other countries to take some people over. Perhaps that will finally lead to practical and fair agreements about the distribution of all refugees.'

I have always been uncomfortable by some calling for our political parties to look more like those in Europe

A giant FUCK NO to that. My sisters are free to cover their heads if they so choose over here. Unfortunately not the same in these utopias that some of these lilies try to tell me we should try and emulate.

I get the "not surprised" part, but I fail to see the link with head coverings and European vs American (assuming "over here" is the USA) political parties. Who's calling Ukraine an utopia to be emulated???

That many western euro nations are passing.

Decade or so.

They've adopted laws like the ban on "headcoverings" in public places, which is obviously aimed at the increasingly black and brown Hijab-wearing migrants. "Headcoverings" in quotes because that is what Norweigans or the French would tell you. When WE know better what that is.

More recently, Polish politicians were spouting xenophobic b.s. directed at the Iraqi refugees in the recent Belarus-Poland border crisis.

These attitudes toward the "browning" of their countries are pretty much true across Europe. And unfortunately isn't limited to any one country.

My point is, there is no European Utopia that WE should model ourselves after. They have some laws and ways of doing things I like, yes. But I just have some follow up questions.

I was just confused because eastern European countries like Poland and Ukraine are quite different from western European countries like France or the Netherlands (where I'm from). Political parties run the gamut from deeply racist to anti-racist.

And while many European countries introduced laws against face covering attire*, hijabs are mostly legal**. Ironically enough I'm not aware of any laws regarding either face coverings or other religious garb in Ukraine. I sincerely doubt they'd ban hijabs because head coverings are worn by lots of (older) women there. Their word for grandmother (babushka) actually is synonymous to a style of headscarf!

This all isn't to say that Ukraine or Europe isn't racist or anti-Muslim, or should be emulated politically (although you should definitely ditch your electoral system in favor of ours). I'm just trying to explain why your statements confused me, and hopefully illustrate that the situation is pretty complex and multi-faceted, especially when comparing Western and Eastern Europe (where Muslims have often been part of society for much longer than in the West).

* not trying to obscure the anti-Muslim sentiment that birthed some of these laws, just stating what they entail
** afaik, the French have stricter laïcité (secularism) laws that ban hijab from public institutions/schools/etc., and in the Netherlands there's currently debate surrounding police officers with visible religious clothing

EDIT because I confused East and West.

Mostly all wear head scarfs.

It's part of why I immediately smelled bullshit when people started discussing whether hijabs and other Muslim garb should be allowed in the oh so secular Netherlands.

Russia is probably the richest country in the world when it comes
to natural resources, and its oil is higher in quality than any other country.
50 percent of Europe depends on it, and even though America produces
it’s own oil, and most of its imported oil comes from Canada, Mexico and
SA, its refineries can’t use those grades of oil.

USA refineries require sulfur based oil, and since Russia’s oil has a high content
of sulfur, the USA must import oil from Russia or their refineries will be fucked.
They could get similar oil from Venezuela or Iran, but they have sanctions against
those countries....,LOL

If you think the USA, UK and NATO are not trying to own or take over Russia, then I have a unicorn to give you. Ukraine is just a proxy. America and NATO have been
pushing farther and farther towards Russian territory.

From Gadaffi to Saddam, we have seen this movie before....but there is one big difference, it’s Russia. Japan refused to surrender during WW2, so America nuked
them.....whole different situation when a country can nuke back effectively.

There are no good guys here.....zero

Like these takes are deeply deeply dumb.

Is the theory the US and NATO goaded Russia into invading Ukraine so that we can invade Russia? How Sway?

I mean did you miss the part of the last 70 years where Russia and the US have been in a cold war, which is the opposite of an hot war where there would be an invasion, because Russia has Nukes?

I am deeply curious, not rhetorical, what youtube video did you watch that put this all together for you?





**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Hell, most of the American wars after WW2 were proxies.

Korean War - proxy
Vietnam - Proxy
Afghan -proxy
Contra War- proxy

Basically, Russia vs America.

This Ukraine situation is no different. This is a proxy. With so many countries around
Russia joining NATO, and Ukraine wanting to join NATO, as well as America and
the U.K. assisting Ukraine with launching attacks against Russians in the Ukraine,
Putin had zero choice.

This wasn’t something that fell out of the sky. Russia warned NATO and Ukraine months
and weeks ago.

America has slowly been doing the same thing to China, setting up bases
in neighboring territories.

Do you understand that after WW2 territories that were owned or belonging to Germany,
were equally divided by America and Russia. The half that was taken by America was
influenced by Democracy and the other half was influenced Communism, and the destiny between both countries were pretty much set in stone...

However, America has mostly been the agitator popping up where ever and whenever
Russia goes to war. Prime example was Afghanistan. That was a region where Russia
had a partnership with the Democratic Party of Afghanistan, then , suddenly, the
leader was assassinated. America put a puppet leader in place and paid
and supplied extreme Muslim groups to uprise against the Russians, all the while
lying to its own Congress about participating in the war.

And don’t even get me started on America killing Patrice Lamumba to keep the Russians out of the Congo, who was going to help Patrice to keep Belgium out of
the Congo and give it back to the Africans. America didn’t care. They just didn’t want
Russia have it.....

You better learn your damn history and know what’s going on here....you clearly
don’t have a clue.

Because we all know the United States can not go into direct warfare with RUSSIA. The US can not take over or own Russia. That's why what you wrote is some dumb.

It can't be done now because Russia has nukes. Before Nukes it couldn't be done because Russia is so massive, so far away, so dispersed and so cold. Hitler and Napoleon found out the hard way.

You talking to me like you need to explain the cold war to me (which includes all the proxy wars you tried to explain to me) but it really takes only the most basic understanding of the cold war to understand ain't nobody trying to take over Russia.

The only people who think the US is trying to take over Russia is you, the person who made the youtube video you watched to form this dumb opinion and Putin.

Please man. Read a book. Leave the youtube videos alone.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

forces in Russia’s orbit are just for shits and giggles?

Got it

If you don’t understand how America uses peripheral countries to get
control of a region or territory or to keep other countries from developing,
the I feel sorry for you.

SMH.

and if you don’t already know it, America runs NATO.

Do you think the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact wouldn’t have done the same thing as NATO and expanded westward?

Also, NATO membership is a two way street. A country has to apply and be voted in, so all this eastward expansion was due to countries like Poland, Latvia, Romania, etc wanting to join NATO.

You’re proving my point. It’s all about region control either way you look at it.

So Russia is just protecting its orbit, right?

Just like America was protecting it’s orbit when Russia popped up in
Central America looking to control the Panama Canal and partner
with the Latins.

No?

Can’t have it both ways.

Yes, the US, Russia, Britain, everyone has done terrible things in the past at times in the name of security and foreign policy. That doesn’t give Russia a pass to go into Ukraine, unprovoked for something that might but hasn’t happen, like Ukraine entering NATO or the EU.

when Russia was at its absolutely weakest to take it over now? We are going to do that through Ukraine of all countries? That’s what you’re going with? Lay off the Hoe Rogan podcast and QAnon Reddit threads, it’s bad for your brain.

Let me see if I got the timeline correct.

1. Install ex-KGB asshole Putin
2. Wait a decade or two for him to start eyeballing ex Soviet territories
3. Ignore several wars (including annexing Crimea) and keep doing business with Putin
4. Do nothing while he builds up troops along Ukrainian border
5. Impose limp-dicked sanctions when he finally invades Ukraine
6. Impose actual somewhat functional sanctions and supply weapons to Ukraine when the limp-dicked sanctions fail to do anything
7. (Presumably) Wait for Russia to tire itself out in the Ukrainian mud
8. (Presumably) Invade the largest country in the world that also happens to be a nuclear super power
9. (Presumably) Drill for oil in a post-nuclear wasteland and realize there's no one left alive to sell it to?

I do find it interesting that some people only have one framework, worldview, mode of analysis of the world and if events don't fit into that framework, well, they just going to make them fit.

Russia is a bad actor here. And literally the world is in agreement about that. But I've seen a lot of people on twitter who can't discuss this topic without interpreting these events through American Imperialism is the root cause of everything bad. And even the best NATO expansionism is bad really have a hard time using that argument to justify Russia's invasion of another country.

It's a sort of a variation of an All Lives Matter type of argument because many people are having a hard time saying Russia did something bad period (without tacking on a "But the US does a lot of bad stuff too" argument).
.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

while at the same time exploiting people who are so desperate to know better than the rest that they'll ignore what is right in front of them in favor of some social media troll's whataboutisms.

It would be funny if it weren't so fucking sad.

That convinced you of all this bullshit.

Put everything else aside and think amount the relative amount of restraint the US is showing here.

Seriously...just think about this logically.


The US/NATO are banking everything on sanctions for a very good reason.


I'm worried/starting to think that they won't be enough, but that is besides the point. I also think more severe sanctions should have happened a long time ago, but again, besides the point here.


All you have to do is think about the situation for 5 minutes tops and you'd realize everything you typed out is bullshit and whoever convinced you of it is not to be trusted.

that dude stay on the wrong side of everything.

and I mean EVERYTHING.

сначала американцы захватывают Аляску, потом приезжают в Россию и крадут мой чрезвычайно длинный стол. таких столов в Америке нет.

but let these nimrods tell it

this is conspiracy theory.

this 40 mile convoys are easy targets

and what happened to their air support?

I know Russia has the size and all the advantages but they still seem lazy and unprepared for this.

https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1499106921953075203
-----
Russia releases its death toll from Putin’s war against Ukraine: 498 killed, 1597 wounded.
-----

to put it into context...it took america 7 years to reach 500 deaths in afghanistan.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna26080411

and you know russia is lowballing it. its most likely several times higher.

ukraine defense ministry has it at close to 6000.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FM3plBcWYAANHXd?format=jpg&name=large

its prolly somewhere in between (and closer to ukraines numbers).

“its like a conveyer belt, they keep coming and coming.. we feel like butchers”

And also about the same number for Ukrainian soldiers.

I agree that the Russian number seems too low and the Ukrainian too high. The US assessment is probably closer to the real number.

https://twitter.com/RichardEngel/status/1499119611190599686
-----
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
-----

hard to tell whats real and whats gamesmanship but nbc news felt comfortable enough with their sources to report those numbers.

and they still haven’t taken these cities..

I think the number is probably higher.

Also hearing reports of the lack of training and russian soldiers bailing or refusing to carry out orders.

while economy continues to crater, nations keep up their russian money tracing/seizing efforts (will hurt a number of western conservative parties too), and public opinion across the world turning against putin/russia.

imho.

the least shittiest/volatile scenario among plenty of shitty options right now.

it obviously still sucks for ukraine because of the ongoing carnage but if things play out that long...that means ukraine wasnt completely annihilated and has prolly fought russia to a standstill and even gained ground back.

i think under those circumstances putin eventually loses his appetite for this war and the economic damage it does to his country (and his oligarch allies). and we get some type of compromise/concessions that are anywhere close to peace.

https://twitter.com/expatua/status/1499073609024917506
-----
Lavrov now says that it's possible that US created the war in Ukraine to get Russia bogged down in a long war.
-----

seems like reverse psychology for an audience of one (putin).

admin officials and fox news did this shit with trump. convince him that what he wants to do is actually playing into his enemys hands.

it also goes to show that yeah...russia reallyyy doesnt want a long war.

Some kind of new treaty is signed where NATO promises never to add Ukraine or any other countries bordering Russia and Russia withdraws all troops back to the whatever positions they held before last week (Crimea, etc.) Essentially formalize ceding the parts of Ukraine they already took.

here without the war?



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

right now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

https://twitter.com/anders_aslund/status/1499112149263831043
-----
The Dow Jones Russia GDR Index, which tracks London-traded Russian companies, has plunged 98% in two weeks. The slump has wiped out $572 billion from the market value of 23 stocks, including Gazprom PJSC, Sberbank of Russia PJSC and Rosneft PJSC (Bloomberg).
The Putin disaster.
-----

wonder how many finance bros are on social media telling people to buy the dip.

Like don't you stop trading after the first 100 billion is lost?

Or is this a thing that it will immediately bounce back when peace is declared?





**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

subsidiaries im guessing.

your point still stands tho.

one of those companies...sberbank (russias largest bank)...is leaving the european market entirely now.
https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/1499131202237870084


the actual russian stock market is closed for 4 days in a row.
https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1499125122850074624

https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4

UChicago professor blames USA and Germany. Also at end says Russia really is afraid of Neo Nazis… but no mention of USA wanting sulfur rich oil…

This lecture is from 2015

I walked into the wrong classroom and sat through a lecture of his once. He's wild. I grew up hearing people gush about the civilized liberal democratic order, treating it as a clear rupture from a surprisingly recent historic past that was created from a river of blood and ruled from a throne of skulls. It was enlightening to see somebody important and smart look at the world and say "nope. it's blood and skulls all the way down."

Here is the thing. I question earlier the idea of letting Ukraine into NATO and no one has given me a good reason why and your guy and just about everything else I have read has given good reason why not.

So I get that. But this video is 7-ish years old. and he states in the video that there are no plans to let Ukraine into NATO. Has anything changed? I keep wondering what is the inciting event for this invasion and I can't seem to see what red line the west cross recently to spark this.

What does seem to make sense is that Putin grabbed Crimea without any major pushback and he so he making another go at it?

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

he was banking on Trump winning reelection and that didn't happen, so his hopes of NATO ending is over. and he didn't want to wait and see if Trump would win in 2024 so he just started making some demands and flexing his muscle...

spooked by what Azerbaijan did during the Nagorno-Karabakh war in 2020.

>spooked by what Azerbaijan did during the Nagorno-Karabakh
>war in 2020.

What happened in Azerbaijan that worried him?

weapons.

From 47:00 to the end:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/podcasts-and-videos/podcasts/the-lrb-podcast/putin-s-mistake

>https://www.lrb.co.uk/podcasts-and-videos/podcasts/the-lrb-podcast/putin-s-mistake

but this seems interesting, I will try to give it a listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppD_bhWODDc&t=224s

WWII from the discussion of the Ukraine/Russia conflict
AND the Oil
AND NATO courting Ukraine
AND the US funding Right-Wing Neo-Nazis in the Ukraine

makes me skeptical as fuck about this drumbeat to war we're on.

There is no real military solution to this.
Negotiations must happen.

https://youtu.be/iLB086ynKMA

Basically it's self-contradictory as fuck.

the original lecture reminded me of Chris Rock blaming the democrats for the handling of the pandemic because Trump is a 5 year old... LOL!

n/m

https://twitter.com/alexkokcharov/status/1499080826599919633?s=21

You can get up to 15 years for protesting

https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1499368360903073798?s=21

I fear for the people right now.

Arresting an old lady....an old hero survivor of World War II...and going to sit at the dinner table in front of my family as a man. I'd have to off myself.

Russia are hurting them more than they are hurting Russia.

Food and energy prices are soaring due to the disruption of Russian commodities
that NATO countries so desperately need.

As stated, American refineries need Sulfuric based oil in order to
operate properly. America gets all of that grade of oil from Russia.

Potash is a commodity that American farmers need to cultivate their crops..
America is the number 1 importer of Potash, with Canada being number 2

Over 40 percent of Europe’s Gas/Oil comes from Russia.

Russia is also a big producer of Palladium which is a necessary
metal to build automobiles, create dental fillings, and to manufacture
electronic equipment from cellular phones to computer processors.

Russians are not people who live lavish lifestyles, and since Russia is
a tremendously self-sustaining country due to the numerous amounts
of resources that it produces, they could drag this war out for a long time.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/food-and-energy-prices-likely-to-surge-further-due-to-russia-sanctions-ing-150822165.html

"i don't know" is clearly not in his vocabulary.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

sure, prices are going up tor some resources but ummm, the Russian currency is trash amd the banks are closing.

Russians are hurting like shit right now.

The € hasn't crashed though, there's no bank runs and we're not getting fucking arrested for saying war is bad.

Pretty much everyone here (except of course for far right assholes getting their paychecks from Russia) thinks it's worth it to draw a line for Russian aggression.

when America has/will do the same stuff, so for America to be hollering war crimes
and sanctions is quite funny to me, and a huge double standard. UN told America not
to invade Iraq and that the war would be illegal and a major breach of international polices....America invaded anyway.

I personal believe that proper politics and government sit somewhere in the middle
of democracy and communism....Both countries illegally invade and kill to push
their agendas and their philosophies.

Джордж Буш такой же, как Сталин.

https://twitter.com/nikamelkozerova/status/1499409153323945986?s=21

They are saying it’s not likely to explode but still it seems pretty dangerous.

https://twitter.com/slavamalamud/status/1499562711830736928?s=21

https://twitter.com/mrkovalenko/status/1499563412812091400?s=21

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-03-22/index.html

https://twitter.com/jbwolfsthal/status/1499549822713569282?s=

on them.

He probably wants to punish them by making much of the country uninhabitable - Chernobyl part 2. This has to be some type of war crime.

Watch til the end.

https://twitter.com/shilpakannan/status/1499360579051560966?s=21

https://twitter.com/polinaivanovva/status/1499716111188860928?s=21

Invading a sovereign neighbor. But also calling for Good relations

and is determined to take everyone with him

.

condemn Russia for their onslaught. India hit their asses with their own medicine.

“India talked about the importance of "the UN Charter, international law, and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states," while also offering medical assistance to Ukraine, but did not clearly speak out against Russia.”

America looked the other way when Italy invaded Ethiopia or when
bodies were been decapitated in Rwanda, now they are getting mad
at Countries who choose to sit on the sidelines and not get involved
in the affairs of other countries.

Is that how foreign policy is done under Biden?

I would think that India's position on this might be expected, and the reaction of the US government a simple matter of strategy, no?

https://twitter.com/skyandyhughes/status/1499863194575200268?s=21

And THIS is what you’re focused on

You need better information. Get as CLOSE to the sources as possible.

This is WILD…

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/05/sports/basketball/russia-brittney-griner.html

Russia Says It Has American Basketball Player in Custody

A Russian news agency identified Phoenix Mercury center Brittney Griner as the American women’s basketball player detained in Russia after customs officials said they found hashish oil in her luggage at an airport.Credit...Paul Beaty/Associated Press
The Russian Federal Customs Service said Saturday that its officials had detained an American basketball player after finding vape cartridges that contained hashish oil in her luggage at the Sheremetyevo airport near Moscow.

The Customs Service said in a statement that the player had won two Olympic gold medals with the United States, but it did not release the player’s name. The Russian news agency TASS, citing a law enforcement source, identified the player as Brittney Griner, a seven-time W.N.B.A. All-Star center for the Phoenix Mercury. Griner, 31, won gold medals with the U.S. women’s national basketball team in 2021 and 2016.

The Customs Service released a video of a traveler at the airport who appeared to be Griner, wearing a mask and black sweatshirt, going through security. The video showed an individual removing a package from the traveler’s bag.

According to the statement, a criminal case has been opened into the large-scale transportation of drugs, which can carry a sentence of up to 10 years behind bars in Russia. The basketball player was taken into custody while the investigation was ongoing, the officials said.

The one who def deserved the benefit of the doubt a few weeks ago

part of me is obviously empathetic because this shit is hell to go through.

but also...you know damn well you cant be doing drugs in these foreign countries mayne. you damn sure cant be smuggling drugs or paraphernalia on planes.

this shit is an age old story.

for all we know...these could be false charges russia used for various reasons...racial, political, etc.

gonna wait to hear from brit or someone associated with her.

way before the war started.

And she has been playing in Russia for serval years, as well as other Americans.

Russia doesn’t play when it comes to narcotics. They have a hard stance
against it.

But I’m sure the media will use this as some type of Russia holding
Americans hostage type of stuff....and Russia will also push its
agenda on Americans being dirty drug heads.

Main focus should be on getting Griner home if that’s possible....just
like here reps stated.

its interesting that we didnt hear about it for weeks while brits folks (and other americans) were trying to quietly seek a resolution to the situation and get her out.

but russian state news service tass (aka putin) were the folks who strategically leaked her identity out *now*.

no ulterior motive im sure...

https://twitter.com/mfa_russia/status/1500182315112321028?s=21

Also, people ARE being held hostage.

https://twitter.com/ninadschick/status/1500256568163581955?s=21

All you have to do is go to YouTube.

It was basically a customs/airport search. She is sitting on the side when they
found the cartridges, then she signs a claim form. It was calm as hell.

She wasn’t in handcuffs.

One of the sports agents talked about the situation on ABC, and stated that
her situation was separate from other athletes he helped to leave.

All other players had no issues with leaving Russia.....so it appears that -from the airline footage - (got the cannabis while in Russia?) and it was discovered when she tried to leave

It just so happened weeks before the invasion....

Not sure how she gets out. The agent couldn’t provide anymore details,
and said her situation was very serious. But he also sounded somewhat
positive, stating that she has good people in her corner and that she
has good representation over there.

https://youtu.be/2_Jfx9rOfic

I imagine with her playing in Russia for so many years, and the associations she has,
and the power that sports club have because their owned by wealthy owners.....
I think she will be okay in the long run.

Long track record of doing so

It’s also starting to sound like you call him daddy

the invasion started?

Other players have been able to leave with no issues. The footage shows her
going up to security to get her bags checked, and they show the checking of the bag,
and the discovery of cannabis.

It’s basically a neutral incident that occurred while conflict is ongoing.....

Now I imagine it will get special attention from both sides due to the conflict.

My only question is did she get the cannabis in America and flew to Russia with it,
or did she get it In Russia?

If she got it in Russia, I can see Russian officers interrogating her to give up
her connections.....

you made it sound like the start of the war was a line in the sand.

This could be a case of keeping a well known American Basketball player (prolly popular
in Russia) knowing the war was going to start soon.

Why didn’t we hear about this back when it happened?

https://youtu.be/FQ4hvLqNfqo

?

.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/04/business/lukoil-end-war/index.html

Russia's second largest oil company has broken ranks with President Vladimir Putin.

Lukoil, which produces more than 2% of the world's crude oil and employs over 100,000 people, has called for an end to Russia's war in Ukraine.

The company's board of directors said in a statement to shareholders, staff and customers that it was "calling for the soonest termination of the armed conflict."

https://twitter.com/hackingbutlegal/status/1500465032966062082

Netflix: fuck you

https://twitter.com/kevinrothrock/status/1500578395083657224?s=21

https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/netflix-suspends-service-russia-ukraine-invasion-1235197390/

Amex also stopped working in Russia. It’s turning back into the USSR but not in the way Putin wanted
Lmao.

i wonder if the oligarchs and various corporate interests in russia actually stand up to putin in some way since they benefited from globalization and being part of the modern world to some degree...and putin just up and pulled the rug from under them in a week.

If other nations don't have short memories.

To me, it seems inevitable that Ukraine will fall sooner or later. Russia just has too many resources.

But if Russia is worried about NATO expansion/ Western Europe influence, that has gotten significantly worse. As much as Trump tried to weaken NATO, it appears to be stronger than ever now. And other "neutral" countries like Denmark, Sweden, and Finland are considering membership.
More former Soviet countries are looking to join the EU.

And they are about to economically and geopolitically isolated. Businesses are pulling out and/or refusing to do business with Russia. Their currency is crumbling. They refuse to open up the stock market. Frenemies like Turkey are siding against Russia. Their only major friend appears to be China.


If everybody doesn't immediately forget about this in a few weeks when the military operation is over, Russia is in big trouble.

Ironically, I think they could've avoided all this if Russia would have been more competent militarily. If Russia would have swiftly taken control, it would have quickly blown over (like they're other actions on Ukraine). The fact that this dragged on forced others to make moves.

resources needed for occupation because4 the Ukrainian people have shown and proved that they ain't having it. Any narrative Putin tried to push in terms of "liberating" Ukraine from a western puppet government is shot because the people are clearly not with him. And on top of that he's starting to lose his own Russian people since so many of them have family in the Ukraine...

And its not a rhetorical question because maybe you can. What's the deal with all the other Russian client states? Are they cool with being Russian Client states? If giving the choice would they leave and want to join the EU?

If the trains start running again do you just stop caring that your country was invaded and taking over Russia?

What are the modern parallels?

Because yeah I think Ukraine will eventually fall (and the media is slightly irresponsible for not talking about that as the far likely outcome), but then what?



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Ukrainians fucking HATE Putin now, even more-so than before. I dont know how he ever expected to incorporate Ukraine back into the fold. None of this makes sense from a victory standpoint. Even if he wins, he's destroying the Russian economy and cant hold Ukraine anyway.

Any puppet/pro Russian government is going to meet with a lot more resistance and insurgency than the US encountered in either Iraq or Afghanistan. That means Russian troops will have to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely.

At least when the US went to Iraq and Afghanistan, a good portion of those countries didn’t like Taliban or Saddam. However, that’s not the case with Ukraine, as the whole country is basically united against Putin/Russia now and have rallied around Zelensky and the Ukrainian government.

Russia has only pushed Ukraine further toward the west, EU and NATO now. Once Russia leaves Ukraine and Ukraine has its own government again, they will go hard for EU and NATO membership.

NATO would slowly grow eastward, limiting his own options and sphere of influence,, regardless of Russian activities. So why not take Ukraine while it’s feasible?

But this will ensure NATO expansion. It’s the Streisand effect of wars.

As to whether its worth the cost for an unknown chance to control Ukraine to an unknown degree, that’s way past my ability to know.

https://www.newsweek.com/videos-show-russian-soldiers-looting-banks-grocery-stores-ukraine-1683027

I don’t have a link that you couldn’t already find for yourself.

I’m taking a mental health break for a day or two.

when there is a war going on

When it's provably false that any prez (Bush or Biden) has that much control over rising gas prices.

Fucking stupid ass country.

Was a good one. Hopefully the Dems and Biden can stay on message with that and drill that into American voters minds.

Who am I kidding, the American voting public are dumb as dirt and it won’t matter.

to cut off oil from Russia so they can blame Russia for the price increase

shit makes no sense. We are on the brink of WW3 and these fools think Biden is to blame for oil prices?

fucking weirdos.

So tired of Americans and their need to blame a politician for anything that happens in their life.

western embargo on Russian imported oil. Russia stated that
if America moves forward with a ban on importing Russian oil, they
will cut off all energy supplies to European countries.

Russia will fully absorb Ukraine. It’s just a matter of time, and it will create
a huge ripple effect, where within the next 3 years China will look to
take over Taiwan.

History definitely repeats itself. This century will have its World War.

https://eand.co/is-this-world-war-iii-eed6d0e2dec1

Is This World War III?
If You Don’t Understand We’re At War, You Haven’t Been Paying Attention

umair haque

Is this the beginning of World War III? The answer to that question goes like this: no, it’s closer to the middle. Maybe about a third of the way through, to be accurate. World War III began quite a while ago, and not nearly enough attention was paid, because part of the point was subterfuge, to unravel our societies in a hidden, covert manner.

If we think about war in modern terms, World War III is what’s called a “hybrid war.” That means it’s not just about guns, but about information. Not even just cyberwar, but propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, about taking societies apart while they’re not even aware of it.

The three stages of this World War go like this. One, destabilization. Two, local war. Three, world war. And we’re at the end of stage one, at the beginning of stage two. That is why I say we’re about a third of the way into World War III.

This is the point that journalist Carol Cadwalladr recently made on Twitter: “I think we may look back on this as the first Great Information War. Except we’re already 8 years in. The first Great Information War began in 2014. The invasion of Ukraine is the latest front. And the idea it doesn’t already involve us is fiction, a lie.”
Let’s take each of these phases one by one, so you really understand what is playing out on the geopolitical stage today — and what comes next.

Do you remember the story of the Trojan Horse? Troy accepted it as a gift, knowing full it shouldn’t have — because it was a gift to their gods, fine and beautiful. It was made irresistible by the Greeks. A Trojan horse was delivered to our societies in the West — one that glittered, too. It was made of Russian money, Russian oil, resources, finances. And we accepted it, without a second thought.

That was just after the fall of the USSR, as Putin came to power, in the late 2000s or so. What happened next? Our societies in the West began to destabilize, badly. A new far right movement began to emerge. It gained power and ascended in influence. Where had it come from? Nobody could quite say. And yet it spoke literally the language of Putin’s philosophers — figures like Dugin and Ilyin, who called for a “planetary confrontation” against “globalists” and spoke of the soil belonging to the pure of blood and true of faith.

This new far right movement had seemingly emerged from nowhere all across the West. From America to Britain to France and beyond. Mighty coincidence, no? An even bigger coincidence that it spoke the literal language of Putinism. An even bigger coincidence that it deployed the Kremlin’s Orwellian “firehose” model of propaganda: gaslight reality, turn it inside out, call the peaceful people the Nazis and fascists, call freedom the enemy of peace, bombard innocent people with those messages a million times a day on Facebook and Twitter. Carpet-bomb them with the inversion of reality — War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength — until their weary minds, baffled, finally gave out…and gave in.

What a coincidence. Of course, it was no coincidence at all. That the far right had suddenly emerged in the West all at once, in unison, like a choir of idiocy. That hate had begun to proliferate like a pandemic, and a kind of bilious populist rage was shaking the foundations of the Western world. That it used tactics from a literal Kremlin propaganda manual. As we know now, all this was funded, financed, organized, and coordinated by Russia.
But back then? The West was still innocent. That the first stages of World War III were beginning. Instead of worrying about these obvious links, the West still revelled in the easy money oligarchs gave it, as they bought up entire districts like Mayfair and Chelsea, and straddled Cannes and Nice in their superyachts. The West was still seduced by how the Trojan horse glittered and shone — even as the soldiers poured out.

What happened next? The attacks began. The big ones. All the disinformation and propaganda that was by now being poured across the West like a great toxic oil slick had a point. And now Russia smiled, and flicked a match.
It interfered in a US Presidential election. It hacked Hillary’s emails — this is a fact, a real one — and leaked them. The US media, credulous, fell for it. Meanwhile, at the same time, Russia had backed Trump, literally elevating him as a national security priority in perhaps its biggest intelligence operation ever, coordinated across all its spy agencies. Don’t believe me? Don’t remember? Let’s review the leaked Kremlin memo.

“‘It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate election to the post of US president…This would help bring about Russia’s favoured ‘theoretical political scenario.’ A Trump win ‘will definitely lead to the destabilisation of the US’s sociopolitical system’ and see hidden discontent burst into the open, predicts.”

“After the meeting, according to a separate leaked document, Putin issued a decree setting up a new and secret interdepartmental commission. Its urgent task was to realise the goals set out in the “special part” of document No 32–04 \ vd.

“Members of the new working body were stated to include Shoigu, Fradkov and Bortnikov. Shoigu was named commission chair. The decree — ukaz in Russian — said the group should take practical steps against the US as soon as possible. These were justified on national security grounds and in accordance with a 2010 federal law, 390-FZ, which allows the council to formulate state policy on security matters.
“According to the document, each spy agency was given a role. The defence minister was instructed to coordinate the work of subdivisions and services. Shoigu was also responsible for collecting and systematising necessary information and for ‘preparing measures to act on the information environment of the object.’”
Conclusion?

“Putin has repeatedly denied accusations of interfering in western democracy. The documents seem to contradict this claim. They suggest the president, his spy officers and senior ministers were all intimately involved in one of the most important and audacious espionage operations of the 21st century: a plot to help put the ‘mentally unstable’ Trump in the White House.

“The papers appear to set out a route map for what actually happened in 2016.
“A matter of weeks after the security council meeting, GRU hackers raided the servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and subsequently released thousands of private emails in an attempt to hurt Clinton’s election campaign.”
We have actual evidence that all this happened. It’s not some kind of fantasy scenario.

Russia interfered in an American Presidential Election. That is a major, major attack. It is an act of war for a sovereign nation to do something like that, to try to literally install a puppet leader. To try and unravel a democracy. It is an attack on a society’s critical systems, just like, for example, attacking its water supply or food supply or dropping a bomb on its power systems — because democracy, of course, is a critical system to us in the West.

And yet nothing happened. Nothing much has still happened. And I’m leaving aside the obvious — which is that Fox News and such far right organizations are all obvious means of Russian “firehose” propaganda, too.

Can you imagine what should have happened? Having seen that our literally leadership and democracies were under serious and critical attack, we should have, in the West, done all this then — all the sanctions on the oligarchs, all the cutting of business ties, all the elimination of Russian money and influence from our societies. Had we done that then, Ukraine — and the rest of us — might not be in this position now.

At the same time, just as Trump was being elevated in a literal Russian intelligence operation, coordinated across all its spy agencies, another major attack was taking place. Brexit. The objective of this attack was to split Britain from the West, and reduce it to a pale shadow of a world power. It was to use hate and rage to divide it, scapegoating Europe. We have evidence that Russian money backed Brexit — and at the time, plenty pointed out that it was sold to British people literally, again, using Russia’s “firehose” model of propaganda.

Reality was turned inside out. Gentle Europeans, Britain’s longtime allies and friends, were painted as everything from selfish to vain to cruel and stupid warmongers and worse. The average Brit was told obvious lies like they’d receive hundreds of millions of pounds a week. From who? For what? Or that Britain would be able to strike trade deals like some kind of glorious empire. With who? For what? Today, in reality, even America’s turned Britain down, and it’s having to go, hat in hand, to individual states in America, begging for some morsel of trade.

And yet because these Big Lies were bombarded at Brits a million times a day on Facebook and Twitter…enough of them fell into a kind of delusional mania, a frenzy of rage and hate…at their European neighbours.

Who was the obvious beneficiary of this? Russia. To split Britain up from the EU and NATO was to weaken in the West in critical ways. And yet, just like Trump’s rigged elevation to power, astonishingly, all this was allowed to proceed without much of a second thought.
Russia hadn’t just interfered in an American Presidential election. Now it had interfered in a European referendum. In a referendum that was to decide the future of EU-British relations for a lifetime. It had attacked that referendum, and turned it inside out, manipulating its result to its own end.

Britain was even more clueless than America — because the Trojan Horse glittered that much more brightly, the oligarchs pouring money into London, buying football clubs, snatching up fine country mansions. Britain needed the money. It looked the other way. And Russia wrecked its future.

Interestingly, just as Americans still don’t want to admit, by and large, that Russia installed Trump, even though the literal evidence is right there before them, so too Brits are reluctant to admit Brexit was essentially Russia’s creation. Denial is a powerful drug, and nobody wants to admit they were made a fool of.

But that is exactly what happened, and worse. Russia attacked the West. In major, spectacular fashion. It literally shaped the future of the West for a decade, and we are still feeling the effects of its success at manipulating us. It corroded us from the inside. To install an American President and split Britain from the EU? It’s the single greatest intelligence feat in history — since the Trojan Horse — twice over.

This was the destabilisation phase of the war. And of course this was war. Coordinated attacks like this, on the West’s key leaders, America and Britain? Today, Britain is a laughingstock — but it wasn’t so long ago. Coordinated attacks like that, major ones, aimed at destroying a society’s critical systems, which in the West’s case aren’t just food or water or energy but democracy, are war. Russia was declaring war on us — but we were too seduced by its Trojan horse to even notice.

The truth, sadly, is that we are still destabilized. Look at America — Americans might support Ukraine. But millions upon millions of them believe in the Big Lies that the election was “stolen” from Trump. Every indication is that they’ll back him in the next election. And then what? Boris might talk a good game — but he’s still compromised, as is his party, by Russian influence and money. They still back Brexit ardently. How much unity is ever really possible between Britain and Europe again? In the long run? Trade is still at a standstill. Brits, many of them, still despise Europeans. Relations are still soured, and both sides don’t trust each other.

Destabilization. We are living its consequences. Our societies might be coming together to support Ukraine, and that’s a good feeling. But just think of two weeks ago. How bitterly divided we were — over everything, from Covid to elections to finances. Think of how crazy and ambitious and deluded our right wings had become — bilious with rage, openly supremacist. That is where we were, and are in the long term. Russia’s destabilisation worked.

And it is betting that as the costs of war become apparent to us — inflation, fewer resources, shortages, turmoil, refugees — we will break.

That brings to this phase. Local war. Russia’s attacked Ukraine. You can see how this works. In the beginning, it made some mistakes. A sense of hope dawned. Now it is going for all out war. Cluster bombs and thermobaric weapons are fired on civilians. Putin is happy to go full Assad on his neighbours and cousins, to reduce Ukraine to Syria.
Why is he doing that? Is he “crazy,” as our own intelligence analysts wonder? No, he isn’t crazy. He’s making an example of Ukraine. He is warning: this is what happens if you resist. Total devastation. Crimes against humanity. Cluster bombs and being burned alive.

Why is he sending that warning? Well, why did he spend decades trying to destabilise the West?
Both of those critical facts are telling you something even more critical: he’s not going to stop here.

You don’t spend a decade or more taking the risk of destabilising nations like America and Britain for nothing. You don’t even to do it to win Ukraine. You only do that if you want to go much, much further than that. To build an empire. That is exactly what Putin has already told us he wants to do, in his speech declaring war on Ukraine — and his “brains,” like Dugin, have told us that many times before. Dugin speaks of a “planetary confrontation.”

That means a world war.

Putin is using Ukraine as a warning. He is making an example of it for a reason. You don’t make examples of a nation or use it as a warning if you don’t plan to go further. This point should be clearly understood. He is trying to teach the world — and the rest of the former Soviet Union, and Europe in particular — this is what happens if you resist. Total war. Civilian death on a mass scale. It’s better for you to submit.

Putin sending that warning is a clear sign that he is quite happy to go to the next phase — world war. He won’t stop at Ukraine. But will he test NATO’s borders? Making an example of Ukraine is meant to send to exactly that message.

Putin is warning us that nothing matters to him. Nothing. Not innocent lives on our side. Not lives on his side. Not his economy, not his oligarchs, not their fortunes, not public opinion. Nothing. The only thing that matters to him is his goal. His goal is to establish a Third Reich for Russia, which stretches into the heart of Central Europe. That empire is a fascist one. Just as his favourite thinker Ilyin, a Christian Fascist called for. It is a spear aimed at the heart of a decadent, “globalist” West, as his “brain” Dugin wants. The aim of that empire is to destroy us.

Yes. This is World War III.

Think of World War II for a moment. What if we’d stopped Hitler at the Anschluss or the Sudetenland? History would have been different. The thing we call World War II now might not have ever happened at all. So what would we have called all that, then? Hitler’s War? Germany’s Invasion Period? Something like that, maybe.

The same thing is happening now. This is World War III. The hybrid war started long ago, major attacks on the West literally tearing its leading democracies to shreds, ripping Britain away from the EU, reducing America to a failed state led by a puppet. The next phase of the war — local war, military war — is starting. After that will come the phase of military world war. Hitler will continue invading Europe — sorry, I mean Putin — from Estonia to Latvia to Poland. NATO will have to step in. Russia will use it’s tactical “backpack” nukes. NATO will be obliged to respond. It will escalate out of control.
And yet if we stop it here, history might not call it World War III. It might just call it “Putin’s Fall.”

We must learn the lesson now, finally, once and for all. The Trojan horse is a legend of history for a reason. No society should be foolish enough to accept a gift from another which has committed to end its very existence, no matter how such a gift glitters and shines. It will only contain the poisons of war, death, and ruin.
We made the same mistake Troy did. And we are paying the price, just like it did. Soldiers are pouring out. Weapons are reducing our cities to ruin.

This is war, my friends.

It has been for more than a decade now.
You are going to be part of it, too, soon enough, whether you like it or not.
Because in this war? We are all going to have to choose a side, and fight for it.
And at this juncture, it’s super important to be aware of what really happened. To us. To the West. We were destabilized. That was the first phase of what was to become a brewing World War. Because just as the propaganda and disinformation had a point — destabilization, so too, the destabilisation itself had a point.
Umair
March 2022

right now than WWIII.

we can't say that we are currently in World War III, but if things go a certain way I agree with the conclusion that history would look back on the War not starting with this conflict, but the war of misinformation that was used by Russia to destabilize the West.

What super country hasn’t interfered with another country’s election to have
better relations?

I’m more of a socialist, so I’m not on any particular side.

The election situation has zero to do with where things are now. This situation
has been brewing way before then; and all of it has to do with resources and
territorial control. It always does.

America surrounding Russia and China by creating relations with neighboring
countries has been an issue for years, and as NATO expands and grows,
countries that oppose will become agitated which will lead to aggression.

Russia, China and India have strong relations. India is a non-aligning country and
refuses to align with any alliance. They want neutrality and their interest comes first.
All three countries are top 5 in Nuclear power, territory and population.

2 communistic countries, and 1 neutral country aren’t going to simply sit still while
an alliance pushes to control and influence all regions.

Not going to happen, Chico

There will be dead bodies and bloody wars

WW1 and WW2 led to the separation and breaking up of kingdoms, leading to
many new states and countries.

WW3 will be in reverse....Russia, China,etc will look to reclaim territories and
countries that were previously a part of their states.

>Russia interfered in an American Presidential Election. That
>is a major, major attack.

I know, right?

It’s shocking just how most Americans are oblivious to world history.

We have decades of Vladimir's precedent that he's set.

So when he amassed an army on a border of a former Soviet Republic, we knew who the aggressor was. It was quite.. obvious.


Sorry that the corporate military industrial complex doesn't fit into your usual talking points this time, commie.

if I had to label my political beliefs. I’m just fair and honest when it comes to
assessing and perceiving the history of the world in regards to politics and
and war.

I was merely pointing out to you that America influenced and interfered with the
elections in Russia after the Soviet Union collapsed, and have influenced and
controlled the installment of leaders and rulers in several regions and countries.

People are murdered, abused, and discriminated against by police officers and racist individuals within the ethnic communities of America, but I don’t see US companies or
government penalizing or punishing those individuals. African countries have
been pummeled and destroyed without any support from European countries or America, so forgive me if I see the political conflict between Ukraine and Russia
as a foreign affair that is none of our business.

When America invades and demolishes regions, it’s observed as a necessity to
preserve and protect freedom and democracy, but when a country like Russia implements those some military actions, it’s perceived as an evil empire?

America wants to be the ultimate super power and dictate the rules of war,
but it doesn’t work like that, and it never will.

There must be balance, no side will be greater or more powerful than the other.
Sometimes war is necessary to generate peace, and sometimes peace
is necessary to stop war.....

During World War 2, Russia and America were allies to push out fascism. And
after the war, the two stood as the main superpowers of the world, but both held/hold
governmental systems and ideas that oppose each other, and they push propaganda
against each other to influence the political beliefs of people in other countries and
regions.....

So it’s not about right and wrong, it’s simply about power.

“This particular brand of changing the subject is called "whataboutism" — a simple rhetorical tactic heavily used by the Soviet Union and, later, Russia. And its use in Russia helps illustrate how it could be such a useful tool now, in America. As Russian political experts told NPR, it's an attractive tactic for populists in particular, allowing them to be vague but appear straight-talking at the same time.”

https://www.npr.org/2017/03/17/520435073/trump-embraces-one-of-russias-favorite-propaganda-tactics-whataboutism

Maybe donate to one of the many organizations that are fighting the injustices he describes. They could use the help for real.

But apparently he'd rather keep muddying the waters while whole cities are deliberately being leveled by indiscriminate artillery fire and rocket strikes from the Russians.

Bombing maternity hospitals, entire cities. Shooting at nuclear facilities but he’s rather people believe that the US does the same thing. Btw, I don’t think I’ve seen anyone here say the US is perfect, but to say the US does the exact same things as Russia is simply untrue.

They bombed hospitals and schools, killing children, the elderly, etc. Did you have
that same sensitivity and concern, and did you perceive America as an evil
empire?

Did you want sanctions to be brought up against America and it’s financiers?

Where you in uproar when America interfered in Libya so that they could change the
regime, when Libya was never and has never been a threat to America? Libya’s
leader was killed, and the country hasn’t had stability or civil structure since.

So think about that as you clutch your pearls in regards to the military actions
that Russia is implementing.

You seem to think you're taking some kind of enlightened position here. You're not. You're being a typical self absorbed US-centric Yankee fuck.

military interventions & their consequences felt in America, as America considers intervening in an another foreign country.

On an American website.
Filled with Americans

THE SHEER NERVE OF IT ALL

To be fair, it started out in a dumb way, so I suppose it's only fitting that you're trying to end it in a dumb way as well.

Now excuse me, I have to go watch The Mainstream Media to see what my next opinion will be.

Ukraine since 2014 or so.

And this is aside from the 13.6 billion the US is planning on sending now.

So yeah, America's foreign policy history is extremely relevant here.

Do you think I don't know about Azov at this point? Did you even read the thread before making these inane statements? Have you considered that I couldn't care less about MSN/NBC or other dumbass corporate US news outlets? Do you realize I live on the continent that this conflict is taking place on, while you do your stupid little tankie posting from across the globe? How many languages do you speak? How many Ukrainians or Russians do you know? Do you realize you're parroting Putin talking points? Do you know that RT is a Russian propaganda channel? Are you so fucking monumentally ignorant that you think bending over for Russia's fascist imperialism is somehow preferable to closer ties with the EU and yes, *even* the US and NATO? What the fuck are you trying to accomplish here, while Russian rockets are raining down on hospitals and theaters and millions of refugees are trying to find a safe place in countries like mine? Do you want to talk about the treatment of other refugees? How many have you had in your home? Where do you do your volunteer work?

Yes, they have.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/congress-has-removed-a-ban-on-funding-neo-nazis-from-its-year-end-spending-bill/

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/380483-congress-bans-arms-to-controversial-ukrainian-militia-linked-to-neo-nazis

https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/us-lifts-ban-on-funding-neo-nazi-ukrainian-militia-441884


Fuck a "tankie" you goofy smug bitch.
Fuck a "Putin talking point"
All that self-righteous "how many languages do you speak" fuck shit is completely goddamn irrelevant.

The US has a terrible fucking history funding horrible people in proxy wars with larger countries over resources. We who live in America, have had to contend with that shit for decades in a LOT of ways that you don't have to.

Us sending billions to the Ukraine is a part of that process.

You could speak 15 languages, including Klingon, and those facts would NOT change.

If you don't give a fuck about that fact, and how that has affected us, as Americans, then you can GET THE FUCK ON and quit trying to fucking police our conversation you goddamn clown

And I wish the fuck I might WOULD host a Ukrainian refugee in my home, lol

Eat a dick

* There are Nazis in Ukraine.
* There are Nazis in Russia.
* The majority of the Ukrainian people aren't Nazis. They want closer ties with the EU and more democracy, which is very much not a Nazi thing to want. Rightwing extremist political representation is actually lower than in many Western countries.
* Ukraine is being attacked by Russia because of this turn towards democracy and the West (and because Putin is an insane imperialist)
* Ukraine fights back and unfortunately can't afford to tell their Nazis not to fight the Russian invaders.
* Ukraine gets weapons from its allies, which means those Nazis get some as well. Fucked up but less fucked up than the alternative.
* Putin (who's been backing rightwing extremism across the globe and has Nazis fighting on his behalf as well) uses the Azov battalion's existence to legitimize his imperialist aggression.
* Navel-gazing useful idiots in the West help Putin by latching onto that talking point because they're so obsessed with US imperialism that they can't even recognize it when the US is actually helping a country for once.
* You call me a bitch because you know you don't have a leg to stand on, and it's too painful to realize that you're just a different flavor of typical Yankee ignorance.

So what is your point? (also you eat a dick, bitch, lol)

NOTHING outside of those mainstream media narratives will be acknowledged.

Poland plans to relocate some of their old Russian-based fighter jets to an army base in Germany on the condition that the US will give Poland comparable fighter jets in return.

Poland announced this without giving a heads up the US, which puts the US in somewhat awkward position.


Almost feels as if Poland is playing games with the US for whatever reasons Poland has.

To be fair, Poland is taking in a huge number of Ukrainian refuges, so they are doing plenty to support Ukraine. The way Poland involved the US seemingly against the US' will is pretty interesting on multiple levels.

I just read an article that Kamala Harris is going to Poland and this fighter jet issue is one of the matter she will broker.

I guess it could be seen by Russia as a direct attack on them if a plane leaves a US base (or German or polish base) and goes into a war zone (Meanwhile, supplying anti tank and anti aircraft weapons isn't direct involvement? I don't get it)

They should just park the planes on Ukrainians border and have some farmers tow the planes in with tractors

>
>
>They should just park the planes on Ukrainians border and have
>some farmers tow the planes in with tractors


they would have to tow fast.

but fighter jets?

I guess that is too much power and considered an act of war.

its like we can give em gas, tires and an engine..

but a whole ass car? oh hell nah.

https://twitter.com/rianru/status/1501930497437581313?s=21

Soviet socialist republic part deux

https://twitter.com/acosta/status/1502996664931561473?s=21


Heard someone pointedly say that Russia is not a failed democracy. It’s a successful autocracy

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1503131708383764485

The so-called "our land is ours and we fight invasion" country on the planet is being a fucking cowardly hypocrite and refusing to call this an invasion, even after all this time.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/11/was-it-inevitable-a-short-history-of-russias-war-on-ukraine

Was it inevitable? A short history of Russias war on Ukraine

by Keith Gessen
Fri 11 Mar 2022 14.14 GMT

To understand the tragedy of this war, it is worth going back beyond the last few weeks and months, and even beyond Vladimir Putin.

For three months everyone argued about whether there would be a war, whether Vladimir Putin was bluffing or serious. Some of the Russia experts who had long told people to take it easy were now telling people to get worried. Others, who had long criticised Putin, said that he was just trying to draw attention to himself, that it was all for show. Among the analysts, there was a debate between the troop watchers and the TV watchers. The troop watchers saw the massive concentration of Russian forces at the border and in Crimea and warned of invasion. The TV watchers said that Russian TV was not ramping up war hysteria, as it usually does before a Russian invasion, and that this meant there would be no war.

The question was settled, for ever, on the night of 24 February, when Russian missiles hit military installations and civilian targets inside Ukraine, and Russian armoured convoys crossed the border. Then everyone began arguing about why. Was Putin crazy? Was he genuinely concerned about Nato expansion? Was he thinking in amoral categories – as longtime Putin scholar Fiona Hill suggested – that were fundamentally historical, along timescales that made no sense to ordinary mortals? Was he trying, bit by bit, to reconstruct the Russian Empire? Was Estonia next?

I had travelled to Moscow in January to see what I could learn. The city looked beautiful. Snow lay on the ground and everyone was very calm. Yes, repressions were ramping up, the space for political expression was narrowing, and many more people had died of Covid-19 than was officially acknowledged. And yes, speaking of Covid, Putin was paranoid about it, forcing anyone who wanted to see him in person to quarantine for one week in advance in a hotel the Kremlin had for that purpose. No one thought things were going in anything like the right direction, but none of the people I spoke to, some of them fairly well connected, thought an invasion was actually going to happen.

They thought Putin was engaged in coercive diplomacy. They thought the American intelligence community had lost its mind. I visited friends, listened to their reflections, gamed out the various scenarios. Even if an invasion did happen – a big if – it would be over quickly, we all agreed. It would be like Crimea: a precision operation, the use of overwhelming technological superiority. Putin had always been so cautious – the sort of person who never started a fight he wasn’t sure to win. It would be terrible, but relatively painless. That was wrong. We were all wrong.

That everyone was wrong did not prevent everyone from immediately claiming that, in fact, they’d been right. Russia experts who had been arguing for years that Putin was a bloody tyrant rushed forth to claim vindication, for he had undoubtedly become what they had claimed he was all along. Russia experts who had been arguing for years that we needed to heed Putin’s warnings could also claim vindication (though more quietly) because Putin had finally acted on those warnings. As usual, officials from US presidential administrations of yore were trotted out on TV as talking heads, dispensing their wisdom and accepting no responsibility, as if they had not all contributed, in one way or another, to the catastrophe.

This war was not inevitable, but we have been moving toward it for years: the west, and Russia, and Ukraine. The war itself is not new – it began, as Ukrainians have frequently reminded us in the past two weeks, with the Russian incursion in 2014. But the roots go back even further. We are still experiencing the death throes of the Soviet empire. We are reaping, too, in the west, the fruits of our failed policies in the region after the Soviet collapse.

This war was the decision of one person and one person only – Vladimir Putin. He made the call in his Covid isolation, failed to mount any sort of campaign to garner public support, and barely spoke to anyone outside the tiniest inner circle about it, which is why just a few weeks before the invasion no one in Moscow thought it was going to happen. Furthermore, he clearly misunderstood the nature of the political situation in Ukraine, and the vehemence of the resistance he would encounter. Nonetheless, to understand the tragedy of the war, and what it means for Ukraine and Russia and the rest of us, it is worth going back beyond the last few weeks and months, and even beyond Vladimir Putin. Things did not have to turn out this way, though where exactly we went wrong is much harder to determine.

1. The breakup: Russia and Ukraine after the fall of the USSR
Thirty years ago, as the countries of the former Soviet Union declared their independence, everyone breathed a sigh of relief that the empire disappeared so gently. Aside from a nasty irredentist conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the ethnic Armenian exclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, there was very little violence. But gradually, almost imperceptibly, conflict began appearing at the edges of the former USSR.

In Moldova, Russian troops supported a small separatist movement of Russian-speakers that eventually formed the tiny breakaway republic of Transnistria. In Georgia, the autonomous region of Abkhazia, also supported by Russian arms, fought a short war with the central government in Tbilisi, as did South Ossetia. Chechnya, a Russian republic that had fiercely resisted the encroachment of the empire throughout the 19th century, and which suffered terribly under Soviet rule, declared its own wish for independence, and was ground down in not one but two brutal wars. Tajikistan endured a civil war, in part a fallout from the civil war raging in Afghanistan, with which it shared a border. And on and on. In 2007, Russia launched a cyber-attack against Estonia, and in 2008, it responded to an attempt by Georgia to retake South Ossetia with a massive counter-offensive. Despite all this, it was still common for people to say that the dissolution of the Soviet Union had been miraculously peaceful. And then came Ukraine.

In the laboratory of nation-building that was the former empire, Ukraine stood out. Some of the Soviet former republics had longstanding political traditions and distinct linguistic, religious and cultural practices; others less so. The Baltic states had each been independent for two decades between the world wars. Most of the other republics had had, at best, a brief experiment with independence in the immediate wake of the collapse of tsarism in 1917. To complicate matters, many of the newfound nations had significant Russian-speaking populations who were either uninterested in or actively hostile toward their new national projects.

Ukraine was unique on all these fronts. Though it, too, had only existed as an independent state in modern times for a few short years, it had a powerful nationalist movement, a vibrant literary canon, and a strong memory of its independent place in the history of Europe before Peter the Great. It was very large – the second-largest country in Europe after Russia. It was industrialised, being a major producer of coal, steel and helicopter engines, as well as grain and sunflower seeds. It had a highly educated populace. And that populace at the time it became independent in 1991 numbered 52 million – second only to Russia among post-Soviet states. It was strategically located on the Black Sea and on the border with numerous eastern European states and future Nato members. It possessed what had once been the most beautiful beaches in the USSR, on the Crimean peninsula, where the Russian tsars had spent their summers, as well as the USSR’s largest warm water naval port, in Sevastopol. It had suffered greatly during the German advance into the Soviet Union in 1941 – of the 13 “hero cities” of the USSR, so called because they saw the heaviest fighting and raised the stoutest resistance, four were in Ukraine (Kyiv, Odesa, Kerch and Sevastopol). The economies of Russia and Ukraine were deeply intertwined. Ukrainian factories in Dnipropetrovsk were a vital part of the military-industrial capacity of the USSR, and Russia’s largest export gas pipelines ran through Ukraine. Strategically, in the words of historian Dominic Lieven, describing the situation circa the first world war, Ukraine could not have been more vital. “Without Ukraine’s population, industry and agriculture, early-20th-century Russia would have ceased to be a great power.” The same was true, or seemed to be true, in 1991.

Ukraine was not just geopolitically significant to Russia. It was culturally and historically, too. The Russian and Ukrainian languages had diverged sometime in the 13th century, and Ukraine had a distinct and notable literature, but the two remained close – about as close as Spanish and Portuguese. While most of the country was ethnically Ukrainian, there was, particularly in the east, a large ethnic Russian minority. Perhaps more important, while the official language was Ukrainian, the lingua franca in most of the large cities was Russian. And perhaps even more important than that, most people knew both languages. It was common on television to see a journalist, for example, ask a question in Russian and receive an answer in Ukrainian, or to have a panel of experts for a talent show with two Russian-language judges and two Ukrainian-language judges. It was a genuinely bilingual nation – a rare thing.

From a Russian nationalist perspective, that was a problem. Why speak two languages when you could just speak one? Crimea was a particularly sore spot: the vast majority of the population identified as Russian. And once you started thinking about Crimea, you then started thinking about eastern Ukraine. There were many Russians there. To be sure, there were also Russians in other places – in northern Kazakhstan, for example, and eastern Estonia. There were irredentist claims on these areas as well, and occasionally they flared up. The writer turned political provocateur Eduard Limonov, for example, was arrested in Moscow in 2001 for allegedly plotting to invade northern Kazakhstan and declare it an independent ethnic Russian republic. But no place held such a central part in the Russian historical imagination as Ukraine.

For the first 20 years of independence, Russia kept a very close eye on developments in Ukraine, and interfered in various ways, but that was as far as it went. That was as far as it needed to go. Ukraine’s large Russian-language population guaranteed, or seemed to guarantee, that the country would not stray too far from the Russian sphere of influence.

2. ‘Where does the motherland begin?’ The view from Ukraine
In Ukraine itself, even aside from the Russian presence, there were the birth agonies of a nation. Many of the new post-Soviet countries had their share of problems – corrupt elites, restive ethnic minorities, a border with Russia. Ukraine had all this, and more. Because it was large and industrialised, there was plenty of it to steal. Because it had a major Black Sea port in the city of Odesa, there was an easily accessible seaway through which to steal it. As became clear in 2014, when it became time to use it, much of the equipment of the old Ukrainian army was smuggled out of the country through that port.

On top of this, Ukraine was, if not divided, then certainly not immediately recognisable as a unified whole. Because it had so many times been conquered and partitioned, the country’s historical memory itself was fractured. In the words of one historian, “Its different parts had different pasts.” To make things worse, one of the most treasured aspects of the political culture of Ukraine, historically – the legacy of the Cossack hetmanate of the 17th century – was anarchism. The original Cossacks were warriors who had escaped serfdom. Their political system was a radical democracy. There was something beautiful about this. But in terms of the construction of a modern state, it had its drawbacks. In a now-infamous CIA analysis written shortly after the creation of independent Ukraine, it was predicted that there was a good chance the country would fall apart.

And yet, for two decades, it didn’t. For better and worse, democracy was rooted deep in Ukrainian political culture, and so while in Russia power was never transferred to an opposition, in Ukraine it happened again and again. In 1994, the first president of Ukraine, Leonid Kravchuk, was voted out of office in favour of Leonid Kuchma, who promised better relations with Russia and to give the Russian language equal status in Ukraine. In 2004, his hand-picked successor, Viktor Yanukovych, was, after massive protests against a falsified election, voted out in favour of a more nationalist and pro-European candidate, Viktor Yushchenko. In 2010, Yushchenko proceeded to lose to a resurgent Yanukovych. But Yanukovych was thrown out of office by the Maidan revolution in 2014. A nationalist candidate and chocolate billionaire, Petro Poroshenko, became the next president, but he was replaced by Volodymyr Zelenskiy, a Russian-speaking pro-peace candidate, in 2019.

Ukrainian politics were full of conflict. Fist-fights in the Rada were common and protests were a fact of ordinary life. There were massive protests against Kuchma, for example, in 2000, when a recording surfaced of him apparently ordering the murder of the journalist Georgiy Gongadze, whose headless body had been found in the woods outside Kyiv. (Kuchma insisted the tapes were doctored. He was charged in 2011, but the prosecution was dropped after a court ruled the tapes inadmissible.) Yushchenko, the opposition candidate in 2004, barely survived a dioxin poisoning, which had all the markings of a Russian special operation. The initial round of voting in 2004 was marked by severe irregularities and clear voter fraud such as had not yet appeared in Russia. It took mass protests, known as the Orange Revolution, to win another round of voting, in which Yushchenko won. Yushchenko himself subsequently presided over a fair election in 2010, which he lost. And on and on.

These changes of power were alternately tumultuous and pedestrian, but they reflected genuine differences of opinion among the populace about what Ukraine should be. Some thought Ukraine should integrate further with Europe, others that it should remain friendly and closely connected with Russia. The cultural and historical differences between the different parts of Ukraine would surface in times of crisis.

For Russian speakers and Ukraine’s remaining Jewish population, the memory of the second world war, of resistance to Nazi invasion and occupation, remained an important touchstone. Ukrainian nationalists had a different perspective on these events. For some, the occupation of their country began in 1921 (when the Bolsheviks consolidated control of Ukraine) or 1939 (when Stalin took the last part of western Ukraine as part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact between Germany and the USSR to carve up Poland), if not 1654, when the Cossack Hetmanate sought the protection of the Russian tsar. The famous wartime resistance fighters known as the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, who had opposed both Soviet and German occupation in western Ukraine, and who were seen as fascist villains by the Soviets, were, in the nationalist narrative, the George Washingtons of Ukrainian history. For nationalists, the signal tragedy of the 20th century was not the Nazi invasion, but instead the great famine of 1932-33, in which millions of Ukrainians died. It was known as the Holodomor – “murder by hunger” – and was consistently referred to as a deliberate act by Stalin (and by extension Russia) to destroy the Ukrainian nation.

People lighting candles last year at a monument in Kyiv for victims of the Holodomor famine of 1932-33.
People lighting candles last year at a monument in Kyiv for victims of the Holodomor famine of 1932-33. Photograph: Genya Savilov/AFP/Getty
All these arguments took place against a backdrop of economic stagnation. Ukraine’s economy was consistently one of the weakest in the former Soviet bloc. Corruption was endemic and living standards were low. Ukraine was dependent on cheap gas from Russia as well as the “transit fees” it charged for Russian gas going to Europe.

To Ukrainians living under these see-sawing politics, going from hope to disappointment and back again, with what seemed like a permanent elite merely trading the presidency back and forth between themselves, it felt like their lives were passing them by. A journalist I met in Kyiv in 2010, who had taken part in the protests that were part of the Orange Revolution and was then let down by Yuschenko’s presidency, lamented the missed opportunities. “All this while time is passing,” he said. He couldn’t believe how little had been done since 2005, and since 1991.

But there was another aspect to time passing. The more time passed, the more Ukraine’s fragile nationhood could coalesce. Because what did it mean to belong to a nation? Where, in the words of the famous Soviet song, does the motherland begin? It begins with the pictures in the first book your mother reads you, according to the song. And to your good and true friends from the courtyard next door. The more people who were born in Ukraine, rather than the USSR, the more people grew up thinking of Kyiv as their capital instead of Moscow, and the more they learned the Ukrainian language and Ukrainian history, the stronger Ukraine would become. Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in the TV show that made him famous in Ukraine and eventually catapulted him to the presidency, played a Russian-speaking high school history teacher who suddenly becomes president. In the brief scenes in which we see Zelenskiy’s character actually teaching, he is quizzing his students about the great Ukrainian national historian and politician Mykhailo Hrushevsky.

3. For Russia, Nato is a four-letter word
It was violent Russian opposition to EU membership for Ukraine that in late 2013 precipitated the Maidan revolution, which in turn precipitated the Russian annexation of Crimea and incursion into eastern Ukraine. But after the end of the cold war, it was Nato expansion that had been the greatest irritant to the relationship between Russia and the west, a relationship that found Ukraine trapped in between.

Nato expansion proceeded very slowly, then seemingly all at once. In the immediate wake of the Soviet collapse, it was not a foregone conclusion that Nato would get bigger. In fact, most US policymakers, and the US military, opposed expanding the alliance. There was even talk, for a while, of disbanding Nato. It had served its purpose – to contain the Soviet Union – and now everyone could go their separate ways.

This changed in the early years of the Clinton administration. The motor for the change came from two directions. One was a group of idealistic foreign policy hands inside the Clinton national security council, and the other was the eastern European states.

After 1991, the post-communist countries of eastern Europe, particularly Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia, found themselves in an uncertain security environment. Nearby Yugoslavia was falling apart, and they had their own potential border disputes. Most of all, though, they had a vivid memory of Russian imperialism. They did not believe Russia would remain weak for ever, and they wanted to align with Nato while they still could. “If you don’t let us into Nato, we’re getting nuclear weapons,” Polish officials told a team of thinktank researchers in 1993. “We don’t trust the Russians.”

In presenting their case, it did not hurt that the leaders of the eastern European countries had a great deal of moral credibility. It was after a meeting with, among others, Václav Havel and Lech Wałęsa in Prague in January 1994 that Bill Clinton announced that “the question is no longer whether Nato will take on new members but when.” This formulation – not whether, but when – became official US policy. Five years later, the Czech Republic (having peacefully divorced Slovakia), Hungary and Poland were inducted into Nato. In the years to come, 11 more countries would join, bringing the total number of countries in the alliance to 30.

During the recent crisis, some American pundits and policymakers have claimed that Russia did not object to Nato until quite recently, when it was searching for a pretext to invade Ukraine. The claim is genuinely ludicrous. Russia has been protesting Nato expansion since the very beginning. The Russian deputy foreign minister told Clinton’s top Russia hand Strobe Talbott in 1993 that “Nato is a four-letter word”. At a joint press conference with Clinton in 1994, Boris Yeltsin, to whom Clinton had been such a loyal ally, reacted with fury when he realised that Nato was actually moving ahead with its plans to include the eastern European states. He predicted that a “cold peace” in Europe would be the result.

Russia was too weak, and still too dependent on western loans, to do anything except complain and watch warily as Nato increased in power. The alliance’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999 was particularly disturbing to the Russian leadership. It was, first of all, an intervention in a situation that Russia viewed as an internal conflict. Kosovo was, at the time, part of Serbia. After the Nato intervention, it was, in effect, no longer part of Serbia. Meanwhile the Russians had their own Kosovo-like situation in Chechnya, and it suddenly seemed to them that it was not impossible that Nato could intervene in that situation as well. As one American analyst who studied the Russian military told me: “They got scared because they knew what the state of Russian conventional forces was. They saw what the actual state of US conventional forces was. And they saw that while they had a lot of problems in Chechnya with their own Muslim minority, the United States just intervened to basically break Kosovo off of Serbia.”

The next year, Russia officially changed its military doctrine to say that it could, if threatened, resort to the use of tactical nuclear weapons. One of the authors of the doctrine told the Russian military paper Krasnaya Zvezda that Nato’s eastward expansion was a threat to Russia and that this was the reason for the lowered threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. That was 22 years ago.

The second post-Soviet round of Nato expansion was the largest. Agreed to in 2002 and made official in 2004, it brought Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia into the alliance. Almost all these states were part of the Soviet bloc, and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – the “Baltics” – were once part of the Soviet Union. Now they had joined the west.

As this was happening, a series of events shook up the Russian periphery. The “colour revolutions” – coming in quick succession in Georgia in 2003 (Rose), Ukraine in 2004 (Orange) and Kyrgyzstan in 2005 (Tulip) – all used mass protests to eject corrupt pro-Russian incumbents. These events were greeted with great enthusiasm in the west as a reawakening of democracy, and with scepticism and trepidation in the Kremlin as an encroachment on Russian space. In the US, policymakers celebrated that freedom was on the march. In Moscow, there was a slightly paranoid concern that the colour revolutions were the work of the western secret services, and that Russia was next.

The Kremlin might not have been right about a long-range western plot, but they weren’t wrong to think that the west never saw it as an equal, as a peer. The fact is that at every turn, at every sticking point, in every situation, the west, and the US in particular, did what it wanted to do. It was, at times, exquisitely sensitive to Russian perceptions; at other times, cavalier. But in all cases the US just pressed ahead. Eventually this just became the way things were. Relations between the two sides soured, and positions hardened. In 2006, Dick Cheney gave an aggressive speech in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, in which he celebrated the achievements of the Baltic nations. “The system that has brought such great hope to the shores of the Baltic can bring the same hope to the far shores of the Black Sea, and beyond,” he said. “What is true in Vilnius is also true in Tbilisi and Kyiv, and true in Minsk, and true in Moscow.” As Samuel Charap and Timothy Colton note in their excellent short history of the 2014 Ukraine conflict, Everyone Loses, “One can only conjecture the reaction to such statements in the Kremlin.”

A year later, at the 2007 Munich Security Conference, in what is widely considered a key turning point in relations between Russia and the west, Putin delivered his response, assailing the US and its unipolar system for its arrogance, its flouting of international law, and its hypocrisy. “We are constantly being taught about democracy,” he said of Russia. “But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.”

The warning was heard, but not heeded. In April 2008, in Bucharest, Nato countries met and delivered a promise that Georgia and Ukraine “will become members of Nato”. It was, as many have since noted, the worst of both worlds: a promise of membership without any of the actual benefits, in the form of security guarantees, that membership would bring. A few months later, in what, up to that point, was by far the most significant military action outside its borders, Russia defeated Georgia in a decisive five-day war.

In retrospect, one could argue that if Nato had moved faster and accepted Ukraine and Georgia much earlier, none of what followed would have happened. This argument has the virtue of examples to bolster it: the Baltics entered Nato, and despite being former Soviet republics, have experienced relatively little Russian harassment since. But one could also argue that, in the face of mounting Russian alarm and repeated warnings about “red lines” over Nato, the US States and its allies should have been extra careful. They should have taken into account the specificity of the places they were dealing with, in particular Ukraine. Ukraine was not Russia, in Leonid Kuchma’s famous phrase, but it was also not Poland. One of the problems with Ukraine’s Nato bid in 2008, for example, pushed forth by the western-friendly Yushchenko administration, was that it was unpopular inside Ukraine – in large part because Ukrainians knew how Russia felt about it, and were rightly worried.

But as Nato and the EU both expanded farther east, their representatives considered it a matter of principle not to make compromises with a regime they viewed as trying to bully them and Ukraine. Again, they may have been right in principle. In practice, Putin has been warning of this invasion, in one form or another, for 15 years. A great many voices are now saying that we should have been much tougher on Putin much earlier – that the sanctions we are now seeing should have been deployed after the war in Georgia in 2008, or after the polonium poisoning in London of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. But there is also a case to be made that we should have thought more deeply about how to create a security arrangement, and an economic one, in which Ukraine would never have been faced with such a fateful choice.

4. What Putin thinks
Still, at the centre of this tragedy lies one man: Vladimir Putin. He has embarked on a murderous and criminal war that also appears almost certain to be judged a colossal strategic blunder – uniting Europe, galvanising Nato, destroying his economy and isolating his country. What happened?

There have always been multiple competing views of Putin, falling along different axes as to his competence, his intelligence, his morality. That is, some people who thought he was evil also thought he was smart, and some people who thought he was merely defending Russian interests also thought he was incompetent.

Five years ago in this paper, during the boom in Putinology that followed Donald Trump’s election, I made the case that Putin was basically a “normal” politician in the Russian context. That didn’t mean he was in any way admirable – the way prosecuted the war in Chechnya, which launched his presidential candidacy, was evidence enough of his bad intentions. Nor did I think he should be hacking Hillary Clinton’s emails. Nonetheless I thought that, given Russia’s history, its traumatic experience of the post-Soviet transition, the internal dynamics of the Yeltsin regime, and the wider geopolitical context, the person who took over from Yeltsin was almost certain to have been a nationalist authoritarian, whether or not he was named Vladimir Putin. The question seemed to be: would this other nationalist authoritarian, not named Putin, have behaved very differently? Here there was some limited historical evidence, in the persons of Boris Yeltsin (author of the first war in Chechnya) and Dmitry Medvedev (author of the war in Georgia), that he would not.

The moment, at least in my mind, where Putin rendered these questions irrelevant, was the attempted poisoning with a nerve agent of the oppositionist Alexei Navalny, an attempted murder that would almost certainly have had to have Putin’s approval. Other political murders in Russia had seemed to me less clearcut. There was good reason to believe that the journalist Anna Politkovskaya and the politician Boris Nemtsov, for example, had been killed on the order of the Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov. And while Kadyrov was Putin’s loyal ally, they were not one and the same. Possibly this was a distinction without a difference, and yet it seemed that talk of a dictatorship in Russia obscured the fact that the country still had some room, albeit narrowing by the year, for political life and freedom of thought. We are now seeing what an actual Russian dictatorship looks like: all remnants of an opposition media shuttered, journalists threatened with 15 years of prison, unbridled and unanswerable police aggression. With the invasion of Ukraine, there is no one left who thinks Putin is merely acting like a standard post-Soviet Russian politician.

Is there any explaining Putin’s thought process? Here, there were objective and subjective factors. Objectively, he was not wrong to think that Ukraine was integrating further and further into the west. The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement that he had so fiercely opposed in 2013 had been signed in 2014 and gone into effect in 2017. Nato, too, was on its way. There were now Nato weapons and Nato personnel in Ukraine. Putin’s attempt to exert control over Ukrainian politics by creating the breakaway republics in Donetsk and Luhansk had failed. In fact, it had not only failed, it had backfired. Ukrainians who had been lukewarm toward Nato now supported joining and many who had entertained pro-Russian sentiments had seen what Russian puppets had done in the breakaway republics. Ukraine, an imperfect democracy, scored a 61 on the Freedom House scale in 2021; the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (competing under the umbrella term “Eastern Donbas”) scored a 4. No one wanted that for themselves. Putin had won Crimea and some territory in the east, but he had lost Ukraine. In the wake of Joe Biden’s election, which signalled a renewed American commitment to Europe and Nato and, inter alia, Ukraine, things were going less and less in Putin’s favour.

But he was not entirely out of options. In 2015 he had extracted, through force of arms, the Minsk-2 agreement – an onerous peace deal, never actually implemented by either side, that had obliged Ukraine to reintegrate the Donetsk and Luhansk republics into a federated Ukraine, where they would essentially have veto power over the country’s foreign policy; perhaps, in 2022, he could get Minsk-3 as well. And if he had previously left the implementation of the Minsk agreement to a democratically elected Ukrainian government, he could decide not to make that mistake again. He could install a leader in Kyiv whom he could trust. A month before the invasion, the British government declared that it possessed intelligence indicating that Putin planned to do exactly that.

And yet here we get into the subjective factors: why, in retrospect, did Putin think he could pull this manoeuvre on a country the size of Ukraine? Partly, to be sure, he was buoyed up by his string of military victories – in Chechnya, in Georgia, in Crimea, in Syria. He had found great success, often at relatively little cost, by being a kind of international spoiler to the west’s designs in various parts of the world.

He must also have been emboldened by what had happened in Ukraine in 2014. Crimea had surrendered to Russia without a shot. A few weeks later, a small group of middle-aged mercenaries had been able to march 100 miles into Ukraine and capture a small city called Slovyansk, igniting the active phase of the war in eastern Ukraine. If a ragtag outfit could do something like that, imagine what an actual army could do.

There was also the important factor that Putin did not believe Ukraine was a real country. This was not specific to Putin – many Russians, unfortunately, don’t see why Ukraine should be independent. But with Putin this has become a real obsession, impermeable to contradictory evidence. One type of leader would see that Ukraine refuses to submit to his will and conclude that it was an independent entity. But for Putin this could only mean that it was controlled by someone else. After all, this was already the case in the parts of Ukraine that Putin had conquered – he had installed puppets to run the self-proclaimed people’s republics in eastern Ukraine. So perhaps it stood to reason that the west had also installed a puppet – Zelenskiy – who would run at the first sign of trouble.

5. Where does this end?
Just about everyone has been surprised by the ferocity of the Ukrainian resistance: Putin, obviously, but also western military analysts who had accurately predicted the invasion but inaccurately thought the war would be over very quickly, and possibly even the Ukrainians themselves. Before the war, sociologists who studied Ukraine pointed to a fairly high willingness on the part of Ukrainians to fight for their country, but it was one thing to tell a sociologist, and it was another thing to go and fight. But, clearly, the Ukrainians have decided to fight.

Putin clearly did not expect Volodymyr Zelenskiy to turn into Winston Churchill. Zelenskiy had been elected as a peace candidate in 2019. A political novice from the country’s industrial south-east, he won an impressive 73% of the vote in a runoff against Petro Poroshenko. The latter’s campaign slogan had been “Army! Language! Faith!” Zelenskiy, by contrast, was elected as a breath of fresh air, someone who was going to do things differently, and also someone who indicated a willingness to try to negotiate with Putin to end the war. Poroshenko’s campaign warned that Zelenskiy was a Kremlin stooge who would sell out the country. People voted for him anyway.

By the time war rolled around, Zelenskiy was no longer popular in Ukraine. His approval rating was in the 20s. He had failed to find a peaceful solution to the festering conflict in the Donbas region, and he had started persecuting his opponents. Viktor Medvedchuk, a close ally of Putin who was considered his point man in Ukraine, was placed under house arrest, and Poroshenko, still Zelenskiy’s main political rival, was charged with treason for some business dealings he had with Medvedchuk and the separatist regions in 2014. And then, when the clouds of war started gathering, Zelenskiy insisted the threat was not real. He criticised the Biden administration for its alarmist rhetoric. The night before the invasion, he told Ukrainians they could sleep soundly that night. But the first Russian missiles hit their targets before dawn.

The day before, in his anguished, last-minute appeal to the Russian people, Zelenskiy had made clear that he did not want war. But it was also the case that he did not have much room for compromise. The only clear path to peace – implementation of the Minsk accords – had become, with the passage of time, even more intolerable to Ukrainians than it had been at their signing. At the end of the day, people don’t like to feel as if they have been bullied into compromise by their larger and angrier neighbour. And most observers noted that, as terrifying as a Russian invasion was, a compromise by Zelenskiy that ceded too much would probably lead to the overthrow of his government.

If the only way to avoid war was through a craven surrender, then it would have to be war. Ukraine would fight. And fight they have.

Now, as the Russian army regroups and starts bombing and shelling Ukrainian cities, Nato governments are faced with an excruciating choice: either they watch in horror as innocent Ukrainians are killed, or they get further involved and risk an even wider conflict. Where this stops it’s impossible to say. As of this writing, with the Russian leadership continuing to put forth maximalist demands, a settlement looks far away. And whether, if the Russian demands moderate, Zelenskiy will be able to accept a Russian Crimea and eastern Ukraine after all the blood his people have spilled – and, indeed, whether the people will accept it – is an open question.

Someday, the war will end, and someday after that, though probably not as soon as one might hope, the regime in Russia will have to change. There will be another opportunity to welcome Russia again into the concert of nations. Our job then will be to do it differently than we did it this time, in the post-Soviet period. But that is work for the future. For now, in agony and sympathy, we watch and wait.

It would have been even better if it also addressed the Neo-nazi elements in Ukraine, how they tie into its development as a nation and the way they were used by Putin to justify his war.

the same country that killed an American Journalist, in which
Biden refused to issue any penalties or sanctions against SA.
He stated that any penalties or sanctions would interfere with
the business/political relationship that America has with Saudi
Arabia.

So since they weren’t penalized then, I’m sure they will not be penalized
or called out for these current violations of human rights.

But, hey, that’s the way it goes when it comes to brown and black countries and
nations....No one cares if they are chopped up or terrorized. So the government
of SA will continue to be allowed to terrorize it’s people in whatever manner
they choose.

Anyway, back to the conflict in white-kraine...sorry, I meant Ukraine.

You can’t talk intl news without inserting America into the convo.

Sorry this isn’t going as well for your boy Putin as you wanted.

I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy, double standard, and blatant racism that exist
in geopolitics.

And because of people like you it will continue to exist.....so, yeah, continue to
cry out. Do you have those same tears for Indians, Asians, and Black Africans
studying in the Ukraine who have been beaten and robbed by Ukrainians while
trying to cross the border?

its typical of tho given how people operate online.

For some reason Russia has a lot of sympathizers.

As I’m sure (somewhere deep inside) you do too.

Aren’t we cool with the Saudi’s?

Not sure where you are going with this but you sound like a Russian apologist.

He is unable to recognize any difference between what Russia is doing in Ukraine and what SA did is bit concerning.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1505514497322196994?s=21

now nato (conservative) estimates has russia at a massive 40k casualties (dead, injured, missing) in under a month.

ukrainian counter offensives are now encircling russian troops around kyiv and cutting off their supply lines (everyone was just fretting about the 40 mile long russian convoy not too long ago).

russian generals are getting picked off like crazy.

russia is begging for additional troops from belarus, syria, libya, etc.

putins inner circle is in complete chaos with people getting demoted, arrested, disappearing from public view, fleeing the country, etc.

russia is prioritizing efforts to defend its forces in the donbas region. the breakaway region in ukraine it had controlled for about 8 years.

and now russia has basically resorted to just lobbing missiles indiscriminately at civilian targets elsewhere with no concrete strategic objective.

not too long ago...the russian military was being heralded as the unwoke benchmark among right wing zombies worldwide. and putin was being worshipped as some white christian ethnonationalist mastermind.

damn how the tables have turned.

On paper, most analysts had it as a win for Russia. Turns out it's hard to account for the incredible levels of corruption in Russia's military, the resulting bad maintenance and low morale.

And of course most official sources would rather err on the side of caution, which also helped to rally support for Ukraine. The resulting sanctions, influx of hardware and global moral support were unprecedented and most likely played a huge role in turning things around, so I'm not mad about it.

I saw amateur analysts (without careers on the line) calling it a failed invasion less than a week into the war, so I've been cautiously "optimistic" (hard to use that word when you see vids of civilians getting shot up in their homes and cars) for a while.

I'm still terrified of what Putin might do before he's forced to retreat or gets toppled. But if he does get toppled, it's going to be a huge shift in global affairs. Of course it's hard to tell what will come after (changing of the guard or shift towards democracy), but even now there's a palpable change in Euro relations (internal and with the US). Could mean a serious blow to rightwing extremist parties across the West, and a shift away from fossil fuel imports from despotic regimes (although I'm pretty skeptical about that).

Interesting times, to say the least.

>Could
>mean a serious blow to rightwing extremist parties across the
>West, and a shift away from fossil fuel imports from despotic
>regimes (although I'm pretty skeptical about that).

but as we see time and time again...conservative/corporate interests are so much more aggressive filling the knowledge/uncertainty void. especially in the wake of a disaster.

a lot of republicans just did a 180 overnight and went from putin cheerleaders to neocon russophobe hawks criticizing biden for being weak in his response to the ukrainian invasion (after acquitting trump during his impeachment for blocking aid to ukraine *and* voting against a ukraine defensive aid package just recently).

and they seem to get away with it with no real consequences because their voters are either too dumb or dont care...and mainstream media never challenges them or provides the public context because theyre just interested in covering the horse race he-said-she-said.

But I still have a bit of faith in the ability of EU/ropean states and the Dem side of the US changing their behavior for the better. After getting the lid on their noses, of course.

We'll have to see.

The Ukrainians have been pretty masterful at seeding stories of Russian incompetence so I tend to take what I hear from both warring factions with a pinch of salt.

These days I've settled on following reports from Chinese news sources as I assume they would be the least likely to have a dog in this fight.

...while refusing to outright condemn the war. China def has a dog in this fight: themselves. There's a reason Putin asked China for military assistance, and Biden had to threaten China in order to get them to not help.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/10/china/china-russia-disinformation-campaign-ukraine-intl-dst-hnk/index.html

even as they promote the bullshit ukrainian/american biolabs conspiracy?

One of the NATO requirements is a professional army.

Ironically, Russia has shown why they ain’t qualified. while Ukraine shows they can bang in the paint. Not that Vlad the Peacekeeper would wanna join anyway of course

https://twitter.com/IuliiaMendel/status/1507348082199080970

maybe possibly if you hit us first.

quite the change in tone from the start of the invasion.

It’s not even up to Minsk anyway. It’s Moscow’s decision if Belarus joins the fight

My shower thought is this only destabilizes Belarus and emboldens the opposition party in his country. He will also have less thugs on the streets of Belarus to quell protests .. because they’ll be in Ukraine fighting

It’s a lose lose situation for him lmao

https://twitter.com/idreesali114/status/1507360791086911490

for anyone skeptical about the various reports/anecdotes pointing to humiliation and failure of the russian objective so far...shit like this directly from their defense ministry implicitly confirms how dire the situation is for them.

imagine beginning a full scale invasion of country on 3 separate fronts with the goal of taking over the capitol and installing a puppet regime...only to downsize your goal to retaining a region that you had control of since 2014.

the equipment failure (including the u.s. saying 60% of their *missiles* are failing), the troops leaving their tanks running at night for heat (and giving thermal imaging drones easy targets), troops having to loot gas stations for food, ukraine *gaining* almost 200 tanks from russia since the start of the invasion, russia not having the capacity to evacuate many of their soldiers bodies, etc.

its just been an incompetent mess. the country is so corrupt and greedy that they clearly werent spending on military maintenance and preparedness. just hording all the money among the oligarchs.

shit do their nukes even work? we might have to call that bluff and find out lol.

ran over by his own troops.
https://twitter.com/dave_brown24/status/1507381758597210128

jesus.

https://twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/1506631927213789198

dude killed his superior that he blamed for the deaths of his fellow soldiers.

“Having waited for the right moment, during battle, he ran over the commander with a tank.”

how bad is this shit gonna look in another month?

Fuck Putin and his whole squad.

The only thing they succeeded at was pushing Ukraine closer to the EU/NATO, pushing other eastern bloc countries closer to EU/NATO, uniting Europe and the US against Russia, and creating an enemy for life in Ukraine.

Ukrainians and Russians had a close history and relationship but Putin burned that down now. Ukrainians strike me as the type of people to hold a grudge and will not easily get over this.

>shit do their nukes even work? we might have to call that
>bluff and find out lol.


But given how close Ukraine is to Russia, would nuclear fallout end up hitting Russia if Russia was actually bold enough to file nuclear missiles on Ukraine?

Based on research, radiation fallout travels up to 25-50 miles. The straight
line distance from Russia to Ukraine is 500 miles.

And a Nuke would be launched to hit a target, where there would
be no collateral damage or residual effect to the country that
launched the Nuke.

https://twitter.com/polinaivanovva/status/1507400330140696576

those other areas we tried to take over? that was just a decoy for us taking over the area we already took over.

https://twitter.com/AlexandruC4/status/1507473089952718851

including his close oligarch ally...former chelsea soccer club owner roman abramovich.

https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1508465837199572993

great article on Roman Abramovich in the New Yorker.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/03/28/how-putins-oligarchs-bought-london

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://www.newsweek.com/every-russian-oligarch-who-has-died-since-putin-invaded-ukraine-full-list-1700022

https://twitter.com/BenObeseJecty/status/1568944139613655045

they have brown water

specifically for infrastructure upgrades, including their water systems.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb61vQ8UUAAiI1x?format=jpg&name=large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb61vQ5UYAEvQaj?format=jpg&name=large

over a year ago:
https://twitter.com/EPAMichaelRegan/status/1370487010151043078

instead of routing that money to jackson (80% black)...the corrupt/racist governor and legislature is fucking off money on shit like this:
https://twitter.com/ajplus/status/1565384992926175237
https://twitter.com/Phil_Lewis_/status/1565470557046538240

and this is what it all comes down to:
https://twitter.com/ashtonpittman/status/1567571007224909826

the republican governing philosophy is blatant sabotage. wreck basic government service. say government doesnt work. sell the service off for spare parts to the highest bidder/donor.

https://images.app.goo.gl/ypeehEUM13PSmP2v5

.

even Afghan refugees are treated better than black people

http://art-------school.com/

https://ibb.co/k4m6n8C

Basically the fault lays primarily with the state government.

not once has the Biden administration ever openly urged Ukraine/Russia to attempt diplomacy or peaceful negotiation

because he thought the prospect of invasion was dire while other people were downplaying it lol.

i have no idea why you would circle back to double down on an equally bad take instead of doing a bit of research and acknowledging the reality on the ground.

lol @ anyone blaming anyone but putin for this war half a year into it.

ukraine tried to negotiate with russia early on and ended up with their negotiators poisoned and russia continuing to relentlessly bomb civilian targets and murder/rape ukrainian citizens.

lol @ negotiating with imperialists who believe they are entitled to rule another sovereign nation. the only terms they would accept is surrender of territory to russia.

russia already broke TWO negotiated treaties to invade ukraine *this* time. they would shamelessly break another negotiated treaty to take more of ukraine in the future once they have the replenished military capacity.

if anything has been shown to date...its that the us has been right on the money about all of this. including aiding ukraine financially/militarily to the point where theres a legit shot ukraine could defeat russia outright and push the invaders out of their country.

the war just took a dramatic turning point in ukraines advantage. a successful counteroffensive has russia retreating out of a massive swath of previously occupied strongholds.

putins own inner circle is starting to criticize him openly for this geopolitical failure.

why would biden push ukraine to negotiate *now* when the only 'peace' would include concessions of territory to an opponent theyre beating the shit out of and pushing out of their country? especially when ukraine doesnt even want that?

Putin is a war criminal. A tyrant. He deserves to die.

But what US-led efforts were taken to deescalate this at any point? The answer is none. That's a fact.

Everything you said is true. And everything I'm saying is true. The US is bankrolling one side of a European conflict with no end in sight and no open encouragement to end it in a civil manner.

Absolutely no effort has been made to scale this down with urgency. But the only bipartisan decisions we can make swiftly involve sending US taxpayer money to fan the flames of war in a European country. That's as true as everything you said too.

The US has told Putin/Russia to withdraw from all Ukrainian lands. Putin/Russia hasn’t.

Meanwhile the US has imposed economic sanctions on Russia in hopes to get them to withdraw from Ukraine. Russia hasn’t.

If you are POTUS, what would you do differently? Let Russia invade and not send any aid to Ukraine so that Russia would quickly win the war, take over and occupy Ukraine just so the war would be over more quickly? Afterwards shake your finger at Putin and tell him very angrily that he better be happy with Ukraine and promise not to invade Poland or Estonia or else!!

What does that accomplish?

Biden had a virtual conference with Putin. Other world leaders talked to Putin. It didn't work.

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/24/1073015013/ukraine-russia-invasion-war-diplomacy

The issue with this as mentioned before is Putin has no regard towards NATO or any western powers, particularly in regards to the former USSR countries. Putin regards those countries as Russia's, and treats them as errant children who have temporarily left home.

He annexed Crimea and invaded Georgia and annexed parts of that too. This is entirely on Putin and other totalitarian leaders who have overtly or implicitly propped him up.

https://twitter.com/JohnQuiggin/status/1570111663785013248

the odds he ever caves, just so he isn't proven a wrong/a failure/a loser, is like .001 percent.

This might be the beginning of the end for Capital P.



http://art-------school.com/

https://ibb.co/k4m6n8C

https://static1.srcdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Tommy-gets-whacked-in-Goodfellas.jpg

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNQZY5KYDFM

Both great movies, but I'd selfishly prefer Goodfellas.

I don't know if the "whacking" scenario is plausible anymore, though. From what (very little) I understand about the Russian oligarchy, it's designed in such a way that the few people who have any access to Putin are completely dependent on him.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/23/europe/wagner-prigozhin-criminal-case-explainer-intl/index.html

i remember when folks thought russia was gonna steamroll ukraine in like a week.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1784011/lukashenko-flees-belarus-russia-coup

https://news.yahoo.com/prigozhin-declares-seized-control-rostovs-071900626.html

sheesh this is looking like a legit military coup.

Especially considering that so many of you thoughtpolicing okp on these issues aren't Black; and there's such a long and rich tradition of anti-war sentiment AMONG BLACK PEOPLE, not only in America but the African continent and global Black diaspora more broadly.

You, Handle, and a bunch of other posters who aren't Black should stop shaming/attacking Black posters on okp just for disagreeing with your neo-con takes and voicing ambivalence that's actually consistent with most other Black nations on the planet:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/12/12/biden-africa-ukraine-coalition/

There's no rule we must all agree, but the racially-divided browbeating is fucked up.

>You, Handle, and a bunch of other posters who aren't Black
>should stop shaming/attacking Black posters on okp just for
>disagreeing with your neo-con takes and voicing ambivalence
>that's actually consistent with most other Black nations on
>the planet:
>

>
>There's no rule we must all agree, but the racially-divided
>browbeating is fucked up.


Yep

The ones who told Biden and the US to tone down the rhetoric, while Vladimir mobilized his army on the border. Bernie was the loudest and dumbest about this so I get why y’all fell in line

The onus will always be on the US as the bad actor, regardless of the actual facts right in front of your face

Race relations are not going to improve under the Chinese-Russian lead world order that you bros want so bad

has nothing to do with China-Russia relations.

All I'm trying to say is Black people have brains, our own frames of reference and experience, and the right to hold and express (various) views on global affairs shaped by those frames of reference and experience. We're not 'idiots' or committing 'treason' for having views, frames of reference, or experiences that differ from yours.

And to be clear - this isn't about being anti-*insert country* or the fact that I'm often in disagreement with you. It's about the way some of yall communicate your disagreement. Maybe it's me, but I'm just noticing a certain energy when a dissenting poster happens to be Black and I think it's fucked up. Doubling-down on such attacks also reinforces the EXTREMELY RACIST TROPE that we (or the Black Heads of State and Government described in the article I linked) are so pea-brained we couldn't possibly formulate distinct positions on this war independent of western or russian propaganda.


- Russia supported Black liberation efforts in South Africa, while the US and Europe supported the Apartheid State. That probably has more to do with the ANC government's Non-Alignment on this war than Pres Ramaphosa being a 'useful idiot of the Kremlin'.

- China recently wrote off debt owed by the DRC (and 16 other countries in Africa - https://qz.com/emails/africa-weekly-brief/1849460851/china-waives-debt-for-17-african-countries), while the West's legacy in that country is: enslaving, torturing, and maiming the population to maximize rubber exports (https://web.archive.org/web/20230113090238/https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/father-hand-belgian-congo-1904/) + arranging the execution by firing squad of their first democratically-elected and Congolese Prime Minister, dismembering and chopping up his body, boiling his remains in sulfuric acid, and grinding and scattering his bones to destroy the assassination's evidence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1960-12-05_Lumumba_Seized.ogg , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba#Final_days_and_assassination , https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/18/belgium-patrice-lumumba-gold-tooth-return ). That probably has more to do with Pres Tshisekedi's government's Non-Alignment on this war than being a 'useful idiot of the Kremlin'.

- AFRICAN voiced an opinion critical of this war in #444 and is from an ACTIVE WARZONE. That probably has more to do with what he expressed than being a 'useful idiot of the Kremlin'.

- And to top it off, I'm pretty sure most Black okps posting in GD are Black American, and from reparations to racism there's def conversations happening in that community that intersect war, government spending, discrimination, etc (e.g. https://www.history.com/news/gi-bill-black-wwii-veterans-benefits , https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/11/us/jrotc-schools-mandatory-automatic-enrollment.html , https://www.wrtv.com/news/local-news/black-veterans-disproportionately-impacted-by-housing-insecurity). Which probably contextualizes Tha Truth feeling compelled to ask about related racial disparities in Ukraine and Mississippi, or Kayru deploring Black Americans frequently getting the short end of the stick wrt the domestic budget implications of belonging to one of the most interventionist nation-states on earth.

Like, are yall serious? I'm genuinely in awe of how some of you dare fix your lips to shame/insult what are very understandable Black criticisms, skepticisms, and fears of this conflict. It's also evident from the post that many are wedded to eurocentric framings of world history, "left" ideology (lol to you 'Left' = Stalin or Bernie, that's it!), and international relations... but there are other constructions.

This shit won't end well for him.

Unless he's playing some sort of 8D chess he might be cooked.

************************

so idk

but like this is just how things go

he promised a quick easy win over ukraine and that didn't happen

you can't do that for too long

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

He seemed to be extraordinarily vocal in western media. Lol

Like, the main voice of Russian opposition filtering out to us from over there.

It started to beg the question (1) how, why, and who else besides western media outlets had so much access to dude; and (2) why he was deemed such a trustworthy source.


In terms of a coup/attempted coup, I don't think it's 8D chess on any side's part but perhaps a desperate attempt to avert nuclear exchange. This is bc over the last few months:


-Russia recently deployed tactical nukes to Belarus (media report from May 26 - https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russia-belarus-sign-document-tactical-nuclear-weapon-deployment-belarus-2023-05-25/)

-The US allegedly approved sending depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine recently as well (ukraine media report from June 13, barely mentioned in Western media - https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/13/7406653/ )

-Ukraine has been raising alarm this week about Russia planning an attack on the Zaporhizhzia nuclear plant (media report from June 22 - https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/06/22/ukraine-zelensky-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant/)


There's a long history of Western statecraft leveraging oppositional (political/rebel/paramilitary) groups to try to forcefully depose adversarial leaders. So if that's what's happening, it shouldn't be surprising bc we've seen it before and more recent examples incl Venezuela, Somalia, Iran, Congo, etc. Charles Taylor is even still serving his sentence for war crimes in Liberia and Sierra Leone he committed under the direction and payment of the USG (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-16627628, https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2012/1/21/accused-war-criminal-taylor-worked-with-cia).

So if Wagner has in fact been compromised, it's pretty consistent with that tradition and I'm not mad if it prevents escalation to nuclear warfare. My only gripe, that I've had since this nonsense escalated last year, is it never had to come to any of this...

hes been airing his grievances for a while now. and he claims his unit was attacked by the russian military. so thats most likely the breaking point.

hes not a nato asset or anything like that lol.

And it's possible dude could have allegiance to nothing/noone but money too...

But my point still stands that, if he is/was in fact compromised, it'd be consistent with previous Western statecraft and simply place him in the company of other mercenaries like Charles Taylor, Osama BL/the Afg muhajideen, etc that the West later regretted funding/using...

exclusive from yours.


>But my point still stands that, if he is/was in fact
>compromised, it'd be consistent with previous Western
>statecraft and simply place him in the company of other
>mercenaries like Charles Taylor, Osama BL/the Afg muhajideen,
>etc that the West later regretted funding/using...

bin Laden/Mujahideen were not mercenaries, and your theory is not consistent at all with what occurred in Afghanistan.

Prigozhin was on bad terms with Russia's military. I don't.

In this context, mutually exclusive would mean that Prigozhin's feud with the Russian military could preclude Prigozhin being compromised by a third party. It doesn't.


>bin Laden/Mujahideen were not mercenaries, and your theory is not consistent at all with what occurred in Afghanistan.



Ok so, this is Article 47 of the "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977" that defines mercernaries in international law:

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-47

"2. A mercenary is any person who:

(a) is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;

(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;

(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;

(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;

(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and

(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces."


^I think Osama BL clearly met multiple criteria, from funding insurgents (it seems you want to split hairs about the US/West-supported Mujahideen and the neighboring Arabs Bin Laden independently supported to fight alongside them, but I don't see why if they fought in alliance against the Soviets) with his own money early on, to the role he played recruiting and organizing volunteers to form Al-Q (https://web.archive.org/web/20201101121742/https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3340101 , https://web.archive.org/web/20151028002646/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1670089.stm. ). The allegations of US training and weapons support have been floating around for a while and printed by reputable Western media outlets.

You seem to have a problem with my word choices... Would you have preferred that I use the term warlord? Bc I'm cool with that. Use whatever term you need to characterize the traits Osama BL, Charles Taylor, and Prigozhin have in common.

good grief.

That Western media (and God knows who else) has had such unfettered access to this dude - while he's literally on the battlefield directing the slaughter of Ukrainians - that they can regularly reach out to him for comment, directly quote him, and prop him up as some trustworthy narrator. And that it's not like there isn't plenty of precedent in Western statecraft of compromising warlords and using them to topple adversarial regimes, IF he is/was even compromised. What's bothering you, my suspicion or the precedents?

Additionally, you came at me in #564 about his beef with the Russian military. Are you aware that his issue with them was he felt they were holding Wagner BACK from fighting a deadlier conflict (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65516633)? And is it not bizarre that the Russian military began witholding supplies and information from him, yet plotting to absorb his troops? I mean, perhaps they suspect he's compromised too? Lol

This war-is-a-team-sport framework isn't helpful at all. Look how some of you rushed into this post breathlessly defending this dude/cheering on his coup attempt, as if he's not an even grimier ghoul than Putin lol. And, unless you have some kind of direct line of communication to Prigozhin, how can you even confidently confirm who he's willing to take cash from?




>good grief.
>

(like his telegram channel) and the media just analyzes that.

hes not out here doing exclusive interviews with anderson cooper or something lol.

one of dudes main areas of expertise is driving narratives, public perception influencing, utilization of communication technology, etc.

so hes willingly putting all of this information out there on his own accounts for the media to consume/amplify without interacting so much directly.

remember...hes the person credited with founding the 'internet research agency' aka the russian troll factory broadening russian influence in elections/politics worldwide. so messaging on social media is kinda his thing lol.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/18/world/europe/russia-troll-factory.html
https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/europe/russia-yevgeny-prigozhin-internet-research-agency-intl/index.html


also...and this should be obvious...but you dont have to be an intelligence asset to blab to the media and have them report on you (if he ever went that route). that knee jerk conflation of government/media (especially in a country like the united states with a free/private media ecosystem) is kinda tinfoily. not saying it cant or doesnt happen. but for that to be the initial conclusion without even a loose shred of evidence is misguided.

the article Lurkmode shares in #556 (Jun 2023 - https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-06-24-23/index.html), where CNN states "CNN has reached to Prigozhin's office for comment."


here are additional examples:


Nov 2022 - https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-prigozhin-putin-chef-vagner-limelight-ukraine-war/32112554.html - "Prigozhin, who could not be immediately reached for comment via his company"

Oct 2022 - https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/10/25/putin-insider-prigozhin-blasts-russian-generals-ukraine/ - "Prigozhin denied recent personal contact with Putin in comments to The Washington Post made late Monday through his press service."


To put it another way, this guy is like Russian bin Laden, right? Would it not have been strange, in the years following 9/11, to be reading MSM articles frequently including some line at the bottom saying "Osama BL did not return CNN's request for comment"?? Lol that's all I was trying to get at.

And yes I've read about his background leading Russia's disinfo racket. But maybe that supports my point? Bc even if he we allow for him simply being super accessible (via socials, media savviness, etc), it's still quite strange that he was presented as a trustworthy source in our media given his past interference work.


>
>also...and this should be obvious...but you dont have to be an
>intelligence asset to blab to the media and have them report
>on you (if he ever went that route). that knee jerk
>conflation of government/media (especially in a country like
>the united states with a free/private media ecosystem) is
>kinda tinfoily. not saying it cant or doesnt happen. but for
>that to be the initial conclusion without even a loose shred
>of evidence is misguided.
>

Ok so I see how you landed here. But I think a closer interpretation of what I was trying to say, again analogizing with the bin Laden parallel, is (a) it's probably unlikely that direct communications with one of the top adversarial combatants in the Ukraine war were unknown/unmonitored by US intelligence; and (b) if they were allowed to continue, without some kind of intervention from the IC/national security apparatus, um that's pretty weird and why was that lol.

Anyway, you have the right to think none of this was weird, just like I have the right to think it was weird... but I'll admit that I do think it's weird that you think it's weird that I think it's weird lol.


p.s. also, can we really say the US media ecosystem is free/private when the last 3 WH press secretaries, for both political parties, were hired directly from 3 major news networks? That revolving door dynamic isn't something you see as frequently in other Western countries like Canada, UK, etc, and private ownership doesn't necessarily preclude state messaging/propaganda...

p.p.s and re: the tinfoil thing, I think we just disagree on to what extent to weigh history/statecraft when contextualizing events. You seem to trust narratives from governments more than I do, and that's fine. Just means we'll probably have different perspectives a lot of the time (which shouldn't be a problem if ppl know how to talk to each other, but that may be asking too much of okp lol).

I call it the American God Complex when I see it

BUT

If it turns out that "Sleepy Joe" unknowingly helped facilitate the downfall of Putin, then his presidency gotta be discussed as being one of the most productive *ever*.

The entire point of Biden and the US support for Ukraine was to stifle his dictatorship. America has been urging the Russian people, no matter who, to rise up since this started. This isnt some "sleepy joe accident." Give credit where credit is due.

Grand opening Grand closing

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-06-24-23/index.html


Prigozhin says his forces "are turning our columns around," amid claims of deal brokered by Lukashenko
From CNN's Katharina Krebs and Nathan Hodge

Wagner boss Yevgeny Prigozhin published a new audio recording Saturday claiming he was turning his forces around from a march toward Moscow.

“We turning our columns around and going back in the other direction toward our field camps, in accordance with the plan,” he said in a message on Telegram.
The announcement comes as the Belarusian government claimed President Alexander Lukashenko had reached a deal with Wagner boss to halt the march of his forces on Moscow.

"This morning, Russian President Vladimir Putin briefed his Belarusian counterpart on the situation in southern Russia with the private military company Wagner," the statement said. "The heads of state agreed on joint actions.
"As a follow-up to the agreements, the President of Belarus, having being additionally informed on the situation through his own channels, and in agreement with the President of Russia, held talks with the head of Wagner PMC Yevgeny Prigozhin," the statement continued. "Yevgeny Prigozhin accepted the proposal of the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko to stop the movement of armed persons of the Wagner company on the territory of Russia and take further steps to de-escalate tensions."
CNN has reached to Prigozhin's office for comment.

dude has already shown a willingness for insubordination, blatantly contradicted kremlin propaganda on the motivation for the invasion, the magnitude of russian territory losses and casualties, etc.

putin had to make a public address talking tough about the insurrectionists being dealt with.

he would look weak if he just lets dude and his troops mosey back on down to their stations and act like nothing happened.

and if he did kill him, what happens with the 25,000 Wagner troops in Russia, not to mention the ones in Ukraine? it would be even more chaos than what is happening now.

aint hard to take out a person or group of people who constantly *report* their location to you...who you fund, arm, and supply logistics for...etc. you know where they are at all times, you know what their capabilities are in terms of munitions, and you know exactly what their leadership structure is.

as far as what happens to the wagner rank and file troops...if we know anything from history...its that when a leader gets taken out...theres *always* someone there in the pipeline who cant wait to take their place.

and the troops are largely gonna fall in line with whoever continues to pay them. thats kinda the definition of 'mercenary' lol.

There's no coming back from this.

Dude does run a mercenary group, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this was straight up extortion move. Putin/Russia apparently need this guy in Ukraine, where his private army does a lot of the fighting. Easier to slide him a shitload of cash and say that they won’t face charges rather than fight a different civil war.

outside his office building filled with boxes containing several billion rubles (~50M USD) cash smh:


https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/24/7408359/

Billions of roubles: Prigozhin claims Russian forces have found a van and 2 buses containing boxes of his money

KATERYNA TYSHCHENKO — SATURDAY, 24 JUNE 2023

Yevgeny Prigozhin, the leader of the Wagner Group Private Military Company, has confirmed that Russian security forces have found boxes full of money near his office in St Petersburg. Russian media reported that the boxes contain a total of 4 billion roubles (approximately US$47 million).

Source: Fontanka, a St Petersburg-based news outlet; Yevgeny Prigozhin’s press service

Details: Fontanka reported that a Gazel minivan stuffed full of boxes containing money was found near Prigozhin’s office, in the courtyard of the Trezzini Hotel in St Petersburg.

According to Fontanka, Prigozhin is believed to have his office in the Trezzini Hotel. During a search conducted in the hotel, the white Gazel minivan aroused suspicion as it did not belong to anyone living in Akademichesky Lane . The van was checked for explosives; when it was unlocked, boxes stuffed with money were found inside.

When the money contained inside the boxes found in the Gazel van was counted, the total was 4 billion roubles in cash (approximately US$47 million).

After this information was shared, Prigozhin issued a statement saying that in addition to the Gazel van, another two minibuses containing his money were also found.

"It wasn’t just the Gazel that was found, but two other minibuses that contained money earmarked for wages, compensation for Cargo 200s , and other things," Prigozhin said.

He also claimed that during its 10 years in business, Wagner Group has always used cash for all payments.

surely if the russian government paid him off to stop the coup...it wouldnt be front page news with the boxes laid all over the ground and photographed for everyone to know of the payment arrangement lol.

and he certainly wouldnt make a point to acknowledge the existence of the money, his ownership of it, and what he specifically spends it on lol.

this was most likely the russian gov (putin) actually searching his residence/belongings that were typically untouched and protected while he was in their favor. that shit was confiscated. i would say they will prolly use it to pay wagner troops going forward...but we know how kleptocratic the russian beauracracy is. somebody is prolly keeping most if not all of it for themselves.

in fact...if they report that they found $47 million...they prolly found $150 million and just officially listed $47 million so they have something to make him look corrupt to the public (and list in court if he would have ever gone on trial).

what is meant to intentionally mislead etc. In the middle of the article it's stated that the report is based on a press release from his office.

FWIW I don't think either your confiscation theory or MrHood75's pay off theory are implausible. This is def all speculation lol.

I will say that I personally detected more of a mocking tone in the article (which might support MrHood's pay off theory being the case) than a persecutory one (which I think would lean towards your confiscation theory), but that could be my own bias based on how suspicious I've been of Prighozhin.


And I confess that I also did some additional game-theorizing myself taking the sanctions situation into account lol (e.g. If one or more parties are under sanction, then they might have had an interest in presenting a financial transaction a certain way to slither around punitive measures. Alternatively, another strategy to evade sanction penalties on both a less controversial payment (say, from Russian government, as per MrHood75's theory) and a more controversial payment (say, from a covert state actor, as per the suspicion/theory I voiced above) could be to publicize the (purported) transaction details of the covert payment (i.e. amount, date, location, modality). By doing so, even if the West's intelligence could confirm transaction details of a Russian government payment (which they likely can lol), they wouldn't be able to apply penalties for whatever amount Russia paid Prighozin without also acknowledging the $50M of unknown/covert origin).

In comparison to that nazi in Ukraine I guess

Anyways your thoughts on Biden and his state dinner with Modi. You didn't hold back on Vex and his hero Tulsi, so I know you are going to go hard now.

https://apnews.com/article/biden-modi-india-state-dinner-76fd29bd3d5f06454f47aee52bf30d17

Vladimir won’t improve race relations and isn’t the horse you want to bet on. He doesn’t care about black America the way you want him to.

After the monumental L you took on Ukraine you move on to modi as if I support him LOL

This is like talking to a high schooler who hasn’t learned what the Economist is yet

>Vladimir won’t improve race relations and isn’t the horse
>you want to bet on. He doesn’t care about black America the
>way you want him to.

I knocked down your Pro Putin strawman the first time you brought it up long ago in this thread. reply 315 and 347

smh

>
>After the monumental L you took on Ukraine you move on to modi
>as if I support him LOL
>

Never said you support Modi, I asked for your thoughts on Biden and his state dinner with Modi.

>This is like talking to a high schooler who hasn’t learned
>what the Economist is yet

The only one taking an L is you. Vex called you out for the same thing(giving a pass on Dem's supporting Modi) and here you are doing it again.

"162. "We haven’t even begun To talk about the Modi connection "
In response to Reply # 0


Some of y’all reallllly don’t wanna go down this hole


Or maybe you do. Let’s see" - treasonous Amritsar



"169. "Raise your hand if you’re familiar with Modi? "
In response to Reply # 0


And what has happened in India under his reign?

Because Some of us got FAMILY back home dealing with this shit. And yes we look at Tulsi supporting this MURDEROUS mutherfucker very sideways

Her support for Modi is nowhere near as bad as her support for Assad though. If I were Syrian ....

Just a little more context to my tone. You dumb fucks ( not all of you. Just the ones doubling down citing Tulsis brown card.)


Do you have any idea how fucking tone deaf that reads? - treasonous

Amritsar

All that energy is gone when it's Biden with Modi at a state dinner.

treatment of minorities in India, and it actually motivated me to read more about it on my own.

Like I thought he was a poster with substantive views.


But after understanding more that he frames everything as team sports, I now believe he only argued passionately because Vex and Tulsi were once vocal supporters of Bernie lol

I don't think it had anything to do with social injustice in India. He just needs to know whether you agree with him on everything or not, and if not, you are on the opposing team and he will attack everything you say, regardless of the topic lol

It's honestly fascinating

>treatment of minorities in India, and it actually motivated
>me to read more about it on my own.
>
>Like I thought he was a poster with substantive views.
>


That's what I was thinking the first time I read some of his post about Modi.

>But after understanding more that he frames everything as team
>sports, I now believe he only argued passionately because Vex
>and Tulsi were once vocal supporters of Bernie lol
>

Exactly the team sports thing comes before anything. Any concern for the treatment of minorities in India takes a backseat to his flawed pick a side argument.


>I don't think it had anything to do with social injustice in
>India. He just needs to know whether you agree with him on
>everything or not, and if not, you are on the opposing team
>and he will attack everything you say, regardless of the topic
>lol
>

All true.

>It's honestly fascinating

It's bizarre, months past and he is celebrating something that was wrong the first time he said it. Doubling down on some fantasy he made up.

https://youtu.be/viuUzGGac5M

I just realized the Wagner Group was the same guys from the Battle Of Khasham in 2018 when the US Military obliterated them so bad Russia had to give out fake medals to save face.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/24/europe/russia-putin-wagner-uprising-saturday-intl/index.html

so dude is basically in safe haven (aka exile until hes murdered) in a russian satellite state where putin has complete influence and wagner troops are now basically an official paramilitary arm of russian defense (aka whoever paid them).

but its really just another hallmark of russian incompetence/ineffectiveness.

putin and prigozhin both caught Ls.

prigozhin got exposed as an emotional loose cannon who drew his own squad into a half cocked scheme to take on russian military leadership.

and putin got exposed for lack of leadership, local folks actually cheering the wagner opposition/occupation, weak response to complete insubordination, low military morale, and the list goes on.

basically russia lost to russia in a battle where nothing happened.

it doesnt get more pathetic than that.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/belarus-weekly-no-nukes-belarus-142939185.html

https://apnews.com/article/nato-russia-belarus-nuclear-weapons-195398abd1ad6010e701fb54c43aec96

empty threats from pooty poot as usual.

one of the best things to come out of this war is the gradual death of western ethnonationalists and tankies portrayal of putin as some sort of powerful demigod who is always 2 steps ahead of his opposition.

its like how trump/maga has forced the media to peel back its portrayal of the republican party as always organized and saavy.

surprise surprise.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/did-yevgeny-prigozhin-just-get-disappeared-by-duplicitous-putin

dude is still in russia with his whereabouts unknown.

r.i.p.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66599733

Condolences to the "I hope Russia wins the war" okp contingent.

Stevie Wonder saw this shit coming.

It was just a matter of time.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ten-killed-private-jet-crash-north-moscow-tass-2023-08-23/

When Prigozhin declared war on Putin and started marching troops in his direction.....How did he not figure it can only end with either him or Putin dead? Like how did he believe Putin would actually live with a truce? He thought Putin would let him live after that?

That being said. Who knows what happen. I can't put much faith in what's being reported to the public. have to consider, maybe he faked his death. Maybe Putin said if you don't surrender, I kill everyone you know and love. Maybe he got a Frank Pentangeli deal.

But I don't see how Prigozhin wouldn't think him surrendering wouldn't end with him dead.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

is that Progozhin thought he was just one part of a bigger coup that was gonna actually unseat Putin. But then everyone else flaked out and he had to improvise his explanations from there.

Is someone disputing that?

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

threatened, so not just Prigozhin’s family. That makes more sense to me…he may have been willing to risk it all, but once some of his leaders started getting family threats and breaking ranks, he had to call it off.

Here’s a swipe;

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russian-agents-threat-to-family-made-prigozhin-call-off-moscow-advance/ar-AA1d16aH

Russian security services threatened the families of the leaders of those leading the Wagner group's mutiny against the Russian government, UK intelligence sources told The Telegraph.

The report offers a reason Wagner leader Yevgeny Prigozhin may have called off the rebellion when his forces were bearing down on Moscow Saturday, having seized control of the city of Rostov-on-Don and other parts of southern Russia.

The report said that UK intelligence believes that Prigozhin had around 8,000 fighters under his command, a significantly lower number than the 25,000 he claimed to have.

Prigozhin, a convicted criminal who ran a catering firm before founding his private army, was long seen as one of Russian President Vladimir Putin' s closest allies, and his forces have played a key role in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

But for months Prigozhin has ferociously criticised Russian defense chiefs over the Ukraine war, and on Saturday launched the most serious challenge to Putin's authority since he took office in 1999.

Having accused the Russian military of bombing Wagner forces, on Saturday Prigozhin led his troops to seize the southern city of Rostov-on-Don then continued to push north towards Moscow, saying he was seeking the resignation of Russia's military leaders.

Russian military and security services sought to blockade the capital, and Putin in a furious video message accused the Wagner group of destabilizing Russia and pledged that the mutineers would be punished.

Then in another surprise development late on Saturday, Prigozhin called off the rebellion late Saturday.

The Kremlin said charges against Prigozhin and other Wagner fighters would be dropped, and Prigozhin would be allowed to go into exile in Belarus. It said that Wagner fighters who didn't take part in the mutiny would be absorbed into the Russian military.

The EU and US have imposed sanctions on two of Prigozhin's children and his wife, and says they are all closely involved in his businesses. The sanctions limit their capacity to travel outside Russia.

Mark Galeotti, an expert on Russian security services, told BBC News on Saturday that though Prigozhin's forces did not appear strong enough to topple Putin, they exposed serious limits to his power.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F4TKxuea0AAqj2z?format=jpg&name=medium

There's basically a circle of trump supporters/anti-vax/pro Russia deplorables.

Russia ain't shit but they stay with a narrative.

Funny, but fake.