How do you assess this war: a regional conflict between Ukraine and Russia, a proxy war between Russia and NATO, or an already emerging war for world dominance between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the USA? And does such assessment influence your judgement about the specific policies of the parties involved?
I foremost understand this war through the prism of the Russian GenStab: as a continuation of Pudding’s politics through other means. Several times over the last 20+ years, Pudding clearly said that Russia is in the state of war with the entire West (and especially the USA). Secondly, I understand it as Pudding’s war of extermination of Ukraine: for him, it’s entirely unacceptable for Ukraine to exist (at least not as an entity separate from Russia).
As next, I see this conflict in which Ukraine was forced to realise that it must completely (re)establish itself as independent from Russia: as a sovereign country with its own history, traditions, language, politics, and future. And it must enforce that way of thinking upon not only the Russians – but its ‘Western allies’, too. Thus, I see this conflict as an ‘ultimate version of the Ukrainian independence war’.
With other words: I do not see this conflict from the typically Western-centric point of view (think it was Mark Galeotti who described it as ‘Western narcissism’), and thus can’t see it as a ‘proxy war’. It’s a ‘proxy war’ only for those who think Ukrainians have no own minds (or are some sort of ‘misguided Russians’) and were played around by outside powers into separating from Russia: as a war based on some sort of sinister plot. I find that way of thinking outright dumb, definitely primitive, and certainly misguided.
From my point of view, the situation is the same like in Libya or Syria of the early 2010s: nope, there wasn’t any kind of ‘Western regime-change plot’, but the people of Libya and then the people of Syria rose against murderous regimes that were terrorising them for 40+ years. Neither needed some sort of ‘CIA-Mossad-al-Qaeda conspiracy’ to come to that idea and it was only after that point that the West became involved, and even then: only to a limited degree (indeed, in both cases the country went down the sink precisely because the West then refused to impose itself upon the locals and preferred to accept interests of other foreign powers for the sake of apeasment).
Of course, there are lots of foreign powers involved in Ukraine. There is lots of playing with Ukraine – especially by the Biden-Blinken-Sullivan gang (the EU has no coherent enough foreign policy to do anything similar; it’s rather so that Scholz is doing his stuff, Macron doing his, and everybody else their own….). And yes: because the West is supplying arms, money, and political support, the war is likely to ‘resemble’ a ‘proxy war’ for many. However, it was nobody else than the Russians who drove Ukrainians into taking things into their own hands, it was nobody else than Russians who invaded Ukraine (Pudding admitted this already back in 2015), and it is nobody else than Ukrainians who are defending their country, nation and their sheer existence as Ukrainians. That’s the bare essence of this conflict, and that’s always going to remain that way. Which is why this is also a war that is going to force Ukrainians into re-defining the role of themselves as a country and a nation in the future.
(….where I think Ukrainians should always keep in mind: when there is a huge country in Eastern Europe, with a population of some 37 million… then the West is not ‘horny’ about accepting it as ‘equal’, at least not without securing its own interests as first. ….and mind that the ‘West’, actually, needs Ukraine more than the other way around.)
Finally, this is a war I hope might force the West into fundamental reforms of the way it’s ruled (because what we have right now is, simply expressed, a ‘kleptocracy with limited pluralism’, but by no means ‘democracy’). This is what is adding the element of ‘war for the World dominance’ to the entire situation: if our oligarchy and its private and corporate interests continue dominating the politics and governance, and remain dependent on extracting profits from their cooperation with the PRC (and, latest analyses of the situation are indicative of both the USA and the EU being hopelessly unable of disentangling their commercial interests from Beijing, i.e. remaining neck-deep involved there), then our systems are not an inch better than any other dictatorships out there.
https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/ukraine-war-q-and-a-session-for-june-f24
Comment: I agree with this succinct analysis by Tom Cooper on the nature of this Ukraine-Russia conflict. It’s a far more reasoned discussion than me shouting “THE UKRAINIANS ARE FIGHTING FOR THEIR VERY EXISTENCE, YOU DUMB SON OF A BITCH!” But that’s the bottom line of Cooper’s answer. However, he doesn’t give the West a free pass.
Of course the Kremlin sees this differently. In their eyes, they are fighting the West and the US in particular. But most importantly, they are fighting to reestablish Greater Russia, “to reunite the Russian people together – in its entirety of Great Russians, Belarusians and Little Russians” as Petr Akopov put it on 26 February 2022 in his RIA Novosti victory editorial.
Although the collective West does want Ukraine within the Western bloc, they have a funny way of showing it. The Eastern Europeans see a continuation of centuries of Kremlin aggression and act accordingly. Western Europe and the US seem just as focused on preserving the Russian state and avoiding a nuclear confrontation as they are on ensuring Ukrainian independence. Our insane policy of escalation management is proof of this. Insane as it is, it is not as insane as seeking a nuclear reaction from a Russia facing not just a lack of a victory, but a real loss. I think this is a fine line we are trying to straddle.
TTG
Tom Cooper shows exactly the problem with US foreign policy. It’s made by people who lack knowledge and understanding of the local politics, ethnic issues, etc. I am not going to go into Syria and Libya, how did western takeover work out in Iraq and Afghanistan? As much as I support Ukraine in its fight for independence, I also understand that Ukrainian language and identity is not a monolith. This is the root cause of the ethnic and cultural tensions in Ukraine that predate Russian invasion in 2014.
Majority of Ukrainians do not identify with national identity and language pushed by the Western Ukrainian nationalists, which is currently the “official” language and identity. Zelensky himself is not fluent in the Western Ukrainian (Galician) dialect. Significant percentage of Ukrainians (not Russians, Ukrainians) have Russian as their native language, at least 10% according to the 2001 census.
US made a mistake in supporting (enabling, financing, whatever you want to call it) Western Ukrainian nationalist in taking over the government in 2014 who then proceeded to alienate large sections of the population, especially in the East, with their historical revisionism, language laws and a push to codify Ukrainian culture, language and identity as Western Ukrainian. This, more than anything, opened the doors for Putin to come in as a “protector” in Eastern Ukraine. Casting this conflict as a simple Russian invasion overlooks millions of Ukrainians that did not accept nationalist takeover in 2014 and took up arms to fight against the new Ukrainian government.
I don’t see it mentioned much that the war started in 2014, that there was a peace treaty agreed on that was never implemented, non-implementation of which directly lead to 2022. Zelensky himself was elected on a peace platform, promising to implement the peace treaty. Non-implementation of the treaty was a direct consequence of Western/NATO policy and pressure, and has been confirmed by Merkel and Hollande since 2022. The truth is that majority of people in Ukraine wanted to see the state federalized as per peace treaty so that they would have more control over their lives, their language and their culture, and not have it dictated by Right Sector and their ilk from Kiev. This was the way to preserve Ukraine and make sure it survives long enough to allow its national identity to form organically rather than by diktat.
So casting the blame for situation in Ukraine solely on Putin, while ignoring or downplaying the role played by US and NATO is supreme hypocrisy and in my eyes discredits Cooper’s analysis. A large portion of the population in Ukraine does not subscribe to the Western version of Ukrainian identity. If their concerns are ignored they will support Russia and Putin over Kiev and Ukraine will not have a future as a country, but only as a bitter Western Ukrainian nationalist remnant with a fraction of its territory.
I agree with your analysis on Russia/Ukraine. As far as Syria and Libya these were not organic civil wars they were uprisings by minority factions that were supported by the US and the Europeans. In Gaddafis case it was oil and in Assads case it was his alliances with Iran and Russia.
Voislav
“…millions of Ukrainians that did not accept nationalist takeover in 2014 and took up arms to fight against the new Ukrainian government.”
Yes. And other millions of Ukrainians took up arms to fight for a future that they craved. But the Russian invasion destroyed all possibility of the Ukrainians working it our for themselves. Yes, Western countries favored the Maidan faction, but their commitment level was low. Their investment was minor and they were very distrustful of the corrupt Ukrainian elites. Only Russian actions produced significant Western levels of support.
Now both sides are dominated by outside actors pursuing non-Ukrainian interests. “Ukrainians working it our for themselves” may sound hopelessly idealistic, but in fact that is how these sorts of issues usually do resolve. With nobody happy but everybody getting enough to make further conflict unattractive. Or with fracture and separation. But either way based on their own goals and strengths.
I do have a different take.
I think the internal issues in the Ukraine are exaggerated.
Why do I say that?
Because the majority of the Orthodox Christians (NOT members of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, in Communion with Rome) in the Ukraine look to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (headquartered in Kiev, and recently granted Autocephalous Status by the Patriarch of Constantinople) rather than Moscow’s Russian Orthodox Church. (In fact, the Russian Orthodox Church has split from Constantinople over the issue, rare in the collegial and Autocephalous East.)
Additionally, the victories over the Black Sea Fleet would not have been possible without widespread support for the Ukrainian cause in Crimea.
The areas of the Donbas recaptured by Ukraine in its Summer 2022 Offensive,
also has not seemed very restive.
I think the Russian invasions and occupations in both 2014 1ne 2922 have proven the most effective unifying force the modern Ukraine has ever had.
Good article.
I argue that for most of the article you could substitute “Israel” for “Ukraine” and “Muslims” for Russia and the article’s validity would change an iota.
Both Ukraine and Israel even have a “West Bank” where other ethnicities exist in conflict with the governing majority.
Funny how someone can support one cause and not another when the underlying principles are the same.
Eric Newhill
And for both, the “West Bank” is located to the East. Sorry. Couldn’t help myself.
Fred,
Ha ha. I know. I guess whoever gets to name the bank after a direction is all a matter of whose perspective takes hold first.
IMO, Israel should take back the meme and start calling it the “East Bank”.
People get hooked on memes and the memes become their reality
Eric Newhill,
It’s the west bank of the Jordan River so that name makes perfect geographic sense, but I’m sure you knew that. The east bank is Jordan.
Not if you’re looking down from above the North Pole. Then East is left and West is right.
Eric – posted this reply in wrong section:-
Eric – it’s possible to argue February 22nd – 24th 2022, the invasion of Ukraine, both ways. It looks to me as if the Russians were taking pre-emptive action to deal with a real and urgent threat, not taking the first step in a campaign to recover or dominate previous Soviet satellites.
But you could also argue that the Russians were fully aware of what NATO was up to, could have responded differently, but let it go to the wire to provide themselves with a respectable casus belli.
I focus more on the European side than the American and it does seem to me that the Europeans were using American muscle for their own ends. And knew very well that if the Russians were provoked or sufficiently alarmed, they’d take some military action that would enable the imposition of sanctions to destroy the Russian economy.
That they’d hoped to destroy the Russian economy is past doubt. They convict themselves out of their own mouths on that. Also past doubt is the degree of European commitment to the attempt to defeat Russia. Or rather, the commitment of the European politicians. They weren’t, as most American commentators would have it. mere bit players dragged into it all by Washington. They were playing their own hand.
I therefore don’t see the US as the grim ogre dragging naïve Europeans behind him into this war. That’s just the happy talk the Europeans console or justify themselves with as the disaster unfolds. I see the US as the dumb giant played by the EU/UK.
Because Biden would have found some other way of getting at the Russians had Scholz, the only really powerful politician in Europe, told him no in Ukraine. And that argues that the provocation that forced Russia into war was premediated. We’re not looking at a Putin waking up one morning and deciding it was a good day for rolling his tanks over the border. We’re looking at a Putin doing all he could to prevent conflict and finally being forced into it.
Premediated provocation to force Russia into a destructive sanctions war? Or Russian imperialism finally breaking loose and using a crisis on the LoC as a pretext?
You can argue it either way, I recognise that. Because we have “no window into men’s souls” and intention is far more difficult to assess than action.
When we get to the war itself, however, we’re on firm ground. This must have been the most incompetently conducted war ever seen. Shockingly so. NATO made all the mistakes going and then some. Who are these people who prance around playing soldiers but haven’t the faintest idea how to do it?
These are not the heirs of Eisenhower or Marshall, let Breedlove summon up their legacy as he pleases, They’re losers, With the failure of the all-important sanctions war the military war was in any case a dead duck. Forcing our proxies to continue fighting in those circumstances was straight mass murder made yet more extensive by our incompetence.
How I see it and have seen it from the very start. Colonel Lang and now TTG have permitted me to put that view forward. But to be realistic, this war will end as it was bound to end whichever way we in the West assess it and however we fumble around with it.
On Gaza, you and I have different views. There’s no doubt, however, that after the way we’ve handled it, Europeans and Americans alike, the West has lost more prestige for the wider world. That wider world Blinken still dreams is at our beck and call.
Colonel Lang never had any time for R2P but at least some of us in the West could fool ourselves that we were going about the planet seeking monsters to destroy. Chastening, that most of the planet now sees us as the monster.
EO,
With respect, I just don’t buy your version. It makes no sense to me.
NATO seeking to wreck the Russian economy? Agree. By NATO’s own actions and words there can be no doubt.
NATO and Ukraine seeking to physically attack Russia; as in invade the country? No way. There is nothing like solid proof of that – and such a move would represent madness of the highest order on Ukraine’s part.
However, let’s say that NATO+ Ukraine had gone stark raving mad and was poised to invade Russia. How did Russia attacking Ukraine “preemptively” help Russia’s military position? I can’t fathom how, myself. If Ukraine attacked Russia, then Russia would be seen positively in the world community and it would be difficult for NATO countries to justify aiding Ukraine in its aggressive and unprovoked war. Russia would be justified in pulling out all of the stops, maybe even tactical nukes. The Russian populace would be highly motivated to mobilize for war.
If you’re pushing the idea that Russia had to attack to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, then preemptively invading Ukraine still makes no sense. Russia would have NATO on its border even if it wiped out Ukraine.
You’re right, Eric, it makes no sense at all. Because that’s not why the Russians moved.
Walrus put it more compactly than I was able to:-
” in my opinion, the Russians launched a classic spoiling attack in Donbass to prevent a Ukrainian advance.
“As you would be aware, once Ukrainian forces had advanced into Donbass, the outcome would have been a catastrophe for the predominantly Russian civilians of that region. The Azov types could rerun their grandfathers WWII genocidal behaviour and the Russians would have had the impossible task of trying to protect the Donbass civilians from them.”
Russia invaded Ukraine because if it hadn’t the Kiev forces on the LoC could have got into the Donbass and wreaked havoc there. That was a risk no Russian leader could ever have taken.
The Kiev forces were larger than the LDNR forces protecting the Donbass. The LDNR forces would not have been able to hold them. The shelling was building up. Neither Biden nor Scholz were stopping the escalation though either could have. Attempts by the Russians to cool things down were contemptuously ignored.
As said, fool around like that on the borders of a major power and we must expect what we get. Now we’re getting it. FOFA.
I wish our proxies weren’t getting it too, and getting it worse by far. But that’s how it usually turns out for our proxies.
EO,
Our “proxies” for what exactly? Are you saying that NATO wanted to slaughter ethnic Russians in the Donbas? Why would NATO want such a thing?
Those Donbas Russians seem to me akin to the Palestinians. They are set up to be political tools and political victims, used at will by larger powers and too stupid and belligerent to understand how they are being used.
Yes, yes, yes… I know Kiev did this, Israel did that, but few ever ask why it was done. What did the “victims” do to merit such actions on behalf of the greater power? The mythology just has it that the “victims” are innocent and the “victimizers” are just plain evil. End of story.
You, as is typical of the pro-Russia crowd, assume that Russia wasn’t using the Donbas people as a proxy and an excuse. You assume that Russia’s involvement was born of honor, desire to protect and truth, justice, freedom, etc. I guess you assume that b/c Putin said so and Putin would never lie. He’s not like other politicians! Sounds like a tale of mythological good v evil proportions, which cause me to become skeptical.
There is a weird self-flagellation phenomenon among westerners these days wherein the westerners flagellating themselves and their societies assume the worse about themselves and the best about “the other”. I suppose it is something TTG might recognize from the Jesuit tradition. There is also more than a hint of Rousseau’s “noble savage” in the syndrome. Something Col Lang and I strongly agreed on is that Rousseau should have been drawn, quartered and the remains fed to sharks along with his writings. Col Lang met a lot more “savages” than I ever did and he states never witnessed any exceptional nobility.
I do think that there was a western backed coup in 2014 in Ukraine and I think that stinks. I originally allowed that fact to make me emotional about how I thought about the invasion. Then I calmed down and was able to decouple the two events. If you look at the history the Donbas has been in a rebellion for at least ten years. Do you really believe that Russia wasn’t encouraging that attitude?
Directly to one of your points (and Walrus’); “Russia invaded Ukraine because if it hadn’t the Kiev forces on the LoC could have got into the Donbass and wreaked havoc there” – I don’t buy that either. Even strictly militarily, there were options other than a full scale invasion of a Ukraine. Russia is very good at constructing defenses, I’ll give them that. Why didn’t Russia just move into the Donbas and get their engineers building what they have now built? Why not issue an international statement that if Kiev attacks the Donbas, then Russia will take measures against Kiev? Explain the situation openly and clearly to the world. Then wait to see if Kiev attacked ethnic Russians. If Kiev initiated such conflict, then Russia looks like the good guys you proclaim they are. Would that be less militarily advantageous than jumping off a surprise invasion? I don’t think so. The surprise invasion isn’t working so great (no end in sight) and the sentiment of the world is against Russia. Russia could have just as easily waited and then jumped off a surprise counter attack had Kiev moved on the Donbas. Even if you think NATO is guilty, Putin is stupid enough to be goaded by NATO into stupid action.
I have listened to many Putin speeches. Sometimes he plays around with the Nazis attacking ethnic Russians meme. However, he sometimes goes farther and explains how Ukraine is historically part of Russia and should be again. You like to read sinister motives into the words and actions of the west (correctly sometimes, IMO). Well, how about being fair and balanced and doing the same when looking at Russia?
Eric – alternatively, why didn’t Putin just wait for the Kiev forces to attack across the LoC? He’d then have been internationally recognised as having been in the right. Responding to aggression rather than initiating it.
So that’s three options the Russians had in February 2022. The one you mention, only moving in to protect the Donbass. Waiting for Kiev to attack. Or what they did.
I’m not military but even so I can give you a host of sensible reasons for rejecting the first two options. A military expert could probably find more. But the military experts who had the job of assessing those three options were Russian. Don’t know who they are or what their reasoning was. (Though Rudskoy maybe gives us a lead on that, as do some others) So we’re more or less in the dark as to that reasoning except for speculation.
They chose the third option. That was their response to the threat posed. Did they have the right to choose that option? Are we entitled to tell them what they should have done?
I don’t think so. That there was a threat you accept. Else you would not suggest they should have occupied the Donbass in response to that threat. Surely, given that we had posed the Russians a threat, it was up to them how they decided to deal with it?
Seems to me we want to play both sides of the board. Pose the threat and then dictate to the Russians how best they should have dealt with it. We don’t get to play both sides of the board in this case, just ours. Up to us whether we posed the threat or not. Up to the Russians how they coped with it.
Solution. Don’t pose the threat in the first place. A word from Biden or Scholz would have made Zelensky stop posing that threat. In fact, given that we’d been arming and training the Kiev forces for eight years, and as the American papers recently reported have been pretty well in charge in Kiev, could be that Zelensky was posing the threat on our instructions anyway.
Either way, whether Zelensky posed the threat or not was up to us. Whether we could have made Zelensky pull back but didn’t, or whether we told him to pose the threat, the posing of that threat was under our control.
Main thing is, the threat was posed, If we hadn’t wanted the Russians to adopt any of the possible responses mentioned , we could have prevented the SMO by removing the threat.
We didn’t, and what followed followed. A straight case of FAFO. You don’t fool around on the borders of a major power like that and then think you’ve got the right to dictate how that major power should respond.
………………………
In reality, Putin did explain his reasoning at the time. The might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb argument.
He knew the West would impose sanctions intended to cripple the Russian economy if he made any military move to meet the threat posed by the Kiev forces. So he might as well go in and clear the whole Ukrainian mess up.
Clearing that mess up was no big deal from a military point of view. That wasn’t ever a military war it was possible for the Russians to lose, barring nuclear of course as said above. It was the sanctions war that that all depended on. Win that, win the lot, as we’re seeing.
What puzzles me is what our side thought they were up to. OK, “let’s break Russia with sanctions” I can understand. A silly gamble, I always thought, given the strength of the Russian economy, but even so the politicians decided to take that gamble.
But it’s been obvious from the beginning, as I used to write in indignantly to English blogs at the start, that they had no Plan B. Any gamble can fail, What did the politicians think they’d do if this one did?
They didn’t do any thinking on that at all! The politicians did their FAFO nonsense on the LoC with no fall-back position if the sanctions war didn’t come off.
I can only assume they were mad. Blinded by hubris. Listening to them talk, from Biden and Scholz down, that actually doesn’t seem that unlikely an explanation.
EO,
“That there was a threat you accept. Else you would not suggest they should have occupied the Donbass in response to that threat. ”
No I don’t accept that there was threat; not the way you mean it. Maybe Ukraine was going to make a major move on the Donbas, maybe they weren’t. I think the probability of Ukraine making a move on Russia itself was an order of magnitude smaller. Your idea of just preemptive war is a dangerous road to go down. Nations see threats all over the place every day. There’d be a heck of a lot more war if the EO doctrine became the standard cause to start shooting.
If Ukraine attacked the Donbas with overwhelming force, then Russia could have responded and made a case that they were in the right. Then the whole bit about Ukrainian Nazis on the march would have resonated with the world. Would Russia have been disadvantaged militarily by playing defense? Maybe and maybe not. Political support is an advantage that cannot be discounted. Could the US have justified pouring $gazillions into a blatant Ukrainian aggressor? I don’t think so. Also, why didn’t Russia simply prepare for a defense, military geniuses that they are fabled to be?
However, you skipped past something else I said – and I thought you would. Russia was probably prompting the Donbas separatists to attack Ukraine since 2014. You want a story line wherein innocent Russia was just minding its own business and evil scheming Ukraine + NATO stirred up all of the trouble. I don’t think the facts support that narrative. It is clear that Putin always had designs on Ukraine because he saw Yeltsin as a doofus for allowing it to go its own way. Perhaps Putin was “ok” living with an independent Ukraine as long as its leadership maintain close ties to Russia and weaker ties to NATO, but he didn’t like it. It wasn’t his ideal and he has pretty much said so himself. It seems to me that after the 2014 coup Putin decided to stir up trouble in Ukraine using the Donbas and Ukraine responded as expected.
Yes the US/NATO was stupid to effect a 2014 coup in Kiev, but Putin was equally stupid to respond by starting a war he can’t finish.
I am one who thinks that, in this world, might makes right and everything else, all the moralizing and legalities and international courts and other bodies are just political means of fighting for the sneaky weaklings and whiners of the world. It’s not the world I would prefer to live, but it is the world we do live in – always has been and always will be. Had Russia attacked Ukraine with overwhelming force (aka shock and awe) and smashed Kiev and its regime in the first month of the SMO, Russia would now control Ukraine and would be reincorporating it back into Russia. There’s not a damn anything anyone could do about that except bitch and moan and levy more limp wristed sanctions. However, Russia F’ed up their invasion in every way possible. They didn’t wait for fair justification to invade. They didn’t ramp up armaments production in preparation, nor conscript sufficient troops. They weren’t, in any way, prepared to totally smash Ukraine, instead gambling on scaring Kiev into a quick settlement, and thus lost the initiative. They didn’t assess that NATO would step in and assist Ukraine in important ways to keep the fight going. They didn’t assess what the aftermath would look like. Now they want to settle. If Russia were winning the way the peanut gallery says they are, they would not be asking for peace; Ukraine would be. Russia is being worn down. Russia is hardly the big bad 4D chess playing bear they were made out to be.
If you want to believe that NATO goaded Russia into this position that they find themselves in, then have at it, but that scenario means that NATO has out-smarted and out-fought Russia – something the Ritters, Johnsons, Martyanovs and their sycophants said was inconceivable*.
* The peanut gallery might benefit from watching the fun kids’ movie, ‘The Prices Bride’
EO,
Inconceivable!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9MS2y2YU_o
The relative failure of sanctions is an important issue (that no one is talking about).
On the other hand, Ukrainian targeting, especially the destruction of the Black Sea Fleet to cause Russia to collapse in the occupied territories when the LoCs are cut was brilliant.
The Ukrainian defeat of the Russian attack on Kiev (which could have won the war quickly), was likewise, brilliant.
Finally, the likely Ukrainian victory will ultimately turn on the Russians not doing anything about their key weaknesses: 1) the limited LoCs into Theater; 2) Russian lack of logistics discipline; and 3) Russian weaknesses in HUMINT and Stratgic IMINT.
Putin wants it to be seen as a proxy war. He needs that excuse as a whitewash for the public to cover up for their dead sons and husbands. A half a million Russian boys are sent home without an arm or a leg, or in a coffin if they are lucky, or rotting in a field in Ukraine. He now has to recruit soldiers from Africa or use press gangs to forcefully conscript Central Asians into uniform and ship them to the killing fields. Meanwhile he keeps driving Russians to the poorhouse. Being raped economically by India and China who are gorging themselves on Russian oil at prices below cost. Buying weapons from North Korea and Iran at high ticket prices. And his fatcat buddies are staying in the rear and becoming billionaires ripping off the public with arms contracts that they cheat on by using substandard components.
Ruining Russia in order to punish Ukrainians solely because they wanted what the Europeans in the EU have enjoyed for years. He, Putin, should have applied for EU membership instead of invading a separate sovereign nation just because they requested EU membership. The Italians and the Czechs tried to get him in the EU but he refused. Back ten years ago a huge percentage of young Russians “viewed the EU as an important economic and strategic partner for their country”. Putin’s Russia used to be the EU’s largest trading partner. It’s unfortunate for the Russian people that he threw that all away by stealing land from his neighbors and bombing their cities when they objected to his theft.
Leith,
Really? Who in their right mind would want to be part of that pathetic mess called “The EU”. Next they’d be trying to make Russia go “green”, leave farm land fallow, and allow a gazillion damn muslims to migrate there, among other retarded EU initiatives that are destroying Europe. Screw that.
However, no need to invade Ukraine, I’m with you on that (though I care orders of magnitude less than you do)
Eric Newhill,
There’s still a line of countries that are candidates for EU membership. Only Greenland and Britain have left.
Greedy lemmings have a high birth rate, which offsets, to some extent, their group cliff diving behavior.
Sort of left the EU, TTG. Little baby steps. We haven’t made it out the door yet. It’s not a set-up it’s easy to leave.
I used to play the haunting EU national anthem at that time. I just loved the concluding guitar solos and the story turned out to be more prophetic than we could have guessed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09839DpTctU&ab_channel=Eagles
Around much the same time I went looking around the 2019 Munich Security Conference.
Tony Blair at a side meeting telling the audience – it was at the height of the Brexit dispute – it wasn’t a good time to be telling the great British public what was going forward. Gavin Williamson, Secretary of State for Defence, glad-handing the assembled Eurocrats and continental politicians and letting them know that, no matter the regrettable fuss over leaving the EU, we were still on side against Russia. Possible the sanctions war was brewing even at that time.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-munich-security-conference
The great majority of our MP’s were opposed to leaving the EU. Our Uniparty still is, though they dare not say so in as many words now. We are not only on side in the war against Russia. We still flatter ourselves we’re leading the charge. “Delivering the leadership that the world turns to Great Britain to actually provide” in Mr Williamson’s words.
I’ll believe we’ve left the EU when we’re the other side of that door. And when we’re no longer riding the White Tiger, alongside Eurocrats backing neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
leith
Putin wants it to be seen as a proxy war and the West wants it to be seen as Ukraine’s fight against unprovoked Russian imperial aggression. Russian irredentism was and remains a factor but the war has certainly developed into a full blown proxy war in which the stakes for both principals are very high. The Serbian president just gave a very sober interview (in English) to a Swiss publication. At the 18 minute mark he eloquently describes why neither Russia nor US/NATO can now afford to lose. Vučić predicts this situation exploding into a major conflict within 3-4 months. I think we will soon be looking at proxy war in the rear view mirror.
BA,
Good find with that interview. I’m with Vucic and have been saying so since 6 months into the SMO. MAD or no MAD someone might still push the button once conventional combat between Russia and NATO crosses some threshold level of destruction. Neither side can afford to Lose. TTG’s suggestion that Russia just pack up and go home is never going to occur, but NATO will not allow Russia to prevail either.
I suspect the Russian collapse will be like 1917. The Russians are good at fighting but bad at logistics.
Ideally, the US could have used these events to lure Russia out of the PRC’s orbit and into Europe.
That did not happen, but without the able authoritarian Putin, a failed Russian state won’t benefit the PRC as much as a Russian vassal the PRC could absorb.
John Minehan,
I’m not convinced Russia will collapse. The Kremlin has solid control over the minds of the Russian people, at least in the realm of politics. Whatever the outcome of their military adventure in Ukraine, the Kremlin can spin it as a victory or, at least, not a defeat and the people will accept it.
John, from your comments at the now-closed Trump trial post,
I gather you are a lawyer.
(I am not.)
If so, you might find this interesting:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/06/fec-commissioner-blasts-dojs-silence-as-bragg-contorted-federal-law-to-get-trump/
I find it quite persuasive.
Interested in your opinion.
Keith Harbaugh, This is an interesting issue, but I tend to agree with some of the comments.
Because of the interplay of NYS and Federal statutes, the fact that there is not absolute Federal Preemption of the issue and because the Federal claims are “pendant” to state law claims, I suspect this stands.
As Justice Holmes said, “Hard cases make bad law,” but there we are.
Larry Johnson spent a week in Russia, where he met with the likes of Alexander Dugin and Maria Zakharova.
He has made a trip report, of sorts, through several videos and blog posts.
Of course this maybe a filtered or sanitized version of what conditions in Russia are really like, but even so what he says may be of some value.
LJ 2024-06-06
St. Petersburg, Put It On Your Bucket List
https://www.youtube.com/live/7M_gUb8aioQ
LJ 2024-06-09
Back in the USA
https://www.youtube.com/live/vaWEocIANPY
LJ 2024-06-10
My Week in Russia
https://www.youtube.com/live/UIkPP4lEYMs
2024-06-09
BACK IN THE USA
https://sonar21.com/back-in-the-usa-leftist-european-governments-in-trouble-as-u-s-democrats-fret-over-how-to-jettison-biden/
2024-06-10
FINAL UPDATE ON RUSSIA
https://sonar21.com/final-update-on-russia-and-questions-about-zionist-hostage-rescue-op/
It would seem in the long term,30 years or maybe less that russia has looked to the usa and has decided that it is headed for a hispanic majority possibly anti European and is setting in motion the weaning of Europeans away from us influence.The immigration policies of the us are now firmly tilted in a latin american direction.I believe that the catholic church has much too gain from this.
From the time of the conquistadors arriving in south america and putting an end to human sacrifice up till now the church has had considerable influence.I believe this to be a good thing in the same way that islam spread amongst the arab and north african tribes and did way with cannibalism and voodoo etc
So what does this mean
After the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy “signed a decree enacting a National Security and Defense Council decision to impose personal sanctions against representatives of religious organizations associated with Russia”.[7] Ukraine’s government will specifically examine the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate and ban any activities relating to pro-Russian
Not sure
Could russia see itself as the guardian of white European man and oppose the us and the wests idea of diversity and inter marriage.possibly.
I once said that in south africa the brown people are the nation of the future.
The gene pool needs diversity but if it comes at the cost of either race then i am not so sure.
Intermarriage of ashkenazi jews with people of indian descent in one such way of boosting the gene pool of jews
These are all my own ideas and not to be taken seriously.
Pero, los países hispanoparlente de América del Sur son ahora más protestantes que parte de la Iglesia Católica. (E agora, essa é a situação do Brasil também.)
…West Coast..East Coast…Cuba…How Many Submarines are out there Joe…..Putins clear Signal…to G7 Joe…You Give Ukraine Weapons to Fire into Ukraine..You Start this all over again Now..?? Billions…To Start Again..Well…Now You Are Weak and Desperate..Joe…..You and The World Face Jihad..Death Every where.
.The Rider on the Black Horse Eh..? Covens..The Works in Dark Places..
You Have Been Since Chinas New Year Welcome..a Fireworks.Burst of Covid Virus..and the Culture Ruin on American Society..and Education..Joe…You Now Have Jihad all over America…And You have Done Nothing…
Whats going on in Space…Weird Events ..Stuck Capsule. Space Warfare that can Shut Nations Down..Lights out..and No Money..No Food..No Gas..Only more War..
Conventional…Urban War…Thats The NEXT War..All Brewed up..in just
three Years… Yep…Light Years Beyond That First Truck into Ukraine..2020..
Last Chance Pilgrims..Get Your American Pie..Drive Your Chevy..Or Alans Ford..
to the Levy…And Watch The Corpses on the South Bank Float By..Eh..
What Kind of War..? One YOU Have Never Seen Before..Universal..
Jim,
In 2033 Social Security payments are going to be slashed by 17% across the board because the program is insolvent, but we sure can spend a lot of money on everything from fighting Russia and on illegal aliens and lots of crap in-between that we didn’t ask for and don’t want.
You will see something like the 1983 Greenspan Commission that will make the changes needed to keep Social Security and Medicare functional for another 40 years or so.
It is a proxy war and has been brewing since the 90s. The cold war never ended but moved into the economic realm then escalated to pipeline poker and asymmetrical conflicts. From leveraging terror in former Yugoslavia, Chechnya, and Syria, to occupying Afghanistan and Iraq, to fracturing Ukraine from the Russian periphery. I also see nothing wrong with any of it. The real war is unavoidable due to climate change and it will be where the two powers are at their closest: In the Arctic. Right now Putin is following Dugin’s playbook by trying to balkanize the US and weaken the resolve by agitating both sides of every divisive topic. There are more currently more Russian spies in the US than at any other time in history. Russian bot farms have been caught organizing both sides of demonstrations and protests. It’s in Dugin’s playbook. They directly support the secession movements in California, Texas, and Alaska among others. . They have more GRU/SVR inside Mexico than any other country and they are exploiting our border politicization between both parties. Americans (especially the few quislings in the GOP) need to wake the fuck up and stop pandering to Russia. If Ukraine falls, we are in WWIII.
Yes..Its Always Been The “Russians..”…The Planners.. Were…and Always Have Been..The Same… Historical…Thousands of Years…Exodus…Israel..Tribe of Judah..Rome…Vatican…The “Tribes” Scattered…Germany..to Russia..Who..Karl Marx…Revolution..”Liberation” Theology”’Wars…..More Wars..
America..becomes a Hive…Yes…By Who.?????
.More Karl Marx…Dynamics…the “Current “Krystal Collusion”…Who Reall
Paid for that Dossier…Did You Back Story Beyond Hillary..on That One..”
Every Decade..every Year…It All Grows..Worse..Record Setting Famines..Floods
Volcanos….. Violence..Diseases..And Predicted…Its a Mad Mad Mad World..
Joe…. “No Code”………Bye Bye Birdie…
Russia will collapse! Because the people’s support for Putin is all fake (and maybe gay – to complete the meme). Meanwhile:
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (25%) I bet Germans really missed Merkel and her enlightened leadership now.
U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (25%) Wow! How’s the de-banked Nigel guy doing compared to that?
French President Emmanuel Macron (21%) – didn’t he just dissolve Parliament?
How’s Biden the 81,000,000 vote getter doing? I foresee a landslide in the near future.
And of course President for life Zelensky. Ukrainians are with him! Because they get jailed if they aren’t.