Doesn’t this table leave out something though? I vaguely remember something else going on in Ukraine in 2014…
7 Likes
Maidan or color revolution
I call it a coup
2 Likes
Yes, Monroe doctrine for me, but not for thee. But international politics is never fair (or balanced). It must be that astute political calculations on our side have estimated the magnitude of the potential upside surpasses the nearly certain downsides, right?
5 Likes
It is interesting that we could start with the premise that Our Betters in the DC & Brussels Swamps are reasonable people dedicated to world peace whereas the denizens of Moscow are evil criminals intent on stamping their boot on the face of happy Westerners. If we start with that premise, then of course everything that has happened (and which will happen) is Moscow’s fault.
Or we could look at the facts. The unnecessary continuation of NATO after the USSR collapsed. NATO’s subsequent aggression in far off Iraq, Serbia, Libya, Afghanistan. The threatening expansion of NATO towards Russia’s borders. The treatment of Russia as either an enemy or a cow to be milked. The political interference by the West in Ukrainian politics. The explicit double-dealing by Our Betters on the Minsk Accords which tried to put an end to the civil war in the Ukraine.
It is hard to avoid the objective conclusion that – whatever problems may exist on the Russian side – Our Betters have been duplicitous and unnecessarily threatening in their approach. What is Our Betters’ pretext?
5 Likes
Odd that the government that aligns with the populations overwhelming preference was overthrown for a government that doesn’t align with their preference.
6 Likes
NOTHING odd about that. It was, clearly, a CIA-backed operation. ?How else does one explain all the organization.
Coups are difficult to execute, especially in former Soviet countries, where neither the people nor the culture has had any significant nurturing of the whole “reisstence culture”. One fights a regime because one can envision a better society without the regime than with it. If you don’t know of a better society, ?how are you suppose to argue FOR it. Look at our own college campuses. They are just FILLED with stupidly inane comments - about Israel, muslims, Hamas, Gaza, “Palestine” - ALL borne of ignorance. And here you are postulating a former USSR vessel suddenly develops a sense of “democracy” and overthrows a corrupt Russian-back regime - only to replace it with a corrupt AMERICAN-back regime.
One should also take note that Russia tolerated the American-backed corrupt Ukrainian regime - until it began to talk about NATO membership. THAT was the straw that broke the camel’s back. So I don’t think we should be so quick to blame the perennial “bad guy” - Russia - for instigating all this. ?What exactly else would you have them do.
9 Likes
Yeah, it must have been a big Biden administration + CIA conspiracy that turned all the European countries against the gentle fluffy dreamy Russia:
Come on, Biden administration can’t possibly be that effective? 
Or maybe folks in this thread have been vaping too much of Putin’s exhaust on social media.
1 Like
I think you would agree that the population’s opinion is given to them through the media. I bet today if you ask people on the US their opinion of say Columbia the response would be very dangerous. How did they get that opinion?
This is another reason I don’t really think democracy is so great. People are handed their opinions or beliefs.
I spent 20 to 49 percent of my time in Germany between 2014 and 2020. I recall zero negative comments about Russia. Many negative comments about Erdogan.
This isn’t to say people didn’t have a low opinion of Russia. I never directly asked about politics. I would ask things like where should I visit or is it safe to go to Prague. But the Erdogan opinions just came out. It was on their minds and presumably in the papers and on the news.
You think my opinion is based on Russian propaganda. I think that is presumptuous. In the US it is actually hard to form an opinion counter to what the state wants it to be.
I am against most wars and you could say I am worn out for war given the constant wars and conflicts during my life. That could be Russian propaganda or it could be me visiting battle field cemeteries and thinking about those boys. Who was so and so from Michigan or whatever name and place on the grave. It took a few years to go from just being impressed with their sacrifice to asking about whether it is right for me to sit on my couch eating Doritos while todays youth get put in the ground and concluding that I would not accept superficial reasons. Then I start to ask was it worth their sacrifice and how would I know? I recall Nassim Taleb writing about skin in the game. It is a long journey going from cheerleader of wars like the Iraq war to where I stand now. I know there is danger of not acting. Of waiting until some enemy has your house surrounded and is kicking in the door. But I will not support the throwing lives away on stupid shit like Somalia. Leaders now have the tough job of leadership. They actually have to convince me which means I am starting from a position of being critical not one of support.
Convince me isn’t good for piss poor leadership. It isn’t good for people that have gotten away with flimsy bs. We must save Democracy wasn’t a good choice.
Part of being critical is simply asking questions. If you say we are saving democracy, I am going to look into the place with regard to democracy. If you say they are preparing for war, I am going to ask what is it that they want and what is it that we offered? In other words what did the negotiations look like?
In the case of Russia and Ukraine did we agree that Ukraine would not become part of NATO unless it was invaded?
What exactly did we offer? It seems to me we offered nothing. No negotiations. Sorry but this seems belligerent to me.
I also believe based on my understanding of history and this is summarized by Ray Dalio(Russian propagandist) well before Ukraine that world powers often end with war. The US is finished in my opinion. As I say the US government has no constraint. It spends money without constraint (check debt limit negotiations). It makes laws without constraint. Check every unelected agency able to make law. It is not constrained in going to war. When was the last vote for war that passed the Senate?
A finished empire will look for war as a way to maintain itself. This means as a citizen I have to be extra vigilant. Is war becoming our primary way of improving? Our primary way of improvement should be what it was historically. The US like every significant power in history got powerful through economics.
7 Likes
Media isn’t always a driver of propaganda - it’s also a facilitator for information pooling.
Having spent a couple of the past few years in Europe, it was pretty clear that Russia’s intent was to negatively influence Europe, it has actually hurt it, boosting both the crazy left and the crazy right, so the dislike is well-founded in fact, not illusory (or delusional).
1 Like
The interesting public opinion question would be – Are you prepared personally to go to the front lines of the war in the Ukraine, fight and die for Ukraine? But we all know what the answer is – because the Westerners going to the Ukraine are few in number and now mostly not breathing.
Another interesting question to put to the public would be – Is the Ukraine worth risking experiencing your own country, your own family, and your own loved ones dying horribly in a thermonuclear war? Again, we know what the opinion poll answer would be.
3 Likes
No one would give Biden the time of day to being effective. But the CIA! - that’s altogether a different animal. The same bureaucrats are there that have been there for decades! THEY wield more power than the president - as DJT found out, to his dismay.
Russia has been a CIA target for a long time. Some of that may have been justified when it was the USSR, but the rump Russia, while still a formidable nation in terms of resources, is not the menace the USSR once was. And even the crazy Politburo rejected the suggestion of a first strike to “cure” their ills vis a vis Reagan. Neither Putin nor Russia come close to the old USSR.
One needs a realistic view of the world - as it really IS, rather than as it once was - to make intelligent decisions vis a vis “old enemies”. After all, WE traded with England - after throwing them out by force of arms.
7 Likes
“Having spent a couple of the past few years in Europe, it was pretty clear that Russia’s intent was to negatively influence Europe“
?And why wouldn’t it. German and Austrian bankers were behind the dismantling and looting of the Balkans in the ‘90’s. They are clearly a malignant force in the world, and my guess is that they work hand-in-glove with the CIA. The Third Reich is, indeed, still alive and well in Germany.
6 Likes
Some speculations about Zelensky’s expensive “Weekend at Bernie’s” in the Swiss Alps. Obviously, this event was a total waste of time. An interesting question is what the B- and C-listers enjoying a paid Swiss vacation could have done to make the gathering productive?
The obvious action would have been to propose that the Ukraine (it’s a “democracy”, remember) hold an election. Zelensky is now a squatter in the Presidential office since his legal term has expired. And there are stories (accuracy unknown) that attendance of elected representative in the Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada is rather skimpy as numbers of them have left the country.
Holding elections in wartime is a challenge, but not impossible. Democratic Russia recently held a presidential election during NATO’s proxy war in which President Putin received a level of support from citizens that Western “leaders” could only dream about. The US held a presidential election during World War II, even though many of the voters were in combat overseas.
Clearly, the remaining legal Ukrainian authorities could request a cease fire from Russia while they hold an election. With suitable guarantees against misuse of the cease fire, it would be in Russia’s interests to agree. Perhaps the UN could do something useful for once in its miserable existence?
There would be important issues to address. Millions of Ukrainians have already voted with their feet, leaving for European countries and Russia. Should those citizens be allowed to vote?
A new legal Ukrainian administration with a firm democratic mandate from the people could then proceed in line with the wishes of the population. If the Ukrainian people want to negotiate a peaceful settlement, the world will breathe a sigh of relief. If they want more war, then war they shall have.
5 Likes
In the meantime, Putin’s weekend:
Also, convergence of policies:
5 Likes
The problem is that one cannot sort propaganda from information pooling. This leads to picking the things that align with an individual bias as information pooling. This is not a talent people can have it is only a talent people think they have. It is Gell-Mann amnesia.
If I wish to be credible, I need to work very hard to be honest in everything I do. This applies to individuals and institutions. The media cannot and never will be credible because their intent is to make money or promote their own bias. It is like expecting a politician to be honest. They cannot be honest or they would not have a job. Media cannot be honest because they would not have a business.
This isn’t a requirement for perfection. There are differences between mistakes and intentional actions.
Media will never become credible until people demand that they be credible instead of trying to pick the corn out of the cow manure.
8 Likes
Words of wisdom, Mettelus. The new technology has made it very easy to put rubbish out, with minimum of a downside under the banner of ‘democratization’. At the same time, the runaway forgiveness has led to very little downside to any kind of dumb, selfish or destructive behavior. As we watch things spiral downwards, we should ask ourselves - what is the way out of this spiral. Maybe a good thread to create?
I like this forum’s combination of passionate advocacy yet with a baseline of truth finding and discourse. I’ve found myself challenged many times - and looking into the facts, I’ve often been surprised by my own blind spots.
12 Likes
With regard to the cluster bomb explosion over a beach, I am hoping those of you that are arms experts can help clarify my understanding. My understanding is the targeting for these arms is via satellite, drone or some aircraft. I envision the data from the recon is sent to some command center and used to set up the targeting system of the weapon.
Is the US providing the recon data? Are they also providing assistance using this data to set the target for the weapon? Which part of the process of bombing is the US not doing?
Beyond the debate about weather the US should be involved or responsibility for the conflict, something about how the US is participating bothers me.
My first impression is that it is chickenshit. It is the kind of thing I think the Soviet Union pulled in Vietnam and other places. It feels about as dirty an “international arms dealer”. It feels like a dishonorable way to conduct yourself. Hiding behind the flimsiest of excuses. Like plausible deniability. “Oh, a crime was committed? I have no knowledge of that.”
Will it be ok if we give Ukraine a Nuke and they let it fly? Will it not be us? Maybe we should have had a Filipino fly the Enola Gay and we wouldn’t have to debate whether it was the right decision to Nuke Japan. Wasn’t us. Or maybe the Germans should have had Czechs run the camps. “Hey, all we did was provide the camps and the trains. What happened there wasn’t us.”
I find it morally unacceptable. It makes me feel like a scum bag. I feel like the US is hiding behind Ukrainian people like terrorists hide behind woman and children. Maybe a great strategy when it comes to conflict, but certainly not honorable.
I understand that the Revolutionary Army used tactics the British found dishonorable. I understand it from that perspective, but the Revolutionary Army was a belligerent. Once you declare war and you are a belligerent, then I believe everything goes. I have never had a moral problem with the dropping of Nukes on Japan or fire bombing Dresden.
I wouldn’t have a problem with how Israel conducts its war in Gaza as long as it was not the US giving them weapons, money or military support. If the US is involved, it is my involvement. My moral compass demands that I declare war if I am going to behave like I am at war. Anything less is really a version of hiding behind woman and children.
8 Likes
Victor Davis Hanson argues for a negotiated settlement to end the ongoing war in Ukraine. He highlights the staggering human cost, with an estimated 500,000 casualties reported by August 2023 and hundreds of thousands more since then[1].
Hanson points out that neither side has made significant territorial gains since Ukraine’s initial defense of Kyiv, likening the conflict to the stalemate of World War I’s Western Front[1]. He notes Ukraine’s manpower challenges, with a quarter of its population having fled and an average soldier age over 40[1].
The author criticizes the Biden administration’s inconsistent approach to the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts, urging negotiations in one while pushing for continued fighting in the other[1]. He argues that a settlement, while unpopular, could involve formalizing Russia’s 2014 annexations of Crimea and Donbass, with Russia withdrawing to pre-2022 borders[1].
Hanson proposes that Ukraine could remain well-armed but outside NATO, with a demilitarized zone along the border. He suggests this compromise could allow both sides to claim some form of victory while halting the destruction of Ukraine and the loss of lives on both sides[1].
Sources
[1] Stop the Ukrainian Meatgrinder? https://victorhanson.com/stop-the-ukrainian-meatgrinder/
5 Likes
Since the US/NATO proxy war in the Ukraine is (necessarily) existential for Russia and (optionally) existential for Our Betters in the DC Swamp, the risk of global thermonuclear war becomes significant if either side seriously feels it is losing.
If cooler heads prevail, then clearly any negotiated settlement has to accommodate Russia’s often stated (and entirely reasonable) desire not to have an armed aggressor directly on its border. That suggests the rational end to the US/NATO proxy war would be a UN mandate to China to put a large military peace-keeping force into de-militarized Rump Ukraine, with the twin objectives of ensuring Russia stays out and US/NATO stay out. Further, China is about the only country which could afford to rebuild Rump Ukraine as a component in its Belt & Road project.
The fun part about this solution would be watching the European anguish. After having huffed & puffed about the supposed threat from Russia on their borders, Euros would then have to live with the mighty PLA on their borders. However, no-one cares about European anguish.
6 Likes
Since the US/NATO proxy war in the Ukraine is (necessarily) existential for Russia and (optionally) existential for Our Betters in the DC Swamp, the risk of global thermonuclear war becomes significant if either side seriously feels it is losing.
If cooler heads prevail, then clearly any negotiated settlement has to accommodate Russia’s often stated (and entirely reasonable) desire not to have an armed aggressor directly on its border. That suggests the rational end to the US/NATO proxy war would be a UN mandate to China to put a large military peace-keeping force into de-militarized Rump Ukraine, with the twin objectives of ensuring Russia stays out and US/NATO stay out. Further, China is about the only country which could afford to rebuild Rump Ukraine as a component in its Belt & Road project.
The fun part about this solution would be watching the European anguish. After having huffed & puffed about the supposed threat from Russia on their borders, Euros would then have to live with the mighty PLA on their borders. However, no-one cares about European anguish. [/Gavin]”
I mentioned it previously, but it merits mentioning again. The old USSR died while Reagan was president. Archives of the USSR show they felt they could not compete with us on Star Wars as it was called. Records also show that the Politburo seriously debated launching a first strike. ?Was anyone here thinking of that. ?Did anyone on our side consider that Russia might, just might, do something seriously stupid and launch a first strike. Think on how many people would have died then. AND on OUR justification in obliterating Russia in response. Totally. A LOT of dead Russians, fair number of dead Americans.
8 Likes