Hopefully, Ukraine will give us some recovered Russian missile decoys:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-deploys-mystery-munition-ukraine-114716254.html
2 Likes
Apologies for turning this into the catch-all RU-UA War thread, but I had been looking for something like this for several days after seeing a similar recording:
2 Likes
Cappy says Russia may be doing better than we are told:
4 Likes
OneWeb, having lost access to Soyuz launches from French Guiana and Kazakhstan, has signed an agreement with SpaceX to launch its constellation: “OneWeb to resume satellite launches through agreement with SpaceX”.
London, U.K., 21 March, 2022 – OneWeb, the low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite communications company, announced today that the company and SpaceX entered into an agreement that will enable OneWeb to resume satellite launches.
The first launch with SpaceX is anticipated in 2022 and will add to OneWeb’s total in-orbit constellation that currently stands at 428 satellites, or 66 percent of the fleet. OneWeb’s network will deliver high-speed, low-latency global connectivity.
In addition to OneWeb, five European Space Agency missions were manifested to launch on Soyuz—alternative launch plans have not yet been announced.
6 Likes
I’d call that quick adaptation “Elon Musk speed”. But, at least in EVs, some of Tesla’s Chinese competitors are outdoing him. And space is next:
5 Likes
Recall that one factor in setting off the “Arab Spring” in 2010 was a rapid rise in food prices.
7 Likes
Not to worry – Africans who cannot get food will simply move to Europe this summer. Lots of food there! And they will be welcomed with open arms.
When we consider all the downsides of the failure of Western politicians to seek a quick end to the fighting in the Ukraine and to the Western sanctions & trade disruptions … we really wonder what our elected representatives are thinking?
4 Likes
I really wonder if our elected representatives are thinking. Actually, I’ve already concluded they aren’t.
4 Likes
The “smart money” claims the deep state is running the show.
How I can sleep at night – God only knows!
2 Likes
The Egyptians have a pair of amphibious assault ships they can trade for Ruskie wheat:
4 Likes
Zelensky was interviewed through a translator on CNN. (I know! I know!). In the course of the interview, he made this peculiar comment about his prior discussions with Western leaders:
CNN.com - Transcripts
"I requested them personally to say directly that we are going to accept you into NATO in a year or two or five. Just say it directly and clearly or just say no, and the response was very clear, you are not going to be a NATO or E.U. member, but publicly the doors will remain open."
This is troubling, since one of Russia’s major clearly-stated concerns was that the Ukraine should not be allowed to join NATO. However, NATO and the US would not give any assurance on that – and thus the war started.
If Western leaders had said publicly what Zelensky says they were saying privately to him, a large part of Russia’s reason for invading would have disappeared. And the knowledge that NATO was not behind them might have persuaded the Ukrainians to make concessions on the Donbas, completely eliminating any grounds for Russia to invade.
It is almost like “Our Guys” wanted to provoke a war in the Ukraine. But why?
I come back to the thought that “Our Guys” know their long economic mismanagement is reaching the end of the road, and want a war somewhere far away to disguise the real reasons for the heavy price we are all going to pay domestically. But can they stop that war going nuclear?
3 Likes
I have been wondering the same thing.
Adding to the theory that the Ukraine conflict was purposefully manufactured by “Our Guys” are revelations that the CIA was training and arming Ukrainian forces in preparation for a conflict with Russia:
As part of the Ukraine-based training program, CIA paramilitaries taught their Ukrainian counterparts sniper techniques; how to operate U.S.-supplied Javelin anti-tank missiles and other equipment; how to evade digital tracking the Russians used to pinpoint the location of Ukrainian troops, which had left them vulnerable to attacks by artillery; how to use covert communications tools; and how to remain undetected in the war zone while also drawing out Russian and insurgent forces from their positions, among other skills, according to former officials.
Moreover, it is admitted:
“Everything we did in Ukraine had a chance to be misinterpreted, and escalate the tensions.”
If the CIA were trying to provide adequate military support to Ukraine that would deter a Russian invasion but not so much as to provoke Russia into war, then they failed spectacularly. But I am reluctant to grant the CIA the assumption of good faith. It is appearing more and more likely that “Our Guys” wanted this conflict to occur.
But why would “Our Guys” want to make an enemy out of Russia?
There is certainly an opportunity for “Our Guys” to scapegoat Russia for any and all economic problems that might emerge following years of unchecked monetary expansion by our central banks. If our central banks are not held accountable, then when the current economic system collapses, the central banks will be the primary architects of whatever system replaces the current one. Perhaps the new system will incorporate a digital currency that is easier for “Our Guys” to monitor and control.
However, the explanation I find most plausible is that “Our Guys” believe it is necessary to introduce a common enemy against whom the West must unite. The institutions that govern Western civilization are rapidly losing credibility but “Our Guys” cannot allow the fragmentation and decentralization of these institutions or they will lose control. Since traditions, virtues, and achievements are no longer shared throughout the Western world, “Our Guys” need a common enemy so that our shared hatred of the enemy will glue the West together and restore trust in our institutions. At the same time, “Our Guys” seek to undermine Western culture, so it is extremely convenient that the Russian menace exemplifies characteristics of whiteness, masculinity, conservatism, and Christianity.
5 Likes
Here is a 2016 story to help put things in context. From the article
“Your fight is our fight,” Graham said during the visit on Saturday alongside President Petro Poroshenko. “2017 will be the year of offense,” he continued. “All of us will go back to Washington and we will push the case against Russia. Enough of a Russian aggression. It is time for them to pay a heavier price. Our fight is not with the Russian people but with Putin. Our promise to you is to take your cause to Washington, inform the American people of your bravery and make the case against Putin to the world.”
Or watch the video to hear it straight from our betters (my Ukrainian vocabulary is rusty, so I skipped the first 1:20 when Peter Poroshenko addressed the troops in Ukrainian.
From the looks of it, the Ukrainian marines are hard men ready to do hard things… I wonder if “Lady G”'s heart skipped a beat looking at those chiseled slavic cheeckbones…
2 Likes
That is an interesting take, but it doesn’t seem to cover the bases very well. Among other things, it assumes a rational plan among the elites, yet nothing I have seen or heard so far seems to support this.
Warfare is an inherently murky undertaking. There are tacticians and strategists (and those are distinct skill sets, not necessarily overlapping nor even interlocking) but few have historically shown the kind of insight to run a successful war efficiently. Certainly WWII was in many ways a ginormous cluster, in which we wasted manpower to satisfy political “allies”, rather than dictating the best strategy regardless of political origin. Monty in particular was a complete flop; had we done what HE wanted, we might STILL be fighting that war. Since then we have basically fought boondoggle wars for political reasons with little to justify the loss of American life.
So despite what to me appears Gavin’s blind faith in the feality of Russian positions and reasons, I am skeptical. After all, all those conditions were present in 2016-2020, yet Putin made NO moves to take on Ukraine. Even now, he had basically won all he wanted, including German dependence on them for oil - at the current exorbitant prices we see, What I think is that this war had nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with Putin’s vision of a new USSR - and the perceived weakness in DC. Not necessarilty Joe, but the whole crowd running Joe. Anyone dumb enough to keep the village idiot can’t be much of a threat. And to a large degree Putin has been right.
What wasn’t considered was that the Ukrainians would fight nor that the vaunted Russian military was hardly a “peer” military. So now everyone wants to appease the Russians in Ukraine while putting on a “tough face”, but the Slavs ({Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria - and no one mentions the Baltics nor Finland) are more than a little worried about the Bear and are willing to fight - especially when it’s by proxy in Ukraine.
2 Likes
So, Devereaux, you completely discount the prior 8 years of the Ukrainian government murdering Russian-speakers in the east whom they claimed as their own Ukrainian citizens.
You completely discount the fact that the US Military and the CIA have for some years been training the Ukrainian zealots who were killing the Ukrainian Russian-speakers – news to us mere US citizens but presumably not to Russia’s rulers.
You completely discount the US Military-funded biolabs in the Ukraine (certainly more than a dozen) – which again were news to us mere US citizens but presumably not to Russian Intelligence.
You completely discount the refusal over years of the Ukranian government to implement the Minsk Accords, which they freely signed.
You ignore the evidence of US involvement in Victoria Neuland’s coup in the Ukraine.
You ignore the evidence of obvious corrupt payoffs from the Ukraine to the Biden family.
You ignore the public statements by Zelensky calling for invasion of Crimea, for joining NATO, for building nuclear weapons.
If you ignore all those realities, then perhaps it is possible that the war is purely due to Putin trying to re-establish the USSR, and not due to Russia having very understandable concerns about a very dangerous situation developing on its borders.
If you want to make the case that the current phase of the 8 year long war in the Ukraine is all about Putin, Devereaux, you will have to do more than make an unsupported assertion.
We in the US have to face the obvious reality that “Our Guys” are in this situation up to their dirty necks. I wish it were not so. I thought we were the Good Guys. But in the Ukraine, that is not at all clear.
5 Likes
I would hardly label us “the Good Guys”. That went away in WWII when we betrayed our natural allies to support communist movements, who were NEVER interested in fighting the Nazis and ALWAYS interested in grabbing power.
I am also sure we put biolabs there, to circumvent Congress. That would be a typical move of the bureaucracy when hampered by elected officials who well may not be there next election cycle. Just look at what all Fauci has been up to for reinforcement of that concept.
On the concept of murdering “innocent“ Russian ”workers”, I am highly skeptical. The eastern parts of Ukraine have only relatively recently been “populated” by Russians. IIRC, it was the RUSSIAN workers who knocked down that innocent airliner. ?How did THAT happen. Now it’s suddenly “Ukrainian zealots murdering those poor “Russian workers” - who never did anything to merit being hunted down as traitors - kind of like ISIS. I look to Yugoslavia for the example of who owns what. Kosovo was NEVER part of Albania; it was Tito, a Croatian COMMUNIST who wished to “dilute” Serb power (the vast majority of the central and southern parts of the country) and so allowed Albanians to infiltrate Kosovo. And WE bombed the Serbs over wanting their land back.
And if we’re going to play “fair” then we should be pushing for western Belorussia to be ceded to Poland as those are traditional Polish lands, only snatched by the USSR. That might balance the “Russian” demands on the eastern Ukrainian land.
Corrupt “Ukrainian” pay-offs were made by Russian oligarchs - most likely at the behest of Russia (?why else the recent comment in Russian news about “Burisma - the gift that keeps on giving.” ?How about Biden blackmailing the Ukrainian authorities to drop their investigation into the corruption of Burisma,) Even our State Department thought Biden’s acts were at least the appearance of impropriety.
?Since when do we take any Russian statements at face value. ?What part of Russia seizing Crimea is to be considered as a reasonable, rational invasion of another sovereign nation. ?Why would that persuade Ukraine to NOT join NATO.
?Do you simply want to assert we are not lilly-white. Fine. That’s an obvious truth, but it hardly gives Russia reason not just to invade another sovereign state but to do some of the atrocities they have been doing. And there was NO evidence PUTIN would invade while Trump was president. ?Why not. ?Was everything hunky-dory under Trump and suddenly under Biden ALL is changed.
2 Likes
Isn’t Crimea Ukrainian just as Kosovo is Albanian, by your previous argument 3 paragraphs above? The Book of Truth says Khrushchev “transferred” it to the Ukrainian SSR in 1954
On 19 February 1954, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR issued a decree on the transfer of the Crimean region of the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR.[45] This Supreme Soviet Decree states that this transfer was motivated by “the commonality of the economy, the proximity, and close economic and cultural relations between the Crimean region and the Ukrainian SSR”.[46] At that time no vote or referendum took place, and Crimean population had no say in the transfer (also typical of other Soviet border changes).
Wait, what about Lviv and surrounding Galician lands? Thought that was part of Poland and previously the Kingdom of Poland for literally hundreds of years… The reality of European modern borders is that - with few exceptions - there are not many countries whose borders today have historical justification that withstands this sort of scrutiny. Which is part of the reason why UE accession has been conditioned by dropping any border disputes with neighbors.
Otherwise, Hungary (and Austria, why not?) would have a strong claim on big chunks of modern Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Czech, etc. And what about Turkey, as the modern heir of the Ottoman Empire? How far back would one want to go to “draw the line”. And the culture argument is very weak and does not make for clear borders either.
2 Likes
Perhaps not, but if you follow the history you will find cultural reasons for some borders. eg. Austria and Hungary are distinctly different. Austria is Germanic while Hungary is Madjar - people from the steppes. Serbs and Croats are clearly the same origin, common with at least the Poles and Bulgarians and Slovaks. Not clear where the Slovenes fit; their language is clearly similar to Serbian but different - and matches the Old Slovakia of the Orthodox Church much better. So somewhere a common origin. TURKS, OTOH, are clearly horse people from the East - Mamelukes. Even their palaces are built to represent tents.
Your arguments tend to be those of an American without personal knowledge of the people there. You equate ceding territory to allowing infiltration - as happened in Kosovo, and is happening on our Southern Border. Neither of those are to be considered legal arguments, whereas USSR ceded Crimea to Ukraine - for cultural reasons. Tito never ceded Kosovo to Albania; he just allowed them to come over, much like our current idiot is at our southern border. But note that AustroHungary ceded Preko to the Serbs, to stand as stanichari against the Turks more than 400 years ago.
History IS, I agree, messy, not the least of which is because of migrations before the whole concept of borders came into being. But I bet if you asked the Ukrainians about Crimea, they would have a distinct reason to feel as they do. Acquiescing to a bully grabbing sovereign territory isn’t a way to calm people.
1 Like
Historically speaking, all borders have been very … flexible, shall we say? Even Her Majesty’s United Kingdom lost about a quarter of its land area in the 20th Century when the bulk of the Irish split away.
It seems that the borders of what is now the Ukraine have been more flexible than most, with even the Lithuanians having had control over parts of it historically. Today’s Ukraine is the resulting tapestry of different linguistic and cultural groups. Plus, this is Europe, where everybody hates everybody else, as the bloody history of Europe shows. The Londoner looks down on the Yorkshireman, and the Yorkshireman despises the Londoner – even though to the outside world they are both English.
The roots of the current conflict in the Ukraine run far back into time. Just as the war did not start last month – it started 8 years ago when Europe & NATO yawned while the Ukrainian government sent its army against the people of eastern Ukraine. Finding a solution now requires real diplomacy – third parties trying to help Russia and the Ukraine find a compromise. Instead, what we are seeing from Western “leaders” looks a lot like attempts to crank the violence up to 11.
1 Like
What is the definition of oligarch? Do these individuals referred to as Russian oligarchs meet the definition? If so, how do they differ from say Jamie Diamond or the Clintons?
My understanding (maybe flawed) is that a Russian oligarch is a wealthy person that is politically connected. My understanding (maybe flawed) is an oligarch is part of the ruling class in an oligarchy.
It sounds like what is referred to as a Russian oligarch is closer to most of the US billionaires than to a true oligarch.
It may be the correct to expand the definition of oligarch. Let’s just apply it world wide.
The other commonality to many of our Billionaires is that they acquired their wealth the same way. My understanding is the Russian oligarchs acquired control of many of the previously State owned businesses by paying pennies on the dollar to many citizens that had been granted small ownership. Technically legal, but morally questionable. They were helped by the Harvard Boys that also made a little in the process.
The US Billionaires don’t do the exact methodology, but the principal is the same. Use your influence or connections on the government to make lots of money. Nancy Pelosies’ husband is exhibit 3046.
I don’t have a good understanding of how the Russian government functions in reality. On paper it isn’t an oligarchy or authoritarian, but it may operate as one. Similarly the US does not operate per its Constitution. Maybe when the US helped set up Russia’s government, they successfully set it up to operate exactly like the US.
2 Likes