Russia is now bombing Ukraine

[Walter Ostanek]

59 minutes ago, decibal cooper said:

 

Live now: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/mar/22/moscow-concert-attack-crocus-city-hall-shooting-russia-live-updates

 

Hmm, they were warning about something like this happening a couple of weeks ago. What a convenient excuse for even more dictatorial powers - so soon after an "election" too! An awful lot like how Chechnya first kicked off, no? It'll also be a great way of putting the yanks in a bind too: "you're fine with Israel committing genocide after the murderous Hamas raid, so how can you criticise our vindictive brutality?"

Funnily enough, barely anyone gave a shit in the news about the russian rockets lobbed at a Ukrainian hydroelectric dam last night.

[decibal cooper]

The warning came from the US embassy, not Russia, and you are correct the warning was issued on March 8th about two weeks ago: https://www.reuters.com/world/us-embassy-warns-imminent-extremist-attack-moscow-2024-03-08/

Quote

• U.S. embassy warns of imminent attack by "extremists"
• It tells citizens to avoid concerts and mass events
• FSB says it foiled an attack on a synagogue in Moscow
• FSB says Afghan arm of Islamic State was planning attack

I've never heard of Islamic state attacking an Eastern country. Gonna be interesting to see what exactly happened after the dust settles. Of course you are right Mr. Ostanek, I think, that no matter who is responsible, Putin can use this to his advantage in someway to either crack down on his own population or that of Ukraine.

Edited March 22 by decibal cooper
added quotation & last paragraph

[ignatius]

9 minutes ago, Walter Ostanek said:

Funnily enough, barely anyone gave a shit in the news about the russian rockets lobbed at a Ukrainian hydroelectric dam last night.

and the bunch of french legion forces killed by russia.  2nd video i posted gets into what's up w/that. fckn geo politics and colonialism and hegemony etcfuck. what a shit show of a mess. 

[Walter Ostanek]

1 hour ago, ignatius said:

this guy has interesting insights. first video is from 5 or so months ago. this guy has worked/works in various government positions related to defense, intelligence etc etc.. 2nd video is from 7 days ago

 

Christ that has some nauseating takes. Simping for imperialism based on the etymology of a country's name and historical linguistic regions. I hope the Swiss don't find out!

 

[ignatius]

Just now, Walter Ostanek said:

Christ that has some nauseating takes. Simping for imperialism based on the etymology of a country's name and historical linguistic regions. I hope the Swiss don't find out!

 

yeah.. i updated the post to add some commentary.  people took him to task in the comments about some statements he made about Poland and how polish people hate ukraine. 

I have to wonder if this line of thinking, if a voice like his, is prominent somewhere in the halls of congress or the pentagon or whatever.. 

the news and narratives we get are so vastly different from what he says. 

[Walter Ostanek]

4 minutes ago, ignatius said:

yeah.. i updated the post to add some commentary.  people took him to task in the comments about some statements he made about Poland and how polish people hate ukraine. 

I have to wonder if this line of thinking, if a voice like his, is prominent somewhere in the halls of congress or the pentagon or whatever.. 

the news and narratives we get are so vastly different from what he says. 

Furthermore I'm so fucking sick of these ideas that people want to be imperial subjects of Putin because they speak Russian or because they opposed Maidan. I've got to know so many people like that over the last couple of years, these narratives couldn't be further from the truth.

At least he touched on the resource issue - that is, indeed, a very material underpinning to the "SVO". Though he's weirdly off-kilter about France's interests in Ukrainian uranium, they can (and do) have a far safer, far higher-grade supplier in the form Canada.

Been talking to a friend in russia all evening, he is scared shitless of what comes next, everyone with a brain there remembers how Chechnya unfolded. I talk to a couple of friends in Kharkiv most days... but can't tonight because they still have blackouts after the last missile attack.

[Wunderbar]

Just watched 20 days in Mariupol.

Completely unbelievable.

 

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt24082438/

[Rubin Farr]

“Acute heart failure”

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1884966/yamaha-music-ceo-dead-moscow-hotel-vladimir-putin/amp

[ignatius]

interesting analysis. basically saying america is dropping the ball and has no strategic plan or end game. 

 

[decibal cooper]

7 minutes ago, ignatius said:

interesting analysis. basically saying america is dropping the ball and has no strategic plan or end game. 

Feel like this has been clear for a while now. Absolutely none of the politicians in America, let alone the executive branch, has said anything about strategy or what a military victory would look like (not to mention the fact that Ukraine is losing bad ever since the failed counter-offensive last year). We have already sunk like 100 billion dollars into this conflict and also a lot of military training to Ukraine's military, training that all of the most powerful NATO countries has contributed toward. Washington's 'plan' is just to continue throwing money at the situation and to extend the war for as long as possible, to fight to the last dead Ukrainian. If they attempted to approach the diplomatic table, Russia has the upper hand now militarily (and this is not likely to change any time soon), so the western powers would have to negotiate from a position of weakness, conceded to Putin's terms, and be seen as 'cutting and running' to use an old phrase, and also they would be seen to have blood on their hands because of all the Ukrainians that have died for nothing (not to mention the land lost and the damage to infrastructure). America's initial strategic plan to weaken Russia by supporting a war on its borders and hitting them with sanctions has not only failed, it has arguably reshaped Russia's economy and strengthened certain sectors, like the domestic production of artillery. Like John Mearsheimer says, it is a war of attrition now, and whoever has the most bodies and the most bullets will outlast the other side.

[ignatius]

14 minutes ago, decibal cooper said:

Feel like this has been clear for a while now. Absolutely none of the politicians in America, let alone the executive branch, has said anything about strategy or what a military victory would look like (not to mention the fact that Ukraine is losing bad ever since the failed counter-offensive last year). We have already sunk like 100 billion dollars into this conflict and also a lot of military training to Ukraine's military, training that all of the most powerful NATO countries has contributed toward. Washington's 'plan' is just to continue throwing money at the situation and to extend the war for as long as possible, to fight to the last dead Ukrainian. If they attempted to approach the diplomatic table, Russia has the upper hand now militarily (and this is not likely to change any time soon), so the western powers would have to negotiate from a position of weakness, conceded to Putin's terms, and be seen as 'cutting and running' to use an old phrase, and also they would be seen to have blood on their hands because of all the Ukrainians that have died for nothing (not to mention the land lost and the damage to infrastructure). America's initial strategic plan to weaken Russia by supporting a war on its borders and hitting them with sanctions has not only failed, it has arguably reshaped Russia's economy and strengthened certain sectors, like the domestic production of artillery. Like John Mearsheimer says, it is a war of attrition now, and whoever has the most bodies and the most bullets will outlast the other side.

in that video he gets in to details about ammo and who's doing what.. what's available, what's working etc.. also says things are stagnant in general and will remain so for a while. it's worth listening to. they cover a lot of ground and wide range of relevant topics. 

[may be rude]

25 minutes ago, decibal cooper said:

America's initial strategic plan to weaken Russia by supporting a war on its borders and hitting them with sanctions has not only failed

you further russian narratives by spreading the idea that US is only aiding ukraine because of russia. ukraine was an ally US had pledged to support years ago. supporting allies is a thing.

 

25 minutes ago, decibal cooper said:

Absolutely none of the politicians in America, let alone the executive branch, has said anything about strategy or what a military victory would look like

these things go on behind the scenes and are generally not appropriate to discuss publicly

 

25 minutes ago, decibal cooper said:

Ukraine is losing bad ever since the failed counter-offensive last year

"losing bad"? hardly, man. they continue sinking russia's fleet and achieving other victories. losses have been quite minimal given the scale of the conflict. also, the "counteroffensive" was a strategy term that the media blew up, inflating expectations. also relevant to note that the planned 2023 spring counteroffensive was impacted by US republican congress members blocking aid to the ally

25 minutes ago, decibal cooper said:

Washington's 'plan' is just to continue throwing money at the situation and to extend the war for as long as possible

again, it's a russian narrative that ukraine is being manipulated by US to fight a war for them. it's plainly fictional - ukraine chose to defend themselves. very, very simple logic. it's a slight of hand designed to trick people. ukraine has been doing pretty well for the last year without US aid. and they were doing well at the beginning when they were defending the kyiv airport by running over russians with cars. please don't spread the misconception that this is somehow propped up by the US, it's false. 

 

so, i notice you are furthering putin's agenda by criticizing US aid to ukraine. FYI, the amounts of money are pretty consistent with typical foreign aid, and this is a perfect example of when foreign aid is appropriate. also, it's a tiny drop in the US military budget, and this kind of thing is considered a good investment for US strategic interests.

Edited April 4 by may be rude

[ignatius]

8 minutes ago, may be rude said:

"losing bad"? hardly, man. they continue sinking russia's fleet and achieving other victories. losses have been quite minimal given the scale of the conflict. also, the "counteroffensive" was a strategy term that the media blew up, inflating expectations. also relevant to note that the planned 2023 spring counteroffensive was impacted by US republican congress members blocking aid to the ally

he gets into that in that talk. how creative the ukrainians have been. lot's of details around it. he's highly critical of congress shitting the bed and not doing its job.  it's a very matter of fact and objective talk they have.  not sensationalized garbage or russian narratives.  discusses some global politics angles as well... and eventual collapse of russia. 

Edited April 4 by ignatius

[decibal cooper]

7 minutes ago, may be rude said:

so, i notice you are furthering putin's agenda by criticizing US aid to ukraine. FYI, the amounts of money are pretty consistent with typical foreign aid, and this is a perfect example of when foreign aid is appropriate. also, it's a tiny drop in the US military budget, and this kind of thing is considered a good investment for US strategic interests.

You don't have shit to say about the 2022 negotiations in Istanbul and how this whole thing could have been avoided. As far as some grand military strategy for winning this war being discussed 'behind closed doors' and how its not appropriate to have a realistic military plan presented to the Americans who are funding it with tax dollars, and the Ukrainians who are being killed, that's bullshit, and you are just sticking your head in the sand. They have no strategy. They are probably praying that the Ukraine military does not completely collapse before the American presidential election. It's also not a question of left versus right. The politicians literally do not give two fucks about what is happening there, so long as it does not threaten their own domestic political power. All of it proceeds from domestic political considerations and winning elections, same as with US support for Israel. No one at all in this thread is discussing the realities of the battlefield, what is happening there, and how depleted the Ukrainian armed forces are. There is no question that they fought bravely at the beginning, but they are now losing bad and the money tap is currently dry.

You make it seem like they haven't already lost four oblasts that they have very little hope of retaking, not to mention that they are continuously lowering the age of conscription for their military and that what's left of the population, the people who have not migrated to other countries, and the fact that they postponed presidential elections. As Russia has the upper hand, they will most likely take more oblasts and kill more Ukrainians the longer the war continues. All for what?

Also, I tried watching that video about the guy talking about arms and whatnot. You can tell in the first five minutes that he is full of shit, saying that we need to think of this situation like America is at war with Russia. Absurd. That does not help in any way, and its a relic of the cold war. Russia does not even come close to posing the kind of threat to the United States that China does, and by the way, this conflict in Ukraine has brought Russia and China closer together in opposing the US. Our leaders are incompetent and it almost seems like they are deliberately squandering America's power and influence on the world stage. All of our politicians that are making these decisions are old as fuck and they are still making THE MOST FATEFUL decisions based on a Cold War mentality, as if Russia was still some communist world leader powerhouse. Pathetic. By fateful decisions I mean ones that will result in the death of other people, whether Russian or Ukrainian in this case. And they got the American people to all cheer the war at the very beginning like it was some grand battle to protect democracy. Insane.

There's no arguing against the fact that this war will eventually come to an end, and negotiated talks and a ceasefire will be the result. All of the rhetoric painting Putin as the next Hitler on his way to conquer Europe does not in any way help what the outcome of this war will be for Ukraine and the people that live there.

[ignatius]

2 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

That does not help in any way, and its a relic of the cold war. Russia does not even come close to posing the kind of threat to the United States that China does, and by the way, this conflict in Ukraine has brought Russia and China closer together in opposing the US.

he talks about that in the video if you stick with it. china is paying attention to what we do, iran is paying attention. so, being half assed about backing ukraine is not the way to go.. if we're gonna do a thing we need to do it... it's a wide ranging discussion in that video. 

edit: also, that guy he interviews isn't some asshole from nowhere. he was commander of US army in europe, senior advisor to human rights first and worked in logistics for UN and specializes in NATO/security etc. i'd guess he's pretty informed. 

Edited April 4 by ignatius

[zero]

1 hour ago, decibal cooper said:

You don't have shit to say about the 2022 negotiations in Istanbul and how this whole thing could have been avoided.

this whole thing could've been avoided if Russia had NOT sent their military into Ukraine and started indiscriminately massacring civilians and destroying infrastructure. all in the name of a BS false flag "de-nazify" operation. or Nato involvement. or land. I can't remember which story they used to justify this...remember that Vlad was given BS intel by his yes men that they'd be welcomed with open arms, and the whole thing would be over by the weekend. Russia could have very easily backed off once they realized this wasn't the case, but due to Vlad's massive ego, had to keep marching on, killing more people in order to save face (and he would've more than likely been assassinated if he backed off so soon).

ask yourself the basic question- who's fault is this exactly? is Ukraine to blame for Russians coming into their country and killing their people? did Ukrainians somehow deserve this? if you believe that is the case, i.e. there is justification for one country's military to go into another and start killing people (civilians!) and blowing shit up, then brother, you are wrong... 

war is wrong, period. killing people is wrong. any arguments in defense of killing others are wrong. delusional human beings believe they have a reason for killing others. Putin is definitely one of those. 

and I wouldn't rest your laurels on that 2022 Turkey negotiation meeting. depending on what website article you look at - western media or pro-Russia - both sides may/may not have been at fault for not coming to a ceasefire pact. Ukraine blames Russia for sending low-level delegates with no authority to end the war to the talks, and Russia blames Ukraine for not accepting their home run of a deal. if you ask me, just more grey area bullshit that causes people to not accept the truth of the matter...classic Russian tactics. "could be this, could be that" is the grey area psychological zone that has been drilled into the heads of the Russian people for a hundred plus years. manipulate and brainwash the population in order to control. can't let them know the truth about what is really going on.

[cichlisuite]

3 hours ago, may be rude said:

again, it's a russian narrative that ukraine is being manipulated by US to fight a war for them. it's plainly fictional - ukraine chose to defend themselves. very, very simple logic. it's a slight of hand designed to trick people. ukraine has been doing pretty well for the last year without US aid. and they were doing well at the beginning when they were defending the kyiv airport by running over russians with cars. please don't spread the misconception that this is somehow propped up by the US, it's false.

i highly doubt it was Ukraine alone who choose to defend. the strategic assessments in this direction were made way before russia attacked (before the annexation of Crimea). usa and nato is highly involved in clandestine manner; training and advisory, providing intel and command and control infrastructure, cyber security, electronic warfare, etc. the carriers are in the Med. the 'lend-lease' is steady going. do you think anyone would want to miss seeing how russia military fights up close and personal? there are probably even japanese and korean observers there.

Edited April 4 by cichlisuite

[decibal cooper]

17 minutes ago, ignatius said:

edit: also, that guy he interviews isn't some asshole from nowhere. he was commander of US army in europe, senior advisor to human rights first and worked in logistics for UN and specializes in NATO/security etc. i'd guess he's pretty informed. 

I can check out the whole vid, apologies for being dismissive initially, but that guy's foundation at the beginning was prefaced upon the idea that American security is threatened by Russia and that we need to behave like we are at war with them, which I honestly believe makes the outcome for Ukraine worse.

24 minutes ago, zero said:

ask yourself the basic question- who's fault is this exactly? is Ukraine to blame for Russians coming into their country and killing their people? did Ukrainians somehow deserve this? if you believe that is the case, i.e. there is justification for one country's military to go into another and start killing people (civilians!) and blowing shit up, then brother, you are wrong...

To be honest with you, I am convinced most by the American political scientist John Mearsheimer, who has been doing long form discussions and interviews of the Russia Ukraine conflict since hostilities began with Russia annexing Crimea in 2014, who puts more of the blame on America and its NATO allies than on Russia, although he by no means excuses the invasion or any butchery or massacres that followed. Barrack Obama's refusal to engage with or support full scale military conflict with Russia back then, when he was president, because, in his words, Ukraine will always be a core security concern for Russia, in a way that it never will be for America, was wise, and I would prefer that kind of leadership today. There was actual strategic thinking happening there.

For that Istanbul situation, I do not think it wise to just say it was a wash and do some kind of he-said-she-said-doesn't-matter-anyway-cavalier--oh-your-wrong-because-whatever-you-read-about-it-is-ideologically-tainted- attitude toward serious diplomatic talks that could actually have ended the war. It was a very comprehensive, and there were five rounds of talks. Two of the people who were there at the highest level, Naftali Bennet from Israel as mediator, and David Arakhamia, who was Zelensky's top guy for diplomacy at the time, said that the central sticking point was NATO. Arakhamia said specifically that the rest of the stuff, the denazification and fact that those eastern oblasts had Russian speakers/culture/history etc., that all of this stuff was just 'seasoning' to use his term, and that keeping Ukraine out of NATO was the key thing the Russians wanted. There is a video interview with him saying this, and that Boris Johnson from Britain visited the talks and shut it down, advising Ukraine to continue with their offensive plans and promising that the west had their back. Pretty sure I posted that video somewhere in this thread. His remarks have been confirmed by a lot of people, which also was noted in this thread. After saying this, he recanted in an interview with the Ukrainian news outlet Ukrainian Truth. Granted, you are right, its not good to rest laurels on something like this, especially given how complex the talks were and that we will most likely never learn of the full context and how both sides possibly may have been trying to outwit and/or deceive the other. All of this proceeds, though, from the fact that there is absolutely no strategic thinking happening in Washington, no diplomacy either. I watch the department of state press briefings. This is supposed to be our government's diplomatic office, but they do no diplomacy. They are more or less just a PR branch for the military at this point, helping to mismanage wars and spread death and arm sales any place they set their gaze (although it is a huge bureaucracy and there probably are a lot of ppl and sub-departments there doing good work in the world, but not at the highest level and not with the most consequential issues such as active wars). 

It seems deeply unnatural and somehow wrong that no diplomacy at all, no talks between Biden and Putin are taking place, to the point that people do not even consider that diplomacy might be an option (and is in fact the only way that this war ends). Most Americans have been brainwashed to thinking that there is actually a military solution to this issue, same as with virtually every war America gets caught up in. Even Politico is running articles about how Ukraine is in very bad shape militarily.

Also apologies for lashing out at you @may be rude I need to make a better effort at not sharing my political views publicly. Each time I do confirms my belief that to talk politics with strangers, and even with friends at times, is always a blunder, and I wind up getting overcome by my own rage that these unnecessary wars are still going strong with no end in sight and all of the people needlessly dying. Even so, I do not like to be accused of 'furthering Putin's narrative' when sharing my views.

[may be rude]

3 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

I do not like to be accused of 'furthering Putin's narrative' when sharing my views.

i didn't say you did it deliberately. 

 

6 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

They have no strategy.

i didn't realize you have access to ukrainian military intelligence. impressive. you know, you're talking about the country that shocked the world with the quality and effectiveness of their strategy in countering the russian invasion.

 

6 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

It's also not a question of left versus right.

well the rightist ecosystem is where most people are buying the cheap tricks designed to shut off aid to the ally in need. democrats have been trying to get an aid bill passed.

 

6 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

The politicians literally do not give two fucks about what is happening there

generalization and wrong, not all politicians are the same, many are humans who care about human things. be advised your misinformation has real harmful consequences

 

6 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

All of it proceeds from domestic political considerations and winning elections

generalization again, this time cynically projecting motivations when in fact many public servants are motivated by doing what's right

 

6 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

You make it seem like they haven't already lost four oblasts that they have very little hope of retaking

hm? the russians are drunk and not aiming their weapons. their navy is disappearing. their militia attempted mutiny. they've suffered a half million casualties. domestic support is that of a hostage with stockholme syndrome. the russians are performing horribly and modern war experts like general patraeus have assessed that the russians will lose.

 

the russians gained a small amount of territory in the last year. ukraine gained some, like the city of kherson. russia has continued suffering strategic losses. ukraine took another russian ship out of commission a few days ago. russia has continually lost both equipment and soliders at significantly higher rate than ukraine. RU lost over 3,000 tanks so far! russia is gaining a little momentum lately but ukraine is still doing well against them.

 

it's a difficult war but it's winnable. messages of fatalism are the stuff that russian propagandists are trying to spread around. i find it quite grotesque to witness people advocating for abandoning an ally suffering mass murder. but hey i get that things are confusing these days, i am trying to help.

Edited April 5 by may be rude

[may be rude]

4 hours ago, cichlisuite said:

i highly doubt it was Ukraine alone who choose to defend.

right here you admit that this is just an assumption made in your imagination. in your mind, did zelensky tell biden he wants to quit and biden said "no!"?

 

zelensky has been risking his life for years to defend his country and his people. that is the chain of command where the decision comes from. of course the individuals in ukraine aren't operating only on command, they have their own wills to fight. who would want to be russia? who would want to let putin conquer them? 

Edited April 5 by may be rude

[Walter Ostanek]

9 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

Washington's 'plan' is just to continue throwing money at the situation and to extend the war for as long as possible, to fight to the last dead Ukrainian. 

I do find it funny how some of the domestic critics of yanqui imperialism are the least able to step outside of that imperalist mindset. Now I agree, the yanks are bumbling along not really knowing what their aim is. But, this isn't about America. The ukes would be fighting whether or not the yanks arm them. It'd just turn from a war into a huge insurgency.

Quote

You don't have shit to say about the 2022 negotiations in Istanbul and how this whole thing could have been avoided. 

How do you think it went? Did Sleepy Joe forbid the Ze from surrendering? Do you recall the context of the negotiations - taking place just as the ukes discovered the first mass graves? When they realised what continued russian occupation of any part of the country meant for the people there? 

Now I will say that I wouldn't be surprised if Ze was hoodwinked by Bojo's grandiose Churchillian crap. I'm sure he made promises that he couldn't keep.

Quote

You make it seem like they haven't already lost four oblasts that they have very little hope of retaking

They haven't - they've lost Crimea and Luhansk, but retain large chunks of Kherson, Zap and Donetsk. Russia has never occupied Zaporizhia city, and I dread to think what kind of Gaza-like apocalypse russia would unleash if they got their mitts on the place (or Kharkiv city). 

8 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

All of the rhetoric painting Putin as the next Hitler on his way to conquer Europe 

Except that that is Putin's own rhetoric.  The threats of invasion and nuclear annihilation against Poland, the Baltics, Finland, Germany, the UK, even Ireland come from he himself - the autocratic leader of the Russian state, plus his apparatchiks who he controls (Drunk Dmitri almost comically so) and the talking heads of his state-controlled media. When imperialist nutjobs make threats, they should be believed. You can hardly accuse people of vilifying Putin as some brutal monster when he openly, willingly (in front of voluntary interviews!) paints himself as one. Have you forgotten when he victim-blamed Poland for Hitler's invasion in front of an audicence of millions of braindead yanks?

Note that the political superstructure that Putin has created, comes with built-in off-ramps. At any time he chooses, he can blame his boyars, his advisers, his ultranationalist outriders, of deceiving him or misinforming him. He could very easily and (actually semi-plausibly) blame Girkin and Malofeyev for the entire unpleasantness since 2014 (he even has Girkin in prison already). He does have options to climb down and save his own skin. But he doesn't, because this is what he wants to happen.

5 hours ago, decibal cooper said:

To be honest with you, I am convinced most by the American political scientist John Mearsheimer,

The Realist viewpoint might be a passive, pragmatic endorsement of imperialism, rather than an active, enthusiastic one, but it is an endorsement of imperialism all the same. A "sphere of influence" IS imperialism. It's the same logic behind the Bay of Pigs and the Monroe Doctrine.

It's also funny how most of the more popular commentators within that tradition are also terminally captured by yank-o-centrism; they can't comprehend that Europe might be, or could be (or should be), its own independent geopolitical entity. And it's Europe that Ukrainians want to join, it's that that caused loads of them to first rise up in 2013. Most Ukrainians were against joining NATO when (and for a long time after) Russia first invaded in 2014. 

[ignatius]

ukraine doing all they can/have to to send shit back at russia. this is nuts. turning russian mortars on a lathe so they'll fit smaller launchers... 

 

https://x.com/FunkerActual/status/1775928114805080430

[decibal cooper]

 

9 hours ago, Walter Ostanek said:

They haven't - they've lost Crimea and Luhansk, but retain large chunks of Kherson, Zap and Donetsk. Russia has never occupied Zaporizhia city, and I dread to think what kind of Gaza-like apocalypse russia would unleash if they got their mitts on the place (or Kharkiv city).

'Large chunks' does not mean that they have control of the whole oblast. I did assume that Russia had all four, but honestly I look for info on the web for current maps and the state of things and cannot find anything, would be very interested to learn more, though.

"All of the rhetoric painting Putin as the next Hitler on his way to conquer Europe"

9 hours ago, Walter Ostanek said:

Except that that is Putin's own rhetoric.  The threats of invasion and nuclear annihilation against Poland, the Baltics, Finland, Germany, the UK, even Ireland come from he himself - the autocratic leader of the Russian state, plus his apparatchiks who he controls (Drunk Dmitri almost comically so) and the talking heads of his state-controlled media. When imperialist nutjobs make threats, they should be believed. You can hardly accuse people of vilifying Putin as some brutal monster when he openly, willingly (in front of voluntary interviews!) paints himself as one. Have you forgotten when he victim-blamed Poland for Hitler's invasion in front of an audicence of millions of braindead yanks?

Note that the political superstructure that Putin has created, comes with built-in off-ramps. At any time he chooses, he can blame his boyars, his advisers, his ultranationalist outriders, of deceiving him or misinforming him. He could very easily and (actually semi-plausibly) blame Girkin and Malofeyev for the entire unpleasantness since 2014 (he even has Girkin in prison already). He does have options to climb down and save his own skin. But he doesn't, because this is what he wants to happen.

What threats? What evidence is there that Putin wants to invade these places if he cannot make quick work of 20% of Ukraine (which is probably what Russia will end up occupying once all is said and done, same as with Georgia when they tried getting NATO on the border before in 2008)? That is illogical. If nuclear war happens in our lifetime or after, do you really believe that is will be Russia who fires first? I am asking in all honesty.

I did not forget the victim blaming from the interview, an interview that was 2 hours long (although 30 mins was mostly Putin's nationalistic version of history). Point is he said lots of things, like he was open to diplomatic negotiations with American re Ukrainian war. Obviously the terms would not be in Ukraine's favor, but it would stop the killing, and the longer it takes to get to peace the worse it will be for all parties involved except for anyone who benefits financially from this war.

9 hours ago, Walter Ostanek said:

The Realist viewpoint might be a passive, pragmatic endorsement of imperialism, rather than an active, enthusiastic one, but it is an endorsement of imperialism all the same. A "sphere of influence" IS imperialism. It's the same logic behind the Bay of Pigs and the Monroe Doctrine.

It's also funny how most of the more popular commentators within that tradition are also terminally captured by yank-o-centrism; they can't comprehend that Europe might be, or could be (or should be), its own independent geopolitical entity. And it's Europe that Ukrainians want to join, it's that that caused loads of them to first rise up in 2013. Most Ukrainians were against joining NATO when (and for a long time after) Russia first invaded in 2014. 

He routinely criticizes imperialism, and he was probably the first American academic (and maybe the only) to publicly criticize the Gaza war in writing and through appearances on news broadcasts - he has been on PBS for instance. Call it what you will (imperialism or sphere of influence), would you rather have Russia and China be the dominant force in the east and then rest of world or the United States. That is what is at stake, and the way that America chooses to make war with Russia instead of cooperating and driving a wedge between Russia and China, is foolish and also incompetent. It creates and sustains military conflict and leeches off the material profits of these unnecessary wars.

Europe has enough power collectively to challenge American policy. They are essentially America's bitch at this point, and ironically the war in Ukraine accelerated this trend especially concerning the cost of energy oil and natural gas. That pipeline blowing up nordstream made a difference in other words.

I do appreciate your response. That last paragraph is powerful. Mearsheimer looks at the world from the vantage point of conflict between the two highest players in the game, American and China in this case. His perspective sees little or no agency in smaller states, Ukraine in this case. You can look at the war from the perspective of Ukrainian liberation/resistance, or you can look at it as America fighting a cold war style proxy war with Russia, and the Ukrainians are just caught in the crosshairs. It's of course possible and easy too to just try and view both perspectives. However, ultimately, however you view the conflict, I think it is not advisable to avoid looking at what the possible outcomes of this war are, especially in terms of escalation.

Related to escalation, America's sec of state just announced today that Ukraine will be a NATO member. This was the exact thing that former president George W. Bush did with Georgia before Russia invaded. Putin's language has changed concerning these matters too from soundbites I've heard. This was back in 2008. We were shoving NATO down their neck and planned to take it right onto the border. A red line for Putin.

 

Edited April 5 by decibal cooper
put wrong date for video, corrected

[ignatius]

Russians Keep Turning Up Dead All Over the World

A helicopter pilot who defected to Ukraine is the latest obvious assassination, but a range of businessmen, bureaucrats and political figures have also suffered suspicious deaths since the invasion

https://archive.ph/F2rfM

here' a snippet.  

Quote

 

On a Tuesday afternoon last month, Maksim Kuzminov drove up to his new condo overlooking a palm-lined Spanish beach, unaware that an assassin was waiting for him by the parking garage. 

Local police stationed less than 500 feet away needed only minutes to respond, but witnesses said it was too late for the former Russian helicopter pilot. The killer had vanished, driving out over the 28-year-old victim’s bullet-ridden body. A medic who sliced through his shirt with bandage shears noted the accuracy of the five small-caliber shots, one directly piercing his heart.

Six months earlier, Kuzminov, a native of a town near Russia’s North Korean border, had defected to Ukraine, his Mi-8 attack helicopter taking small-arms fire as he flew barely 20 feet above the ground. After turning over the gunship, he collected a $500,000 reward and encouraged his countrymen to follow his example.

“When all this opens up before you, your views will fundamentally change,” he said in an interview filmed and posted on YouTube by Ukraine’s Defense Ministry. “You’ll simply discover a world of colors.”

Now Kuzminov—gunned down in Villajoyosa, a coastal resort that translates as “Joyful Town”—has become the latest name on a lengthening list of unsolved deaths of Russians who soured on Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Spain hasn’t identified a suspect, although investigators believe the murder was ordered by the Kremlin, an official involved in the investigation said. 

Moscow hasn’t denied killing the pilot. “This traitor and criminal became a moral corpse at the very moment when he planned his dirty and terrible crime,” Sergey Naryshkin, Russia’s foreign intelligence chief, told its state news agency TASS. 

 

 

[may be rude]

here's a well-produced documentary about the ukrainian children abducted by russia. at least 19,505. hard not to suspect human trafficking. 

https://kyivindependent.com/uprooted/

Edited April 6 by may be rude