Russia-Ukrainian War

[Spekulatius]

Prigozhin can’t shift sides, he is too deep in with war crimes all over the place. He is to Putin what Himmler was to Hitler. He also getting very cocky and I think crossing Putin is not good for the health in general.

 

Also of note, is that he pulled his mercenaries back from Bahkmut in particular and to some extend from other areas of the frontline, so if the Russians army loses due the Ukrainian counteroffensive, then we know exactly where he can point fingers to.

[John Hjorth]

Slap on top all that this very unpleasant - and also yelling, like the mercenary - personallity with the name Ramzan Kadyrov, sometimes wearing a Cossack hat [as if he did not already have enough hair in his face and on his head] into the cocktail, and we get something stronger than Stroh Rum to speculate away on. It so friggin' *pretty* - not!

[John Hjorth]

Lars Bangert Struwe :

 

Putin and some Russians and followers of Russia often claim that NATO did not want to expand, but there is no agreement.
There was no treaty stating that NATO could not absorb states located in Eastern Europe. It was discussed, but never implemented. All NATO expansions took place on the basis of the individual states' independent desire to join NATO.

On the other hand, there is an agreement concluded by, among other things Russia, which Putin and his people like to forget everything about. It is the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, which was ratified in 1994.

The agreement was signed by the President of Ukraine, Leonid Kuchma, the President of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, John Major, and the President of the United States, Bill Clinton.

According to the agreement, the parties undertake to respect Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and existing borders. Russia's attack on Ukraine is a direct example of this.

Almost every time someone brings up the Russian myth of NATO expansion, ask for documents documenting the claim via official treaties. And remember the senders of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. His entire text is available via the UN's website. The text is available in Russian, English and Ukrainian:

 

Link

 

So much for your word and signature, when your predecessor fucks you when you are out of the political game caused by age, or even death, your predecessor chosing own personal modus operandi based on old maps, and what do I know.

[cubsfan]

^^^^ Yeah, nice find there John.

 

Agreements mean nothing to despots. It just stalls off the pacifist, so he can claim victory, and pass the buck off to another administration to deal with the real problem. It's easy to look like a hero, when you avoid war - but do nothing about the underlying issue.

 

The right thing would have been to let Ukraine arm up (or join NATO) to insure their sovereignty.

 

So you let him take Georgia and Crimea, keep appeasing the tyrant, all the while hoping he will stop.

 

Sadaam made such a miscalculation with Kuwait and took the brunt of punishment in the form of George Bush.

 

But Putin saw his opportunity with (appeasers) Obama and then Biden:

 

Tyrants step all over weak leaders ---  "It's now or never baby"...

[Xerxes]

43 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

Lars Bangert Struwe :

 

Putin and some Russians and followers of Russia often claim that NATO did not want to expand, but there is no agreement.
There was no treaty stating that NATO could not absorb states located in Eastern Europe. It was discussed, but never implemented. All NATO expansions took place on the basis of the individual states' independent desire to join NATO.

On the other hand, there is an agreement concluded by, among other things Russia, which Putin and his people like to forget everything about. It is the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, which was ratified in 1994.

The agreement was signed by the President of Ukraine, Leonid Kuchma, the President of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, John Major, and the President of the United States, Bill Clinton.

According to the agreement, the parties undertake to respect Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and existing borders. Russia's attack on Ukraine is a direct example of this.

Almost every time someone brings up the Russian myth of NATO expansion, ask for documents documenting the claim via official treaties. And remember the senders of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. His entire text is available via the UN's website. The text is available in Russian, English and Ukrainian:

 

Link

 

So much for your word and signature, when your predecessor fucks you when you are out of the political game caused by age, or even death, your predecessor chosing own personal modus operandi based on old maps, and what do I know.

forgive my ignorance but what is exactly new revelation here by this analyst. 
 

1994 Agreement and the de-nuclearizarion of Ukraine is well known. 
 

The fact that NATO can structurally intake new members, by the prospective member applying is well known. I.e. it has an intake process. 
 

The fact that NATO as a consequence expanded eastward (by design or not, I care not) is well known.
 

The fact that Russia invaded two sovereign countries in 2008, 2014, 2022, as NATO expanded toward it, is well known. 
 

Not sure what is new here. I think the author is just being cute with his technicalities. 
 

Nixon and Kissinger bombed Cambodia (and expanded war) in order to achieve specific objectives vie a vis Vietnam (which is clearly not Cambodia). Just ONE example, of how great powers do whatever the f$&@ they want. and now you get this analyst getting all cute with this technicalities, “but but but there was no treaty that said NATO couldn’t” 
 

 

 

Edited June 14, 2023 by Xerxes

[cubsfan]

^^^ You are absolutely right @Xerxes. There is nothing new at all.

 

Just a reminder that history repeats itself again and again.

 

The fact that western leaders choose not to learn from history is real lesson.

 

The Obamas of the world feel they are so special and revered, that if they extend magnanimity to a despot - that will actually change the man. It didn't work on Hitler and it wasn't going to work on Putin.

[changegonnacome]

3 hours ago, Xerxes said:

Just ONE example, of how great powers do whatever the f$&@ they want. and now you get this analyst getting all cute with this technicalities, “but but but there was no treaty that said NATO couldn’t” 

 

Exactly - I almost break my heart laughing when i hear people talk about international law and UN conventions........if you are a nation on the UN security council YOU are effectively the law (judge, jury & executioner). You disagree show me Russia's indictment and punishment by the United Nations. There isn't one - cause Russia vetoed the indictment against itself 

 

There is no world police force.......the international system above nation states is by definition anarchic...there is the illusion of one........ask the folks in Rwanda......there is no 911 number you can call as a nation......you can call the UN HQ in Manhattan if you like, Rwanda did that - but it called on the weekend and nobody was there to answer the phone....and even if somebody answered nothing would have happened anyway. It's but its the reality. The UN does good work in aggregating collaboration across nations on certain issues but it isnt anywhere near to what some folks seem to think in terms of actual influence or power - at best you can say the UN is all bark and no bite when it comes to matters of aggression from the great powers. To the extent the 'laws' on the books are ever enforced they are enforced on small nations.

Edited June 14, 2023 by changegonnacome

[changegonnacome]

Back to our nordstream pipeline explosion & 'who dunnit' mystery

 

This nugget of history rhyming popped up in a recent talk I listened too.

 

In the early 1980's the United States was incensed that West Germany was increasingly trading more and more with the USSR (sound familiar)....... providing it with valuable foreign currency. The United States couldn't have been clearer & became intent on trying to slow the USSR's increasing acquisition of foreign trading relationships.

 

Then in 1982 a Russian pipeline in Siberia exploded with a blast equivalent of 3 kiloton nuclear device. The story goes that the USA blew it up - with a trojan horse software that it nested inside a Canadian companies product that they allowed Russia to steal.

 

https://www.risidata.com/Database/Detail/cia-trojan-causes-siberian-gas-pipeline-explosion

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/02/27/reagan-approved-plan-to-sabotage-soviets/a9184eff-47fd-402e-beb2-63970851e130/

 

So Nordstream 'might' be the SECOND Russian pipeline the USA has blown up in my lifetime, not the first. Allegedly.

Edited June 16, 2023 by changegonnacome

[Spekulatius]

Putins Game in Africa:

 

[changegonnacome]

 

Backing a nuclear rat into a corner - is not a good strategy - is it saber rattling right now, for sure it is......do country's do crazy erratic bonkers things when they are backed into a corner & their survival is at stake, sure they do......remember little 1941 Japan attacking the mighty USA at Pearl Harbor......pretty crazy huh?.....bonkers even......with a 99% probability that Japan would end up being totally destroyed in an all out confrontation with the USA & and less than 1% chance they would succeed in anyway militarily but they still did it. Why? Because their survival was threatened and they were being backed corner - like Buffet's purchasing of the trading companies there recently for this very reason - Japan in the late 1930's & early 40's was completely dependent on foreign imports - oil and steel.

 

In a ratcheting up of hostilities in Asia where the Japanese were the aggressors the US began to work on various embargoes and sanctions against Japan:

 

> 1938 - the USA proposed with Britain to blockade the whole island. Britain refused on the grounds it was too escalatory

> 1938 - US stopped supplying Japan with machined parts & aviation fuel....cutting off oil, was considered too extreme given Japan's complete dependence on US oil.

> 1940 - further scrap steel sanctions were put in place, strangling Japanese economy

> July 1941 - complete & total embargo of all oil exports to Japan.....Japan economy was internally imploding

> Oct 1941 - Japanese economy estimated to have 3 months of oil reserves remaining

> Nov 1941 - Pearl Harbor attack

 

It was outright CRAZY for Japan to attack the United States at Pearl Harbor...they effectively signed their own obituary with that act.

 

They did it anyway.

 

We should thank India, China & various African/Middle East nations....basically half the planets population..... for not going along with Biden's sanctions dream. Squeezing the Russian economy & raising the costs for their act of war in Ukraine is appropriate........but too much of good thing can be a bad thing......US sanctions policy if completely successful in getting India + others on board would have strangled the Russian economy to death in 2022/early 2023.

 

1941 Japan resorted to a crazy, hair brained and sure to fail act of aggression at Pearl Harbor when sufficiently corned (estimates suggest Japan was on course to completely run out of oil/aviation fuel by Feb 1942) leaving it completely defenseless against attacks from its enemies (China/USA etc.). They decided to launch an attack on the United States at Pearl Harbor that was destined to fail.

 

Now imagine 1941 Japan again but this time they have 5,977 intercontinental nuclear missles.

[Spekulatius]

Putin always mentioned his nukes when he is losing.

 

If we back down on Ukraine, Russia still has 5977 inter continental missiles and he knows for sure his strategy is working and will use it again and again.

 

The only think that neutralize nuclear threats are nukes. So eventually Ukraine might become a nuclear power just for the sake of neutralizing The Russian threat. About 20 ICBM from mobile launch platforms sites would do. Perhaps even one or two nuclear armed sub in the black sea as well.

 

Putin isn’t a rat in a corner either. He is an aggressive rat that attacked a smaller mouse next to his claimed territory. He can always go back to his rathole.

 

Edited June 17, 2023 by Spekulatius

[changegonnacome]

46 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

If we back down on Ukraine, Russia still has 5977

 

Not suggesting we back down....but also kinda suggesting we in the West don't attempt or lets call it aspire to 'win' so completely either...which I know is tough when you get into war one automatically begins to think in binary outcomes and surely 'winning' is the point of getting into a conflict in the first place, right?.......however the above Japan thingy was just a little thought experiment for those that dream of 'winning' and 'defeating' Russia so completely in this conflict....defeated nations do crazy, irrational & unpredictable things......so I guess what I'm saying is be careful of what you wish for, you just might get it......as folks never quite think through what peril exists in the West/Ukraine 'winning' so completely in this conflict.

 

You know the dream on CNN.......retired Generals with maps and videos of a Russian army bloodied and battered retreating as Ukraine with NATO equipment drives East, pushing Russian forces out of Ukraine taking back the Donbass/Crimea (which are now due to emigration of Ukrainian's at the start of the war....are really just majority full of ethnically Russian people now).....& who knows maybe Ukraine in gaining these now ethically Russian regions engages in a little ethnic cleansing as payback for Russian atrocities (not sure anybody would be surprised if this happened?)....and maybe to be safe the Ukrainian army decides to push its battles lines deep into Russian territory to create some security space....all while maybe further wins & progress on the sanctions front from the Biden administration means India signs up & refuses Russian oil.....and the Russian economy begins to implode......sounds like the WH's and the Western medias dream scenario........but then stop and think what that all looks like from a seat in the Kremlin.....then think about what an Imperial Japan so defeated in Oct 1941 was so recklessly willing to do in its final throes......they attacked a nation ten times their size with a military capability with no hope of achieving anything.

 

Their reckless abandon when faced with total defeat is best illustrated by a word that jumped from their language into our language  - 'kamikaze'

 

I wonder what the Russian equivalent word for 'kamikaze' is? I hope I never find out. 

[Dinar]

12 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Not suggesting we back down....but also kinda suggesting we in the West don't attempt or lets call it aspire to 'win' so completely either...which I know is tough when you get into war one automatically begins to think in binary outcomes and surely 'winning' is the point of getting into a conflict in the first place, right?.......however the above Japan thingy was just a little thought experiment for those that dream of 'winning' and 'defeating' Russia so completely in this conflict....defeated nations do crazy, irrational & unpredictable things......so I guess what I'm saying is be careful of what you wish for, you just might get it......as folks never quite think through what peril exists in the West/Ukraine 'winning' so completely in this conflict.

 

You know the dream on CNN.......retired Generals with maps and videos of a Russian army bloodied and battered retreating as Ukraine with NATO equipment drives East, pushing Russian forces out of Ukraine taking back the Donbass/Crimea (which are now due to emigration of Ukrainian's at the start of the war....are really just majority full of ethnically Russian people now).....& who knows maybe Ukraine in gaining these now ethically Russian regions engages in a little ethnic cleansing as payback for Russian atrocities (not sure anybody would be surprised if this happened?)....and maybe to be safe the Ukrainian army decides to push its battles lines deep into Russian territory to create some security space....all while maybe further wins & progress on the sanctions front from the Biden administration means India signs up & refuses Russian oil.....and the Russian economy begins to implode......sounds like the WH's and the Western medias dream scenario........but then stop and think what that all looks like from a seat in the Kremlin.....then think about what an Imperial Japan so defeated in Oct 1941 was so recklessly willing to do in its final throes......they attacked a nation ten times their size with a military capability with no hope of achieving anything.

 

Their reckless abandon when faced with total defeat is best illustrated by a word that jumped from their language into our language  - 'kamikaze'

 

I wonder what the Russian equivalent word for 'kamikaze' is? I hope I never find out. 

Alexander Matrosov is what you are looking for.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Matrosov.  Not perfect but close enough.  https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/papers/2008/P7192.pdf

[Spekulatius]

Kamikaze never works and the actual Russian soldier doing his work doesn’t believe in what he is doing, unlike in WW2. They are the attackers and they are left out to die on the frontline there. Those that go home will be a very potent threat to Putin. Even with Putins control of the media this will become a huge problem for them.

 

On a different note, a Michael Clark from Sky News mentioned that the African leaders are not really on a peace deal visit in Ukraine and Russia. Instead, want to make sure that the grain deal gets extended another year, because they are dependent on grain imports and no deal mean higher prices for them. This makes sense to me.

[cubsfan]

5 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Backing a nuclear rat into a corner - is not a good strategy - is it saber rattling right now, for sure it is......do country's do crazy erratic bonkers things when they are backed into a corner & their survival is at stake, sure they do......remember little 1941 Japan attacking the mighty USA at Pearl Harbor......pretty crazy huh?.....bonkers even......with a 99% probability that Japan would end up being totally destroyed in an all out confrontation with the USA & and less than 1% chance they would succeed in anyway militarily but they still did it. Why? Because their survival was threatened and they were being backed corner - like Buffet's purchasing of the trading companies there recently for this very reason - Japan in the late 1930's & early 40's was completely dependent on foreign imports - oil and steel.

 

In a ratcheting up of hostilities in Asia where the Japanese were the aggressors the US began to work on various embargoes and sanctions against Japan:

 

> 1938 - the USA proposed with Britain to blockade the whole island. Britain refused on the grounds it was too escalatory

> 1938 - US stopped supplying Japan with machined parts & aviation fuel....cutting off oil, was considered too extreme given Japan's complete dependence on US oil.

> 1940 - further scrap steel sanctions were put in place, strangling Japanese economy

> July 1941 - complete & total embargo of all oil exports to Japan.....Japan economy was internally imploding

> Oct 1941 - Japanese economy estimated to have 3 months of oil reserves remaining

> Nov 1941 - Pearl Harbor attack

 

It was outright CRAZY for Japan to attack the United States at Pearl Harbor...they effectively signed their own obituary with that act.

 

They did it anyway.

 

We should thank India, China & various African/Middle East nations....basically half the planets population..... for not going along with Biden's sanctions dream. Squeezing the Russian economy & raising the costs for their act of war in Ukraine is appropriate........but too much of good thing can be a bad thing......US sanctions policy if completely successful in getting India + others on board would have strangled the Russian economy to death in 2022/early 2023.

 

1941 Japan resorted to a crazy, hair brained and sure to fail act of aggression at Pearl Harbor when sufficiently corned (estimates suggest Japan was on course to completely run out of oil/aviation fuel by Feb 1942) leaving it completely defenseless against attacks from its enemies (China/USA etc.). They decided to launch an attack on the United States at Pearl Harbor that was destined to fail.

 

Now imagine 1941 Japan again but this time they have 5,977 intercontinental nuclear missles.

What you’re missing here is a couple of the key reasons WWII was so destructive. Pre-WWII, the USA had a strict policy of isolationism. Americans said flat out - we’re not fighting, we’re not getting involved. The Japanese knew this, and had no respect for America’s will to fight. If they were ever going to take the Philippines, Japan was going to have to take out the US Navy. It certainly backfired. Like Britain’s appeasement of Germany, US policy signaled to the aggressors- no will to fight. We’ll make noise and impose sanctions, but we’ve No stomach for a fight - and we’ve told the American people as such.

 

If the USA and UK had diplomatically sent strong messages of deterrence to both Japan & Germany - the chances for a worldwide war would have been diminished.

 

Fortunately for the Allies,  the United States produced more equipment & armaments than all the Allies and Allied force put together.

 

The big mistake for Britain was appeasement of Germany. The big mistake for the USA was isolationism on all fronts.

 

No matter how strong you are or how great your army is - when you signal to the bully that you have no will to protect yourself or your friends - the bully is going to try and take you out and the conflict gets worse.

 

This is what’s lost on the pacifist.

Edited June 17, 2023 by cubsfan

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

Kamikaze never works

Kamikaze + nuclear works very well. That was my point. I wasn’t trying to get you to think about Russian pilots flying planes into aircraft carriers. It was a case study in how extreme and reckless a nation state, but let’s call it a regime, can act when it’s survival is threatened. They will act and take courses of action you could never imagine possible & you would discount  as being too reckless to be possible. This was Japan in 1941…it was so bonkers they would attack the US on home turf that is beggared belief when it happened.

 

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

Russian soldier doing his work doesn’t believe in what he is doing, unlike in WW2

Your forgetting the golden rule - nationalism is the greatest force in our time….global Russo-Phobia is at an all time high…we took their McDonald’s away……we are attempting to make the average Russian family poorer via OUR actions (you or I would say Putin is doing this but it doesn’t matter what you or I say we don’t program Russian State media)…..a narrative can be spun where we in the West are taking bread from their table….I’m not too sure what the level of extreme Russian nationalism was prior to February 2022 invasion was….but let me help you with something……it’s higher today than it was then, for sure, regardless of what the BBC/CNN tells you about the Russian state collapsing from the inside or widespread discontent….I look forward to seeing it but the book says you strangle a country economically, you strengthen the regime & stoke nationalism…..the people in Russia are being fed propaganda for sure….but that’s beside the point…we are supplying Putin the raw materials & kindling required to fuel Russian nationalism…if he’s unable to get the fire lit it would amount to an even greater failure of his leadership than his misjudged invasion of Ukraine. I would caution believing narratives about the average Russian person losing faith in his/her own country’s leadership. Nothing stirs the blood like perceived or real conflict.

[Spekulatius]

Theories abound, but the evidence to me is that not NATO expansion, but. The prospect of a democratic Ukraine is what really scared Putin, because it undermines his autocratic power.

The evidence that points to this is timing. Russia invaded Ukraine the first time in 2014 after the Orange Revolution when they chased away Russia friendly President Yanukovych was changed away and and exiled to Russia.

 

https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/what-putin-fears-most/

 

Why would NATO extension be an issue for Russia? At some point Yeltsin and even Putin contemplated joining NATO. There is absolutely no reason why Russia could not have joined NATO just like Poland etc.

[John Hjorth]

38 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

... Why would NATO extension be an issue for Russia? At some point Yeltsin and even Putin contemplated joining NATO. There is absolutely no reason why Russia could not have joined NATO just like Poland etc.

 

I simply don't get the above quoted. Please elaborate.

[cubsfan]

Your options are: do you let expansionism go unchecked? Do you let Putin, with his threat of nukes, then take the Baltic States, Poland in a few years?  Continue to appease the despot? Ignore him, like the US ignored Japan with no threat of military action. Like Stanley Baldwin ignored the NAZI’s? Hoping with one more conquest they’ll be happy?

 

Hardly. Sadly human nature does not change- there will always be evil people the world needs protection from. They are never appeased and don’t go away until they are stopped. 
 

I’d venture to say , despots like Putin tell you , they will use their nukes until you tell them the game is OVER. You are done terrorizing the world.

 

that’s the only language Putin respects.

[Spekulatius]

17 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

I simply don't get the above quoted. Please elaborate.

Isn’t it simple? The Cold War was over in 1990. NATO and Russia started to collaborate and this lasted until the early 2000 when Putin decided that Russia wanted to become an antagonistic superpower again. When Putin gained power in the 1999 election, he was perceived to be a strongman but not unfriendly against the west at all. This only become evident years later. I think he made up his mind after he gained power.

[John Hjorth]

I haven't been much in doubt about the last line of yours above lately, @cubsfan,

 

It was the post about Russia joining NATO by @Spekulatius that triggered my post. Source?

[Spekulatius]

2 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

I haven't been much in doubt about the last line of yours above lately, @cubsfan,

 

It was the post about Russia joining NATO by @Spekulatius that triggered my post. Source?

Read up the article I posted above.

[Spekulatius]

In simple words, Putin is not so much afraid of NATO expansion, he is afraid of Democratic expansion in former Soviet Union states.

 

Having a Democratic and prosperous Ukraine would be an incredible problem for Putin eventually l because Russian may question the current state of affairs.

 

Same with China, HK and Taiwan actually. A free and prosperous Taiwan basically tells the Chinese people that we don’t need to CCP, we can do better. HK was taken care of, it’s just another Chinese city now. One country, one system.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Spekulatius

[cubsfan]

@John Hjorth I wasn’t responding to you John. We posted at the same time. Sorry. My response was to change, who is suggesting we let Putin off the hook because he has nukes…..

 

and I think @Spekulatiusis completely right. Putin is afraid of western democracy not an aggressive Ukraine that will attack him..

[no_free_lunch]

Not much choice but to stand up to our enemies.  If we don't, they simply get strong and emboldened.  We are sending arms to a different country to defend itself, I don't see how that is aggression or provoking a war.  Russia should be concerned too and all these arguments against nuclear war apply to them as well.