Of course, I forgot that you are the owner of the truth and the knower of all objective information - for example Chomsky speaking about communism. You have to be kidding.

Anyway, please, give your version, how many people died under Stalin's regime (please include Holomordor, dying of hunger is a violent death IMO)? How many people died as a result of the invasion of France, Poland and the USSR by Nazi Germany? Hint: You will have to make some assumptions, none of that data is really uncontested.

Feel free to compare these, in reasonable terms with US wars or even US induced wars.

Bottom line, authoritarian regimes are much more prone to enter into wars. Most people by default do not want war, if given a voice, they would tend to request peaceful solutions. Tyrants need wars, countries ruled with strong military influence tend to like large armies and these tend to like waging war.


Putin's psychos are shelling and bombing all over the southern front, some salient attacks in the East near Izum achieved a few miles of advance. Missiles launches from Luhansk as usual.

Another "electrical failure" occurred in Kurst (yes, that is Russian territory) and a drone was downed as well inside Russian territory. Air defence in Belgorod (Russia) was activated during the night (sleep tight, you are safe in Putin's Russia....) and a further "casual fire" in Belgorod (Russia).

People demonstrated in favour of Putin in Kherson... but they were carrying Ukrainian flags. Strange uh? A false flag attack in "Transnistria" points to Putin Chief Psycho thinking of opening a front from Moldavia.

The forecast for the next week: More "testing" of defences by Putin's Chief Psycho - which in itself means that their intelligence is weak at best - some of the salient attacks in Izum and the east front will achieve some advance, but my take is that once the go too far from their bases, get into unfavourable terrain or if dare to stretch their supply lines they will be fodder for Javelins and Razorblades. As of now, it does not seem that Ukraine is making any effort to recover territory, but that may happen during future weeks if they start getting the promised western siege artillery.

Overall, I do not see any game changer in the next week. The Ukrainian army is remarkably good at doing a lot with their limited resources and the military and civil aid will be reaching the from along the next month, so they could potentially find the cracks as they found them in the battle of Kyiv.

More like a lady that has been threatened by her abusive drunken ex-husband and has taken the knife to avoid being raped.

You consider that all governments are equally legit, so North Korea and Denmark are at the same level to you. I disagree - legitimacy comes from the will of people, period. Anything else is slavery and serfdom.

Ukraine, as far as I know, is not accepting NATO bases nor troops in its territory as of now, although the people could decide so if properly informed of the consequences. They certainly know now the consequences of not being protected. I never said that this lunch is free either, but stands a better chance of increasing living standards while keeping a reasonably representative government.

As said, if the people of the SI, properly informed of the consequences, decide to enter an (extremely asymmetric) treaty with the CCP, they are free to do so. The key is being properly informed and properly represented when making the decision. This is not entering and agreement with China, it is entering an agreement with a ruling elite that has China under their thumb.

On the Ukrainian topic, I partially agree. Would be an Ukraine under Putin's control be stable: most likely yes. Would that be a country that could develop, advance and have a choice about their destiny? Not a chance.

Again, if you take a short term and practical approach, Ukraine joining the EU and looking west makes no sense. If you look into the future and want a higher degree of freedom, social progress and development, it does.


Oh, sorry, I did not answer this. The regimes that have caused the most violent (no-defensive or otherwise reasonably justified) deaths are Communism under Stalin, Japan imperialism under the military junta, Nazi Germany and, to the scale of it's time, the Roman Empire. I you want to count the number of wars, the Roman Empire probably.

However the answer you are looking for, as profiting from war in the last few decades, US & Russia. Both are major weapons dealers.

No, supported in the sense of having something to eat.

I do not see Cuba supported.

The rest are excuses.

200k of obviously unprepared and un-informed soldiers is enough to control a country that surrenders. But not enough to take it over if there is determined resistance. That is the key mistake that has costed thousands of Putin's soldier's lives.

Now the Chief Psycho has decided to regroup, add some Tactical Cannon Fodder Battalions and try to achieve some limited gains in favourable terrain, near the bases in Russia and in a limited hostile territory. This guys knows the limits of Putin's Army and would rather try a modest "success" than a "glorious defeat". I reckon this guy is more cunning than the previous ones.

What is the caveat of this strategy? Dvornikov the Butcher, Chief Psycho, is, as many generals, fighting the last war. Time has always been on his side in Georgia and Syria - he had a influx of troops that could rotate, proper funding, international apathy for the conflicts, apathy or support from Russians and their enemies had limited supplies.

In Ukraine, time can be turned against him by:

- EU and US preparing to de-couple energetically and financially from Russia.
- Increased sanctions and continued diplomatic action.
- Increased military aid and intelligence support to Ukraine.
- Increased information to the Russian people about the thousands of soldiers dead.
- Attacks to critical infrastructure and legitimate targets in Russian territory.

It is for US and Europe to make this work.


You are assuming there will be no consequences for Putin's Russia trying to do that in Europe?

Ukraine will be receiving all the help and supplies required to achieve a decisive victory. By this time, Putin's Chief Psychos must have noticed that US will not allow them to reach any significant gain, but they are certainly going to let Putin bleed, alas, with Europe. Russia did not learn anything from WW II, except to use their people as cannon fodder.


Or one can assume many other things - if that information was true in the first place.


be.open can word it however he wants, but the major surprise here was for Putin. The official initial objectives were:

"demilitarise" - Ukraine has an army that is stronger, better armed and better supported from outside than before.
"depose de government of Ukraine" - Ukraine government has now become a symbol of fight against tyranny.
"denazify" - Putin's actions got all the Nazi traits: encouraging Homophobia, Xenophobia ("gayrope"), militaristic, aggressive, curtailing free speech, incarcerating the opposition, invading neighbours, systematically destroying any balance of power, installing puppets and mass-graving civilians,... He has proven to be a Supremacist psycho.

The ones that were not declared:

- Install a puppet: Failed.
- Take Kyiv - expecting a surrender: Failed.
- Prevent Ukraine's access to the Black Sea: Failed (at least for now admittedly).

The ones that are achieved as of now:

- A corridor to Crimea... (except for the resistance in Mariupol).
- Territorial gains in the Donbass (very limited territorial gains).

Securing these two is still very questionable.



There is no way the separatists could have been funded an armed without Putin's money and support. It does not get any clearer.


Cuba, Grenada, Serbia, ...

Boris "Partyman" Johnson went to India so that he could avoid being in the UK while the results of the investigation on his behaviour during COVID were made public. A secondary objective was to establish a trade treaty to try to make-up the mess he is making after BREXIT, including being at clear risk of making Northern Ireland and independent country under Sinn Fein rule.

UK official position is to arm and help Ukraine and recently has stated that targeting legit objectives in Russia with UK supplied weapons is not a problem. This obviously has not been to the liking of the Ministry of Dark Humour and Fantasyland tales.

I am not trying to prove anything. You are comparing Putin's war to a peacekeeping mission - which is not, because they have clearly declared that they are fighting on behalf of one side, or a proxy war between Russia and the US, which is not because there are no US soldiers (nor NATO troops) in the conflict but there are Putin's Russia soldiers - so it is not a proxy, it is simply a war between Russia and Ukraine.

Russia has put forward their conditions about how Ukraine would need to act to avoid being invaded. That, in my hood's called a threat, not a negotiation. Ukraine has decided not to be bullied. On top of that, the Donbas conflict could not exist without the support from Putin's Russia. War is expensive - who is funding the separatists? We all know who.

Seems to me that Putin wants peace, but only if he sets the rules, else ... psycho mode.
#

Oh, I can help you with that. The guy's strategy is: using massively artillery in cities. Night and day, flatten them. He led the war in Syria... this is Aleppo after his "strategy". This is why the West should be helping Ukraine achieve a decisive victory, this guy is not a soldier, is a psycho.

RE GDP, you are right to assume that people would be very happy about a better lifestyle - that is, if that money really ever reaches the average Joe. However, you should as well tell them that they are becoming a military target, should a war ever occur and they will be from then on depending on keeping in the good side of the CCP and thus loose their independence and, to a great degree, their freedom. You, see ... there are no free lunches, particularly, there are no free "swallow nests" when dealing with the CCP (and I am the one being classed as Naïve... oh my).#

By the way, if you have an army of, let's say 1000 soldiers and you have a base in your territory of, let's say 5000 Chinese soldiers, backed up by a massively superior force ... who's country is it?

See, you can argue about how representative democracies are, however, you cannot argue how representative is the system in Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran... because there is no argument.

Your position is that "since representative governments are not perfect then everything is equally bad". Cuba and US have the same level of legitimacy for you. Also, you take the practical approach to world diplomacy, but an ethical approach to judging representation in democracies.

We do not agree, that's all. Certainly, I am not trying to make anything up, I am simply expressing my view. I do not need to "list" ... you need free press, respect for the law and the individual rights and a representative system to elect a government plus independent judiciary... the more the better),

Also, I am not trying to convince you of anything either, nor do I need to justify anyone else's doing and I am certainly not going to try to justify any of the Bushes - Junior is certainly psychopath IMHO.

I think that my way of seeing things is what corresponds to a civilized position in the XXI century. Tzars, despots, kings, feudal lords... that is medieval and humanity should strive to get rid of those systems and those who support and promote them.

I am not a fan of the US nor I defend their way of electing representatives, the massive private donations, the gerrymandering and many other of the idiosyncrasies of the voting system. I could say the same for France, UK (extreme gerrymandering), Spain (you vote for a list, not a person) and even Switzerland which tends to delegate too much into referendums, even for decisions that are too complex, ... you can name any representative system and it has its faults.

The original version would be

You can also see the rouble / USD value right by the helicopter, sunken deep.

On the helicopter thing, I am not saying this is not accurate information, but I wonder why was the helicopter not able to leave the ship?

The nurses... gee, looking clean and lovely. No wonder Putin's soldiers are so keen in getting wounded and their leader make all kinds of efforts to send them to the hospital. Or the morgue.

Are you aware that you just quoted one of my links above? Yes you provide links to official media sometimes ... hardly a proof, more of food for Youtube algos.

Oh, my brain is fine. I know you will have a hard time understanding me and, be sure, I am not here to amuse you. Truth is boring, logic is long, boring and does not provide simple (yet wrong) answers to complex issues.

Act of war definition:


Does not get any clearer.


Curiously enough, that is not always the case. War crimes have also specific definitions, not everything illegal is a war crime and there are three groups of crime wars that are not at the same level of relevance.


There are no US nor NATO soldiers in Ukraine, there are Putin's Russia soldiers. A peacekeeping mission is a force that gets in the middle of two conflicting factions to prevent them from fighting. Russia is not getting in the middle of two factions, is taking a side.

If you wish to consider this a proxy for spheres of influence it would be closer to the truth. I am not particularly happy about US influence in Latin America, the Middle East nor anywhere else. I do take sides when a despotic regime takes the path of aggression on a germinal democracy - a very imperfect one.

I am not blind to the conflicts in Donbas, but there should be a pacific resolution and Russia should have acted as a mediator, not as a part in the conflict. US probably did not help either, both are still living in an imperialistic mindset in which local dissents are an opportunity to grab another piece of the world and they are both experts at feeding the local hawks and make a lot of money selling weapons in the process.

There are many countries that have different levels of governments and political organisations that could very well work in Ukraine, but that happens when people are given the opportunity to discuss and find common ground. That does not happen under despotic regimes that simply take one side, but usually in Democracies (e.g. North Ireland, Basque country, ...) in which people eventually understand that fighting is most of the times the worst solution.

For your purposes, you can call it whatever your government allows you to call it - we would not want you in prison, would we?

I could even believe you... except for the fact that Biden was clearly stating that it was going to happen even a couple weeks ahead "genius" https://www.politico.eu/article/us-joe-biden-warns-of-russia-invasion-of-ukraine-within-days/

There are even posts on this forum making fun, even I did not think Putin would be as stupid... But NATO, they knew.


Again, following the argument of "Russia is not at war" (which is already unbelievable), you say "Ukraine is in a civil war", that means that you admit that all the Donbas is Ukrainian territory at contest between two Ukrainian factions (Ukraine surely thanks you for that). You also say that Russia came to stop it. Thus Russia has sent troops into Ukrainian territory and has military presence there.

Invading another country with military forces is an act of war. Russia is at war with Ukraine. Ukraine can use any (legal) means to destroy Russian war infrastructure, including logistics, depots, factories, command centres, military installations, etc.

And let's now follow the opposite argument: If "Russia is not at war", then Putin is committing acts of terror in Ukraine which makes him a terrorist and makes Russia a terrorist supporting state. Ukraine is then in the right to capture, put to trial and sentence any member of the Russian government or military involved in these terrorist acts. They are lucky, if it were the US they would be sent to Guantanamo without trial and for an indeterminate period of time.

But, none of that is true - Russia has started a war with Ukraine. And, as the saying goes, you only know how wars start, not how they end.

In practical terms, Russia will deny there is a war, and Ukraine will "not deny nor confirm" any activity in Russian territory. But words are just wind.



The numbers you are providing are impossible. The self propelled howis are in the range of tens. Should UKR have 1000 Putin's army would already be on their way to Moscow. Interesting that you add numbers of APCs and howis which are completely different. The number of ATs as you mention is nearly impossible.


That refers to the possibility of pondering different opinions when there is no data or the data is incomplete, it does not mean purposely changing facts.



As far as Cuba, Castro's regime is not a representation of the people of Cuba, thus does not represent the will of the people living there. I will get flames for this, but that government, IMHO, while de-facto is the Cuban government, cannot be assumed to speak of behalf of the Cuban people and any agreement entered by it is not legit.

Chinese cookies are China's Communist Party's cookies, clearly a regime that cannot in anyway be assumed to represent the majority of the Chinese, even less now that Xi has decided to perpetuate himself in power. Again, I will get flames for this, but their government lacks legitimacy to act on behalf of their people.

If the majority of people of the S.I. and majority of people in China wish to have an agreement and are informed of the consequences (economic, political,...) then they should. There are some doubts about the level of representativeness of the current Prime Minister, who is accused of being in China's pocket.

Now, back to Putin's Russia, currently at war with Ukraine.


The govs in the West are banning anything that is considered disinformation. Anyone interested can still access Russian media. If you need proof, please, let me know any outlet that you would like me to read.

Unfortunately, all those bots and trolls like you sending false information have given the West govs the chance to restrict liberty. Another reason to hate this war.


You would need to elaborate that "thought".

The explanation is far simpler. Putin though that he would actually take the city, that it would surrender. He failed. The unprepared Russian soldiers died by the thousands.

However, I agree in the general sense: Russia does not have the numbers to achieve a major victory of any kind.

I think that the Ukrainian military strategically has been mostly intelligent and technically well prepared. When Putin stated over and over that he would not invade Ukraine, they did not prepare for the best case, but for the worst scenario and they were right.


You are confusing determination with nervousness. Putin is certainly shelling, bombing and launching missile attacks at Ukrainian cities and villages, if you want to deny that is up to you. At this point nobody has any doubt about it, not even in Russia.

Yes, sleep tight... and repeat three times "I am safe in Putin's Russia" if you dream of dead soldiers and burnt bodies.

The argument is just stupid, but let's follow it: Putin has not declared war in Ukraine. However he is bombing the cities. Are you saying then that Putin is a terrorist?

Or, in another way: Putin is doing a Special Bulshitwhatever, but then Ukraine has exactly the same right to do the same.

Do you think that not declaring war means that there is not actually a war? Even historically, Japan did not declare war, they simply bombed Pearl Harbour.

Your country is at war. There are consequences if you bomb someone else's cities. It is effectively an act of war by any international law, you do not need to declare it.

The last war on earth was 1945 ? OMG, I bow before your knowledge of history. It certainly explains a lot of what you write.

Per your logic, US was not at war in Irak because there was no full mobilisation. Even you must be aware that this level of bullshit cannot be digested even by the most convinced Russian supremacist.

Yes, and Japan was on a Special Military Operation with the United States during WW II. And Germany was on a Special Military Operation in Stalingrad and the the UK bombed Rotterdam in a Special Military Operation.

Now, Ukraine is in his right to undergo a Special Military Operation in Russia.

It is so funny if you think of it, Ukraine cannot attack targets in Russian soil because Putin has decided to call his war "a Special whateverthebullsh*t". You are once more an bottomless pit of fun.

Ah.... there your are. You did not get it at all. Russia is waging a war in Ukraine. I am going to repeat it to you because I do not think you fully understand the situation:

Your country is at war. Russia is a belligerent nation in a war with Ukraine.

What did you think? That this was all about watching the killing Ukrainian civils and military, destroying their infrastructures and sitting in your couch slamming the keyboard? Well, breaking news for you: Ukraine is perfectly in his right to blow any military, logistics, transportation or command related infrastructure in Russia. It is not terrorism, it is absolutely to the rules of war. They could even put a bomb in the Kremlin and it would be a perfectly legitimate target.

Not only that, they are perfectly in their right to launch air strikes, missiles or covert ops, lets say for example in the vicinity of Minsk. Remember this, any legal (war rules) operation in the vicinity of let's say, Minsk.


On this, I have to ask: Blame Ukraine for what? If they were blasting apartments in Moscow, there would be some blame game, but destroying any military target or killing anyone involved in espionage, counterintelligence, etc... is simply called war, and we know who started.

I do get that it may be intended to generate hate in Russia towards Ukraine thus having people supporting their government, but "nor confirmed or denied" it is legit.


You intend this as a joke, but the divide in the US is extreme. Recently, I meet a girl from California. She mentioned that they call the "bible belt" (Missouri, Mississippi, Texas,...) the "fly over states". They could not despise more the deep south, and, from my own experience when I lived there, I cannot blame them.

Ukraine does not deny nor confirm. Do you understand? "Does not deny nor confirm". And if you ask US intelligence services if they are helping... they "not deny nor confirm".

Now repeat with me once more:  "I am safe in Putin's Russia, I am safe in Putin's Russia, I am safe in Putin's Russia..."

I answered to this. You quote me on the topic of flechettes, I answer to that. But, to be honest, I was also not paying much attention either.

There is also a constant mention of the nuclear arsenal in Putin's controlled media "debates". Poland, Germany,... and then a "test" of Satan II in the middle of a war. The message to the population is clear: You are part of a strong country that can destroy others. You are safe, we will win and nothing bad can happen to you.

Is that working? Well, even the dumbest of the Russians does understand that once you use nuclear weapons, you can be certain to get hit back. I would be fucking scared to hear to official sources talking over and over about nuclear strikes. Particularly if I were living in Moscow, perhaps even St Petersburg with the right wind and weather. Perhaps the first strike would be in Belarus, depending on the target hit by Russia.

Please, do not think that I am talking theoretically about this. That comes from known results from "wargames" exercises by the Pentagon and NATO desk-based exercises.