Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[be.open]

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.

Well, it seems that these are not very good prospects for Ukraine. However, it seems that yesterday the intensity of artillery fire from Russia sharply decreased, the period of intensive softening of the fortified positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass lasted about a week. I can assume that a significant part of the centers of fire resistance identified by reconnaissance has already been destroyed there and the preparatory part of the battle for Donbass has already ended.

I'm not sure where did you got that Russian invasion become surprise for Ukraine, NATO and West. IIRC, few days before inavsion, USA intelligence warned that inavsion can begin at any moment, on 23th February state of emergency started in Ukraine. Though, Ukraine admitted that they didn't expected invasion in North, from Belarus side.

It doesn't matter how well Ukraine prepared for a Russian invasion if it missed a surprise blow. Although TwitchySeal believes that Ukraine won near Kyiv and kicked Russia's ass there, putting it to flight. This feature of Ukrainian propaganda does not surprise me; it even declared the defeat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Mariupol as a victory.

And I'm not sure why you're saying about too small forces, when there was close ti 200k troops near to Ukrainian border.

200,000 soldiers is dramatically small to start an operation; according to NATO intelligence estimates, the minimum number required to control only the eastern part of Ukraine is 400,000 soldiers. Russia began the operation with half the resources in terms of manpower, dispersed in addition to the East, also in the North and South. I think that's why NATO considered Putin's statements a bluff, NATO intelligence had accurate data, but made incorrect conclusions from them.

So, Mariupol's infrastructure isn't good after all? But I used it just as most obvious example, there is lot of smaller cities with huge damage like Severodonetsk or Borodyanka.

Mariupol suffered significantly in urban battles, it's true. The Azovstal plant cannot be restored, blast furnaces cannot be turned off and turned back on like a gas burner - this is a continuous cycle enterprise. As soon as the blast furnaces at Azovstal were stopped, there was no longer much point in keeping its walls intact. It seems that now 240-mm mortars "Tulip" are working there. Everything else will be restored. Mariupol has a very important strategic importance in this operation for a number of reasons, so I think the victims were not in vain.

And this ''civilian war'' was started by Russia 8 years ago. And what is genocide of Russian speaking Donbass population is still big mistery for me.

You have an interesting interpretation of historical events, but I do not agree with it.

If it weren't for that law they just passed about what you can say about the war special operation, I'd give you a hard time about letting your emotions keep you from admitting that Russia got their ass whooped in the battle for Kyiev.

History is written by the winners, not the losers. This story is not over yet, so any conclusions are at least premature.

And lonng table is in action again . This time in meeting with António Guterres.

Formally, no one has canceled the covid-19 pandemic in Russia. It is not the size of the table that is curious, but what Putin told him, regarding the decision of the International Court of Justice on Kosovo's right to self-determination, without permission from the capital - that this episode created a precedent, on the basis of which the independence of Donbass from Kyiv could be quite legitimate. It seems that Guterres did not find what to answer to this argument of Putin.

[1714643756]

1714643756

[1714643756]

1714643756

[1714643756]

1714643756

[1714643756]

1714643756

[DaRude]

....

Australian PM warns Chinese that new base would be 'red line' for Australia and the US...Western countries are scrambling over a security pact reached between China and Solomon Islands

https://www.foxnews.com/world/australian-pm-says-new-chinese-base-would-be-red-line-for-australia-us

Think we're hitting the peak of the irony here. So how many here are going to start yelling about Solomon Islands' right to join whatever pact they want? Or Chinese cookies are different than Nuland's cookies? Surely China can find a lot more countries around the globe where it can offer some irresistibly profitable trading terms in exchange for some military cooperation. That's the problem with precedents, once you set them then you reap what you sow.

The justification for US screwing Cuba was that Cuba's proximity to US was an existential threat, that got us through cold war. Why, why did they have to challenge that and rock the boat now?

...

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.

Ahh right, the "will of the people", totally objective position for international relations, who wouldn't buy up such logic. Now who do you think should decide which governments "speak on behalf of its people" enough to allow them to join pacts? Care to share your list? Did Bush represent the majority of Americans, majority supported, had an agreement and were informed of the consequences (economic, political,...) of getting into Afghanistan? So were Trump's and now Biden's actions?

I mean if we're going to make up justifications why some countries are not allowed to do things that others can, after the fact, why not just say that counties that are in a pact that begins with NA* or in alliance with such pact, can just do whatever they want, wile everyone else gets sanctioned?

S.I. GDP is just $1.71 billion if China double/triple/10x... countries GDP overnight do you not think that majority wouldn't be dancing on the streets welcoming it's military in their houses?? Such idiotic diplomacy is what got us to this place. Now China is just going to buy up "majority" in every poor country that it wishes. If this is the best argument for foreign policy they can come up with, then it's a total diplomatic failure. No one with IQ higher than a rock will accept such mental gymnastics.

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.

Wait, are you being sarcastic here? Talking about no free lunches, after Ukraine accepted Nuland's cookies?   Or do you believe full scope of consequences, how it will be crossing Russia's red line and Ukraine becoming a military target, resulting in loss of life that we're seeing now, was fully disclosed to Ukrainian people as condition of accepting those cookies??

BTW if you're any country in central or south Americas with opposing views from US...who's country are you? Or better yet, how long will you have before you're sanctioned?

My position is that all big boys get their own sandboxes (spheres of influences). After loosing the cold war, Russia's sand box was eroded down to bare bones of Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan (all Russian speaking countries). And more or less everyone was fine with/accepted it. USA/Europe were growing, Russia was more liberal and positioning itself towards Europe. Now what genius decided to ruin that stability by taking Ukraine out of Russia's sandbox with cookies, is beyond me. And after that claiming the following:

One of the most senior US officials in the Pacific has refused to rule out military action against Solomon Islands if it were to allow China to establish a military base there, saying that the security deal between the countries presented “potential regional security implications” for the US and other allies.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/26/us-wont-rule-out-military-action-if-china-establishes-base-in-solomon-islands

So Russia in 2014 when it was in shambles and was not a threat to anyone, shouldn't consider loosing a Russian speaking country ally, through which majority of its gas is exported to EU, as having "potential regional security implications". But somehow Solomons Islands have regional security implications for Australia which is 1.000miles away and US which is 10.000miles away? No one can be expected to swallow such BS, and that's how wars start.

Now what I hope is that US haven't gone full retarded, in fact clandestinely filling up the Ukraine with weapons and bringing their army from 0 to 101% in 8yrs [although by leveraging NAZIs] points to US fully expected Russian retaliation. Now this will either bare fruits and will bring a fall of Putin, or will be a total diplomatic fuck up, EU would be freezing and unable to compete on global markets (due to higher costs of raw resources), while Russia is pushed into China's hands and now with set precedent China uses same playbook to buy loyalty of poor countries situated closely to its adversaries. Great high risk low reward move...

I might be taking a practical approach, but your approach that any hypocrisy and blatant double standards could be justified by claiming that it represents the "will of people" just doesn't hold water. If anything it makes pushing back on China impossible when US does exactly the same thing.

Was a fan of Switzerland, bottom line their referendums and neutrality worked out great for them (isolation by alps helped out too). But by bending over on bank reporting to US, and now joining EU sanctions, the saying "neutral as Switzerland" doesn't make much sense anymore. In fact i have no idea what they have left going for them, that Nazi gold they're holding must be running out soon, and not sure how much millennials care about great watches. But in any case, as far as all regimes having issues, sure can't argue there, but then should we start with biggest offenders, those who start the most wars, who objectively caused the most loss of life, who's weapons kill the most people bar none?

There are consequences for setting precedence and breaking international norms. Claiming unique rights because you represents the "will of the people" just makes you a clown in international relations

[Branko]

I'm not sure where did you got that Russian invasion become surprise for Ukraine, NATO and West. IIRC, few days before inavsion, USA intelligence warned that inavsion can begin at any moment, on 23th February state of emergency started in Ukraine. Though, Ukraine admitted that they didn't expected invasion in North, from Belarus side.
And I'm not sure why you're saying about too small forces, when there was close ti 200k troops near to Ukrainian border.

He is probably comparing that USA attacked 3 times smaller country (Iraq) with 5 times more soldiers (almost a million) and
only after 42 days of one of heaviest bombardment in history

[be.open]

I'm not sure where did you got that Russian invasion become surprise for Ukraine, NATO and West. IIRC, few days before inavsion, USA intelligence warned that inavsion can begin at any moment, on 23th February state of emergency started in Ukraine. Though, Ukraine admitted that they didn't expected invasion in North, from Belarus side.
And I'm not sure why you're saying about too small forces, when there was close ti 200k troops near to Ukrainian border.

He is probably comparing that USA attacked 3 times smaller country (Iraq) with 5 times more soldiers (almost a million) and
only after 42 days of one of heaviest bombardment in history

Yep, but for some reason they call General Dvornikov the "Butcher of Aleppo" and a psychopath. Although he just did his job and left Assad in power when his fate already seemed sealed. Russia does not abandon its allies, regardless of the complexity of the situation - and therefore Russia is now respected in the Arab world. India also remembers how the USSR came to its aid when the whole world supported Pakistan against it. Therefore, Johnson can at least dress up as a clown, India listened to him carefully and took note of Britain's desire to restore trade ties, but refused to impose sanctions against Russia. Therefore, Serbia loves Russia, and also does not impose sanctions, despite the pressure of the European Union.

It really didn’t work out with Poland, how quickly they forgot about Katyn - well, no one really counted on them.

[paxmao]

And I'm not sure why you're saying about too small forces, when there was close ti 200k troops near to Ukrainian border.

200,000 soldiers is dramatically small to start an operation; according to NATO intelligence estimates, the minimum number required to control only the eastern part of Ukraine is 400,000 soldiers. Russia began the operation with half the resources in terms of manpower, dispersed in addition to the East, also in the North and South. I think that's why NATO considered Putin's statements a bluff, NATO intelligence had accurate data, but made incorrect conclusions from them.

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.

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.

Well, it seems that these are not very good prospects for Ukraine.

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.

However, it seems that yesterday the intensity of artillery fire from Russia sharply decreased[...] I can assume that a significant part of the centers of fire resistance identified by reconnaissance has already been destroyed there and the preparatory part of the battle for Donbass has already ended.

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

I'm not sure where did you got that Russian invasion become surprise for Ukraine, NATO and West. IIRC, few days before inavsion, USA intelligence warned that inavsion can begin at any moment, on 23th February state of emergency started in Ukraine. Though, Ukraine admitted that they didn't expected invasion in North, from Belarus side.

It doesn't matter how well Ukraine prepared for a Russian invasion if it missed a surprise blow. Although TwitchySeal believes that Ukraine won near Kyiv and kicked Russia's ass there, putting it to flight. This feature of Ukrainian propaganda does not surprise me; it even declared the defeat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Mariupol as a victory.

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.

And this ''civilian war'' was started by Russia 8 years ago. And what is genocide of Russian speaking Donbass population is still big mistery for me.

You have an interesting interpretation of historical events, but I do not agree with it.

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

I'm not sure where did you got that Russian invasion become surprise for Ukraine, NATO and West. IIRC, few days before inavsion, USA intelligence warned that inavsion can begin at any moment, on 23th February state of emergency started in Ukraine. Though, Ukraine admitted that they didn't expected invasion in North, from Belarus side.
And I'm not sure why you're saying about too small forces, when there was close ti 200k troops near to Ukrainian border.

He is probably comparing that USA attacked 3 times smaller country (Iraq) with 5 times more soldiers (almost a million) and
only after 42 days of one of heaviest bombardment in history

...
 Russia does not abandon its allies, regardless of the complexity of the situation...

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.

[Branko]

Cuba, Grenada, Serbia, ...

I don't see Cuba conquered

Grenada was just colonialist escapade by USA, there was nothing
worth to invade there nor they were Russian ally

Serbia - well, Russia probably played game there as Kosovo
gave them great pretext for Crimea and Donbass. Even Serbs
knew it was gone

China probably activated Solomon Islands story to show
West hypocrisy vs similar situation in Ukraine, even if they
don't have short term plans

[Cryptmuster]

But I was especially pleased with the Russian propaganda ingenuity ... if I were the one who would receive money for such work, I still would not have thought of dressing the girls in the uniform of sexy nurses with swastika elements, (the uniform is definitely taken from a sex shop or a drama theater because this kind of costume nurses wore 70 years ago).

The sick fantasy of propaganda is being refined as best it can. In this I see a kind of mockery of those to whom this propaganda is presented. Absolutely ridiculous outfits from aliexpress, the shooting takes place in some kind of field by the road, it's all so stupid that it's not clear who believes it all.

[be.open]

The sick fantasy of propaganda is being refined as best it can. In this I see a kind of mockery of those to whom this propaganda is presented. Absolutely ridiculous outfits from aliexpress, the shooting takes place in some kind of field by the road, it's all so stupid that it's not clear who believes it all.

Whether it's the case of the history of Ukrainian propaganda about Russian soldiers who first saw asphalt and a toilet bowl in Ukraine (when millions of Ukrainians go to work in Russia as guest workers, prostitutes and cleaners of station toilets). Give me your Nutella or I'll eat your parrot and drink olive oil lol. Xeндe xox, ёптa.

[paxmao]

Cuba, Grenada, Serbia, ...

I don't see Cuba conquered
...

I do not see Cuba supported.

The rest are excuses.

[Branko]

Cuba, Grenada, Serbia, ...

I don't see Cuba conquered
...

I do not see Cuba supported.

Supported in what, invasion of USA?

[paxmao]

Cuba, Grenada, Serbia, ...

I don't see Cuba conquered
...

I do not see Cuba supported.

Supported in what, invasion of USA?

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

[paxmao]

....

Australian PM warns Chinese that new base would be 'red line' for Australia and the US...Western countries are scrambling over a security pact reached between China and Solomon Islands

https://www.foxnews.com/world/australian-pm-says-new-chinese-base-would-be-red-line-for-australia-us

Think we're hitting the peak of the irony here. So how many here are going to start yelling about Solomon Islands' right to join whatever pact they want? Or Chinese cookies are different than Nuland's cookies? Surely China can find a lot more countries around the globe where it can offer some irresistibly profitable trading terms in exchange for some military cooperation. That's the problem with precedents, once you set them then you reap what you sow.

The justification for US screwing Cuba was that Cuba's proximity to US was an existential threat, that got us through cold war. Why, why did they have to challenge that and rock the boat now?

...

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.

Ahh right, the "will of the people", totally objective position for international relations, who wouldn't buy up such logic. Now who do you think should decide which governments "speak on behalf of its people" enough to allow them to join pacts? Care to share your list? Did Bush represent the majority of Americans, majority supported, had an agreement and were informed of the consequences (economic, political,...) of getting into Afghanistan? So were Trump's and now Biden's actions?

I mean if we're going to make up justifications why some countries are not allowed to do things that others can, after the fact, why not just say that counties that are in a pact that begins with NA* or in alliance with such pact, can just do whatever they want, wile everyone else gets sanctioned?

S.I. GDP is just $1.71 billion if China double/triple/10x... countries GDP overnight do you not think that majority wouldn't be dancing on the streets welcoming it's military in their houses?? Such idiotic diplomacy is what got us to this place. Now China is just going to buy up "majority" in every poor country that it wishes. If this is the best argument for foreign policy they can come up with, then it's a total diplomatic failure. No one with IQ higher than a rock will accept such mental gymnastics.

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.

Wait, are you being sarcastic here? Talking about no free lunches, after Ukraine accepted Nuland's cookies?   Or do you believe full scope of consequences, how it will be crossing Russia's red line and Ukraine becoming a military target, resulting in loss of life that we're seeing now, was fully disclosed to Ukrainian people as condition of accepting those cookies??

BTW if you're any country in central or south Americas with opposing views from US...who's country are you? Or better yet, how long will you have before you're sanctioned?

My position is that all big boys get their own sandboxes (spheres of influences). After loosing the cold war, Russia's sand box was eroded down to bare bones of Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan (all Russian speaking countries). And more or less everyone was fine with/accepted it. USA/Europe were growing, Russia was more liberal and positioning itself towards Europe. Now what genius decided to ruin that stability by taking Ukraine out of Russia's sandbox with cookies, is beyond me. And after that claiming the following:

One of the most senior US officials in the Pacific has refused to rule out military action against Solomon Islands if it were to allow China to establish a military base there, saying that the security deal between the countries presented “potential regional security implications” for the US and other allies.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/26/us-wont-rule-out-military-action-if-china-establishes-base-in-solomon-islands

So Russia in 2014 when it was in shambles and was not a threat to anyone, shouldn't consider loosing a Russian speaking country ally, through which majority of its gas is exported to EU, as having "potential regional security implications". But somehow Solomons Islands have regional security implications for Australia which is 1.000miles away and US which is 10.000miles away? No one can be expected to swallow such BS, and that's how wars start.

Now what I hope is that US haven't gone full retarded, in fact clandestinely filling up the Ukraine with weapons and bringing their army from 0 to 101% in 8yrs [although by leveraging NAZIs] points to US fully expected Russian retaliation. Now this will either bare fruits and will bring a fall of Putin, or will be a total diplomatic fuck up, EU would be freezing and unable to compete on global markets (due to higher costs of raw resources), while Russia is pushed into China's hands and now with set precedent China uses same playbook to buy loyalty of poor countries situated closely to its adversaries. Great high risk low reward move...

I might be taking a practical approach, but your approach that any hypocrisy and blatant double standards could be justified by claiming that it represents the "will of people" just doesn't hold water. If anything it makes pushing back on China impossible when US does exactly the same thing.

Was a fan of Switzerland, bottom line their referendums and neutrality worked out great for them (isolation by alps helped out too). But by bending over on bank reporting to US, and now joining EU sanctions, the saying "neutral as Switzerland" doesn't make much sense anymore. In fact i have no idea what they have left going for them, that Nazi gold they're holding must be running out soon, and not sure how much millennials care about great watches. But in any case, as far as all regimes having issues, sure can't argue there, but then should we start with biggest offenders, those who start the most wars, who objectively caused the most loss of life, who's weapons kill the most people bar none?

There are consequences for setting precedence and breaking international norms. Claiming unique rights because you represents the "will of the people" just makes you a clown in international relations

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.

But in any case, as far as all regimes having issues, sure can't argue there, but then should we start with biggest offenders, those who start the most wars, who objectively caused the most loss of life, who's weapons kill the most people bar none?

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.

[be.open]

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.

Ukraine behaves like an inadequate drug addict with a knife in his hand and borderline personality disorder in his head. But in fact, Ukraine is a whore and a kept woman of the United States, who sold herself for Nuland cookies. There are interesting analogies to Johnny Depp's trial, with the shit in the bed and "who would believe a straight white man?" etc.

I don’t know what fate Ukraine itself prophesies in fantasy, but this clearly should not be connected with anti-Russian rhetoric and all this Nazi shit. And the knife would have to be taken away before she killed herself.

[suchmoon]

The sharply increased amount of whataboutism in this thread indicates yet another Russian failure. I feel "phase 3 of the special operation" is coming soon.

[Branko]

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.

But in any case, as far as all regimes having issues, sure can't argue there, but then should we start with biggest offenders, those who start the most wars, who objectively caused the most loss of life, who's weapons kill the most people bar none?

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, US & Russia. Both are major weapons dealers.

You eat too much western propaganda. I suggest reading

http://www.spectrezine.org/global/chomsky.html

"Overcoming amnesia, suppose we now apply the methodology of the Black Book and its reviewers to the full story, not just the doctrinally acceptable half. We therefore conclude that in India the democratic capitalist "experiment" since 1947 has caused more deaths than in the entire history of the "colossal, wholly failed...experiment" of Communism everywhere since 1917: over 100 million deaths by 1979, tens of millions more since, in India alone. The "criminal indictment" of the "democratic capitalist experiment" becomes harsher still if we turn to its effects after the fall of Communism: millions of corpses in Russia, to take one case, as Russia followed the confident prescription of the World Bank that "Countries that liberalise rapidly and extensively turn around more quickly [than those that do not]," returning to something like what it had been before World War I, a picture familiar throughout the "third world." But "you can't make an omelette without broken eggs," as Stalin would have said. The indictment becomes far harsher if we consider these vast areas that remained under Western tutelage, yielding a truly "colossal" record of skeletons and "absolutely futile, pointless and inexplicable suffering" (Ryan). The indictment takes on further force when we add to the account the countries devastated by the direct assaults of Western power, and its clients, during the same years."

[be.open]

The sharply increased amount of whataboutism in this thread indicates yet another Russian failure. I feel "phase 3 of the special operation" is coming soon.

Meanwhile, in Mariupol, the Russian Orcs are resting after clearing the city.

[paxmao]

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.

Ukraine behaves like an inadequate drug addict with a knife in his hand and borderline personality disorder in his head...

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

[paxmao]

...

You eat too much western propaganda. I suggest reading

http://www.spectrezine.org/global/chomsky.html

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.

The sharply increased amount of whataboutism in this thread indicates yet another Russian failure. I feel "phase 3 of the special operation" is coming soon.

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.

[Branko]

...

You eat too much western propaganda. I suggest reading

http://www.spectrezine.org/global/chomsky.html

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.

Collosally failed experiment of capitalism killed around 650 million people so far
Communism killed around 100 million

(I don't support either number, but you get those numbers when you apply same methodology of counting bodies
used by authors of "Black book of Communism" to both capitalism and communism)


Your "Bottom line, authoritarian regimes are much more prone to enter into wars." suggest USA is the most authoritarian regime ever

[suchmoon]

https://www.bbc.com/russian/news-61241878

Another spontaneous combustion near Belgorod:

Near the village of Staraya Nelidovka, according to preliminary information, an ammunition depot is on fire. There is no destruction of residential buildings, houses. There were no casualties among the civilian population

Allegedly destroyed 5784th Bayraktar near Kursk:

Tonight, at 2:45, many residents of Kursk heard pops. The details of the incident are being clarified. According to preliminary data, the air defense system worked. There are no casualties or damage. [...] in the sky over the Kursk region [...] a Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicle was intercepted.

5785th near Voronezh:

[...] Voronezh Governor Alexander Gusev [...] wrote in the telegram channel that in his area, the air defense system "detected and successfully destroyed a small-sized reconnaissance UAV"