Russia attacking Ukraine 2/16?
- Thread starter Seattle Husker
- Start date
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
If you volunteer to protect the ships and trucks that will deliver these weapons, be my guest. They are now targets.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Many people still don't get what Putin's objectives are, even though he has outlined them pretty well. Also, the opinions speculate on Putin's mindset; how he views the world. It's not so much a question of whether he is right or wrong - just the facts as he sees them, and that's what matters.
Here's some links of different analysts you won't find on TV for what its worth. I'll list them one at a time below this post.
RUSSIA UKRAINE 1
Key excerpt:
Here's some links of different analysts you won't find on TV for what its worth. I'll list them one at a time below this post.
RUSSIA UKRAINE 1
Key excerpt:
Had I been at home I would have read Putin’s speech earlier and understood sooner. What he is talking about is what the Soviet Union tried to do from 1933 onwards: namely to stop Hitler before he got started. This time Russia is able to do it by itself. In other words, Putin feels that he is making a pre-emptive attack to stop June 1941. This is very serious indeed and indicates that the Russians are going to keep going until they feel that they can safely stop.
I believe that I am starting to see the outline of what they’re trying to do. Bear in mind that the aims to de-militarize and to de-nazify are rather large. I believe Putin and Company have decided to do them thoroughly and that is the reason for the troops on the ground.
At the large end, the grand strategy, is the destruction of NATO and the so-called New World Order. Scott Ritter has explained this in his piece. The “new” new world order will be that as described in the joint Chinese-Russian statement I have discussed elsewhere.
It will be obvious that NATO is useless and its friendship worthless. In fact, NATO/Western support is dangerous because it makes you think you have something when you actually have nothing. In a week it will be clear to all who can think that Washington and its minions cared nothing for Ukrainians – they were a sharp stick to poke the Bear with. Many will notice.
I believe that I am starting to see the outline of what they’re trying to do. Bear in mind that the aims to de-militarize and to de-nazify are rather large. I believe Putin and Company have decided to do them thoroughly and that is the reason for the troops on the ground.
At the large end, the grand strategy, is the destruction of NATO and the so-called New World Order. Scott Ritter has explained this in his piece. The “new” new world order will be that as described in the joint Chinese-Russian statement I have discussed elsewhere.
It will be obvious that NATO is useless and its friendship worthless. In fact, NATO/Western support is dangerous because it makes you think you have something when you actually have nothing. In a week it will be clear to all who can think that Washington and its minions cared nothing for Ukrainians – they were a sharp stick to poke the Bear with. Many will notice.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Scott Ritter. (He is a convicted pedophile, but he knows his stuff).
Not only analyzes what led up to this, but where things are likely to go afterward.
Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine in Perspective
Not only analyzes what led up to this, but where things are likely to go afterward.
Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine in Perspective
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Putin Ushers in the New Geopolitical Game Board - Gold Goats 'n Guns
Luongo is more of a libertarian type of guy. I'd recommend you read the whole thing.
Luongo is more of a libertarian type of guy. I'd recommend you read the whole thing.
Last edited:
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
I think that is the best decision, but you will have to be careful how you arm Ukraine. Russia will also fight to keep Western military tech out. It has to be seen by Russia as a neutral act not as working with the West to build a threat on their border. That is the whole reason for the war today.
The West is already sending arms and equipment in. Poland did it Friday.
Germany announced it is allowing the Netherlands to send 400 German made RPGs.
We just announced we are sending 350 million in equipment and arns.
There will be more before the day is over
iis was right.
Germany announced it is allowing the Netherlands to send 400 German made RPGs.
We just announced we are sending 350 million in equipment and arns.
There will be more before the day is over
iis was right.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Aren't we past the "fear of antagonizing Russia" or the ruse that Russia attacked Ukraine out of fear of the West? That's simply disinformation at this time, just as Russia's claim of de-nazification of Ukraine because of the ~1000 of the Azimov Battalion who were instrumental in the success of the overthrow of Putin's puppet government.
So what is it then?
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Sorry. One more.
Consultant to United States Departments of Defense and State, Foreign Service Institute and Mellon Bank on multilateral diplomacy, peace keeping by multinational organizations, and political risk assessment.
Prof. Brenner writes:
Friends & Colleagues
When a prediction proves erroneous, a decent respect for your colleagues requires at least an explanation.
cheers
Michael Brenner
[email protected]
SOMETHING HAPPENED
My muse knocked at dawn. Exhausted after catching the redeye from Moscow and then diverted over Finland. He insisted on a full breakfast before whispering in my ear. A week pulling up the grass roots from the permafrost in Gorky Park while subsisting on borscht and boiled cabbage had drained him.. Reanimated, the Truth began to flow – in short, staccato sentences with none of the usual refinements and subtle similes.
Context and background are everything in understanding the Russian attack. Look at the process of decision as dynamic over time rather than sharply focused in the immediate.
Putin is not a dictator. He cannot simply choose a course of action and give commands a la Stalin. Never has been. He has great authority; yet, at the same time, he represents the underlying convictions, thoughts and interests of powerful people in and around the government. Most of them were seated in that semicircle at St. Catherine’s Hall for the televised meeting of the Russian Security Council.
They, along with most all of Russia’s political cum economic class, have felt deeply humiliated by what they see as the shabby, patronizing treatment they have received from the West – led by a crass America – since 1991. The insults in word and action have hit them nonstop since 2014, reaching a crescendo from March 2021 onward. They have known full well that the aim is to denature Russia as a political cum diplomatic power in Europe – and beyond. The West want it neutralized and marginalized so that the U.S. can remain master of Europe as it prepares for a titanic struggle with China for global supremacy. Unfettered access to Russia’s wealth of natural resources is a bonus.
Concrete security concern have sharpened progressively as Washington has broken a series of major arms control agreements, expanded NATO, connived to replace friendly governments with American proxies via the notorious “color revolutions,” sought to undercut energy ties with European states, and deployed advanced weapons systems (above all, the anti-missile systems in Poland and Rumania able to be converted into offensive missile launchers), and via its ‘rules-based international order’ sloganeering and democracy vs autocracy campaign make explicit its intention to do everything possible to rig the game of world politics in its favor.
Ukraine, they believe, became the occasion (not the cause) to pin down a Russia whose growing strength discomforted and annoyed the Americans. It represented a conscious decision of the Biden administration under the sway of reborn Cold Warriors in State, the NSC, the CIA and the Pentagon. The triumph of their will in a government bereft of contrary voices and led by a weak, manipulable President was a sure thing. The Ukraine anti-Russia operation began in March with the Washington encouraged build-up of Ukrainian military forces along the Donbass Line, delivery of large quantities of arms including Javelin anti-armor weapons, renewed talk of heavy economic sanctions, and a chorus of shrill rhetoric from all quarters in Washington and Brussels.
The American objective of putting Russia back in its subordinate place was taken as an obvious given by the Kremlin. Uncertainty existed on the question of what initiatives on the ground to expect: a major assault on the Donbass or provocative acts to force a Russian reaction that could be used as a pretext for imposing sanctions (above all, the cancelling of NORDSTROM II).
It is likely that senior policymakers in Washington themselves had not made a definitive judgment on the issue. Divisions among individual players and a wavering President could very well left have important matters unresolved within a soft, cloudy consensus. There was visible evidence of this in the repeated juxtaposition, and alternation, of bellicose rhetoric and Biden’s mollifying words in public and the “let’s not go to war” telephone conversations he initiated to Putin and reaffirmed at their Geneva Summit.
In Moscow, too, there likely were differences of opinion – or, more accurately, of emphasis. They surely led to some divergences over what actions Russia should take. It is essential to bear in mind that Putin himself seems to have been closer to the dovish end of the continuum among Security Council members on the overarching issue of how to deal with the U.S., with the West, and particularly Ukraine. One could imagine a gradual hardening of thinking among all individuals as tensions mounted and frustrations grew in the Kremlin. A Putin, who might have been trying to fashion an approach that reconciled his own wariness about military confrontation with genuine worry about the threats to Russian security presented by Washington’s hardline, might have found himself in a quandary. I suspect that American official have very little understanding of this reality or appreciate its implications.
That could explain the promulgation of that strange position paper/demarche wherein he laid out in detail a list of demands for a drastic revision of Europe’s security configuration punctuated by an emphasis on time urgency. That is to say, a Hail Mary to stay the hand of a growing consensus that the time had come for Russia to hit back at the West in the Ukraine. Two things perhaps tipped Putin’s thinking into accepting the necessity of doing what he did. One was the West’s unbending and unaccommodating response. The other, was the Ukrainians’ launching an unprecedented artillery and mortar barrage against the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces. Who forced that fateful step? Elements of the Ukraine Army and/or security services? The AZOV brigade and associated parties? Zelensky? With how much encouragement from the CIA and/or the White House?
Michael Brenner
Prof. Brenner writes:
Friends & Colleagues
When a prediction proves erroneous, a decent respect for your colleagues requires at least an explanation.
cheers
Michael Brenner
[email protected]
SOMETHING HAPPENED
My muse knocked at dawn. Exhausted after catching the redeye from Moscow and then diverted over Finland. He insisted on a full breakfast before whispering in my ear. A week pulling up the grass roots from the permafrost in Gorky Park while subsisting on borscht and boiled cabbage had drained him.. Reanimated, the Truth began to flow – in short, staccato sentences with none of the usual refinements and subtle similes.
Context and background are everything in understanding the Russian attack. Look at the process of decision as dynamic over time rather than sharply focused in the immediate.
Putin is not a dictator. He cannot simply choose a course of action and give commands a la Stalin. Never has been. He has great authority; yet, at the same time, he represents the underlying convictions, thoughts and interests of powerful people in and around the government. Most of them were seated in that semicircle at St. Catherine’s Hall for the televised meeting of the Russian Security Council.
They, along with most all of Russia’s political cum economic class, have felt deeply humiliated by what they see as the shabby, patronizing treatment they have received from the West – led by a crass America – since 1991. The insults in word and action have hit them nonstop since 2014, reaching a crescendo from March 2021 onward. They have known full well that the aim is to denature Russia as a political cum diplomatic power in Europe – and beyond. The West want it neutralized and marginalized so that the U.S. can remain master of Europe as it prepares for a titanic struggle with China for global supremacy. Unfettered access to Russia’s wealth of natural resources is a bonus.
Concrete security concern have sharpened progressively as Washington has broken a series of major arms control agreements, expanded NATO, connived to replace friendly governments with American proxies via the notorious “color revolutions,” sought to undercut energy ties with European states, and deployed advanced weapons systems (above all, the anti-missile systems in Poland and Rumania able to be converted into offensive missile launchers), and via its ‘rules-based international order’ sloganeering and democracy vs autocracy campaign make explicit its intention to do everything possible to rig the game of world politics in its favor.
Ukraine, they believe, became the occasion (not the cause) to pin down a Russia whose growing strength discomforted and annoyed the Americans. It represented a conscious decision of the Biden administration under the sway of reborn Cold Warriors in State, the NSC, the CIA and the Pentagon. The triumph of their will in a government bereft of contrary voices and led by a weak, manipulable President was a sure thing. The Ukraine anti-Russia operation began in March with the Washington encouraged build-up of Ukrainian military forces along the Donbass Line, delivery of large quantities of arms including Javelin anti-armor weapons, renewed talk of heavy economic sanctions, and a chorus of shrill rhetoric from all quarters in Washington and Brussels.
The American objective of putting Russia back in its subordinate place was taken as an obvious given by the Kremlin. Uncertainty existed on the question of what initiatives on the ground to expect: a major assault on the Donbass or provocative acts to force a Russian reaction that could be used as a pretext for imposing sanctions (above all, the cancelling of NORDSTROM II).
It is likely that senior policymakers in Washington themselves had not made a definitive judgment on the issue. Divisions among individual players and a wavering President could very well left have important matters unresolved within a soft, cloudy consensus. There was visible evidence of this in the repeated juxtaposition, and alternation, of bellicose rhetoric and Biden’s mollifying words in public and the “let’s not go to war” telephone conversations he initiated to Putin and reaffirmed at their Geneva Summit.
In Moscow, too, there likely were differences of opinion – or, more accurately, of emphasis. They surely led to some divergences over what actions Russia should take. It is essential to bear in mind that Putin himself seems to have been closer to the dovish end of the continuum among Security Council members on the overarching issue of how to deal with the U.S., with the West, and particularly Ukraine. One could imagine a gradual hardening of thinking among all individuals as tensions mounted and frustrations grew in the Kremlin. A Putin, who might have been trying to fashion an approach that reconciled his own wariness about military confrontation with genuine worry about the threats to Russian security presented by Washington’s hardline, might have found himself in a quandary. I suspect that American official have very little understanding of this reality or appreciate its implications.
That could explain the promulgation of that strange position paper/demarche wherein he laid out in detail a list of demands for a drastic revision of Europe’s security configuration punctuated by an emphasis on time urgency. That is to say, a Hail Mary to stay the hand of a growing consensus that the time had come for Russia to hit back at the West in the Ukraine. Two things perhaps tipped Putin’s thinking into accepting the necessity of doing what he did. One was the West’s unbending and unaccommodating response. The other, was the Ukrainians’ launching an unprecedented artillery and mortar barrage against the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces. Who forced that fateful step? Elements of the Ukraine Army and/or security services? The AZOV brigade and associated parties? Zelensky? With how much encouragement from the CIA and/or the White House?
Michael Brenner
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Putin has talked many times about the former glory of the USSR and how glasnost started it's demise. Why can't it be as simple as wanting to restore Russia's prestige on the world stage? Re-ascending to a global power from the regional power it has become since 1991.
Look at the benefits of doing this now.
1. The West just ended a 20yr war in the ME. How much appetite is their for another? Less than zero?
2. Resurgent China is at the front of the minds of the West.
3. Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk allowed time to test the West's resolve. He knows that all the West will offer is military aid, no engagement from the West.
4. Ukraine isn't a NATO member and the last POTUS spent 4 years denigrating NATO and attempting to weaken the bonds between its member nations.
5. Climate change and the move towards alternative energy reduces Russian energy leverage, its lone but significant advantage.
If you cannot expand Russian hegemony through political manipulation in other countries (see: Belarus) then military invasion is a more extreme option.
If you are Putin and inclined to use your military, there may not be a better time.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
But do we have any evidence of that? He has stated over and over again his goals and they are all regional in nature. Literally about countries that Russia shares a border with. Over the last 12 months there have also been issues in Belarus and Kazakhstan where it is believed that the US has been involved.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Are you asking whether he's ever longingly spoken about Russia's previous global prestige of the USSR and detailed Glasnost as the reason for the demise? Has he ever talked about Russia's seat at the table on the world stage?
Yeah, that happens when the people get dissatisfied with decades of authoritarian rule. When they look at their more democratic neighbors prospering more than their own country.
I'd be naive to claim the CIA had no role supporting the protests but if you watched it's clear they'd be little more than a light breeze blowing in the direction of democracy.
If extreme despotic tactics are required to maintain power then a leader has clearly lost the will of the people. Of course in Autocracy, that's not required to rule.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
I think Russia overplayed it’s hand. Ukraine really is resisting. Russia will win (they can’t back out) but they will have to be brutal to do it, with the world watching.
Their goal was to resist a US dominated world order, and China is now acting like Russia is on its own.
They counted on Europe energy dependency and Germany is now sending weapons to Ukraine.
They are booted from SWIFT, meaning transactions are now more expensive and burdensome.
They are making NATO stronger, not weaker.
I see a victory for Russia, but a Pyrrhic one.
Their goal was to resist a US dominated world order, and China is now acting like Russia is on its own.
They counted on Europe energy dependency and Germany is now sending weapons to Ukraine.
They are booted from SWIFT, meaning transactions are now more expensive and burdensome.
They are making NATO stronger, not weaker.
I see a victory for Russia, but a Pyrrhic one.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
What I take from this is that the West (US and NATO) are 100% fighting back but the strategy will be to try to bog down Russia in a Vietnam/Afghanistan/Iraq type of insurgency that drains them over time. Militarily, Russia is far superior to NATO in Russia's back yard. The other strategy is a financial war (SWIFT, sanctions, etc.) where everyone in the world pays a deep price. At some point, Russia turns off the gas to Europe. This cripples Europe's economy and probably contributes to a global depression. Is the hope that one side will say "uncle" and give in when the pain hits? The West has more to lose than Russia. I don't see this working.
Aside from Ukraine, US/NATO have apparently decided to buildup and strengthen the Baltic countries. Biden is requesting billions more to aid Ukraine. But is that throwing more good money after bad? What if NATO forces are annihilated before they have time to bring enough resources to bring about deterrence? Nuclear war? If Putin is as "irrational" as many suggest, why keep poking to see if that characterization is true?
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
Dude, why do you carry water for Putin?
Economic costs? They’re accounted for. NATO has five nations with larger GDPs than Russia, and only one with a larger population.
Putin is 70 years old. Russia is not situated to win a long game.
Economic costs? They’re accounted for. NATO has five nations with larger GDPs than Russia, and only one with a larger population.
Putin is 70 years old. Russia is not situated to win a long game.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Long game? It's been a long game. It's time to end it. Can't you see this is a turning point. We are months away from a potential global food crises, the phasing out of the dollar as a reserve currency in favor of who knows what? We have spent trillions over the past decade on military adventures that have gained nothing, and now we are impotent to stop Russia. The US with its current corrupt leadership is in no position to play long games with reckless abandon. Let me ask you a question. Why do you carry water for a corrupt, neocon establishment that has no respect for the rule of law either domestically or internationally? Because that's what we now have.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
I carry water for liberal democracy, inalienable rights and free markets. Nothing else.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Yeah, from what I've seen the past several years its a fight we're losing; and it has nothing to do with Putin nor Russia.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
No. I am asking if there is any documentation that Putin wants to expand Russia's borders to the USSR extent? Mentioning something is a little different than plans. Now he may have that plan. I don't know. I'm asking.
Non sequitur fallacy.
Ukraine has been a democracy since 1991. Yanukovych was elected democratically and lasted almost 4 years before he was ousted by a coup. Is a coup democracy or authoritarian? I am not saying a coup was wrong or right. But let's be honest with what happened.
Yanukovych was held in power by Russia either. So I don't see where you are making a relevant point. This invasion isn't keeping an authoritarian in control. It's a naked attack on a sovereign nation. Both bad but different.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
Disruptions like this give bitcoin an opportunity to prove its worth. It is situated for large transactions like this and very affordable.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
Nothing says free markets like economic sanctions, weapons build ups, cutting off pipeline projects, etc. Liberal democracy in 2022 is most interested in implementing Critical Theory. Both Ukraine and Russia are fighting this war with 1/4-1/2 of their forces conscripted. Nothing says inalienable rights more than forcing someone to kill other people and/or die in the process.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
The US has a banking system that is crumbling and causing historic inflation. We have a military trying to "go green". Since the summer of 2020 we have had violence in the streets that has never been resolved. We are in the middle of a Maoist style Cultural Revolution based on Critical Theory.
The US is the weakest it has ever been culturally and morally. With all these internal inconsistencies we are in no place to win a protracted war, even through proxy.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Major companies that are accountable to regulating agencies and investors can't operate on bitcoin transactions for their core business. Russia can sell to El Salvador and a few other bit players but no bank will lend in bitcoin. In fact, Russia is so fearful of Bitcoin that their central bank recently clamped down hard on it.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
They can operate with bitcoin and there is nothing a regulator can do about it.
If Russia is cut off from banks they will quickly agree that this is a great thing and change their stance. I have read multiple accounts today of Ukrainian refugees surviving by using bitcoin with everything in chaos.
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
