Somewhat swept under the rug by all the new commotion filling the news cycles today was the fact that yesterday Ukraine suffered a massive unprecedented country-wide blackout which even blew out major parts of neighboring Moldova.
Once the grid begins to collapse it's difficult to stabilise. Luckily they still have some big spinning assets in the nuclear plants. If these get disconnected it would be grid Armageddon.
Agree. A disaster for the whole of Center/Eastern Ukraine and their population. Irreparable for decades with destroyed cities due to burst water pipes and sewage all over the place…Horror.
The Russsians ar quick to restore, see Mariupol. Luckily, they have no EU regulations. It could a piece of the negotiations that Russia will help in all Ukraine with restoration material, equipment and logistics.
After all many things in Ukraine are from old Soviet infrastructure, which has to renewed at some point.
I wonder how you think then. Do you really believe Russia will conquer Ukraine and then rebuild it? Or will they pay for the rebuilding even if no peace is achieved? Soviet infrastructure was built to withstand War more or less. If something is built today you know how much corruption eats up the material and results in faulty buildings… This is pure horror and people still believe in their own wishful thinking.
I don't think so. They will likely force a surrender of Ukraine, and as part of the terms of surrender, a temporary military/civilian junta will be formed whose responsibility it will be to arrange a Russia-friendly government, remove remaining nazis from power, reduce the Ukrainian military (what is left of it), rebuild and restore services. Just enough Russian force would be necessary to keep order and help with the denazification and demilitarisation effort.
There is no one in Kiev who'd surrender. The entire political class has the bags packed and ready to go live the good life in the West. Nobody will surrender. So who'll remain in Lvov after Kiev,Odessa and Harkiv fall? Azov. They won't surrender. It's the same idelology and fanatism that led Germany to 1945 Berlin. Taking Kiev and/or Odessa won't matter, Lvov will be the last battle, followed up, by some weak resistance in the mountains. Sure the russians want a deal, but there's no one to deal with.
A lot of people there don't have the wherewithal to go anywhere else. If the current political class departs, a new political class of some sort will be constituted from those who remain behind. They will have a different set of priorities than the current one.
The two cases are entirely different, so should not be conflated.
Millions of German women and girls were raped by soviet brutes as the SU invaded Germany - egged on by the pamphlet "Kill!" airdropped to them by the jewish commissar Ilya Ehrenburg - so Germany had to fight to the last Hitler Jugend.
Ukraine's invasion, should it occur today, will be of an entirely different nature.
I can already picture Kyiv enriching the Donbas, which concentrates something like 60% of Ukraine's industrial activity. We will certainly see an influx of Ukrainian workers towards the Donbas and the two southern oblasts, agricultural regions.
Interesting to me that the West finances all these games by debasing their own currencies.
China is a huge adversary, yet our major stores continue to profit from big markups on China's products?
Yeah it seems obvious to me, start WW3 so we can lose our civilian populations and property. Meanwhile all the MIC keep making money and gaining power. Just move head quarters.
Then we have UN drip, after so many travesties, this is actually flying?
Not necessary, there's a fine line between the two and this looks like satire. If sarcasm it should include /sarc as some comments are not always easily to discern between witless stupidity and genuine wit.
The former is as you describe and can be conflated with irony, ie saying the opposite of what you actually mean, for comic effect.
Had I laid it on any thicker, you could have built a house on it.
Sarcasm though, as the name suggests, ( Greek for "ripping the flesh" ) has an entirely more brutal intent, and is associated with bitterness, rather than with light humour.
Like the description of ”Eastern Express” and ”Russia Spring offensive”.
It is Monday morning again - Groundhog day style. Fifth year is starting soon…
Good explanation, though, about the play with Donbass and how they will use the eventual capture of Donbass against Russia. And it also shows the weakness in Russias stance in this matter. The SMO will not end on Russian terms - not ever. The War between West and Russia may be lost or won, though.
Elections are coming, Putin (pro-Zionist) will be gone, and Russian Nationalism will return to power.
I just watched several footage of NATO drones striking civilians car, homes, and killing several Russians today, daily occurrence (groundhog day). Obviously no-condolences from the Kremlin.
Reyn, I hope the Russian Nationalists return to power.
They would be less inclined to cozy up to the West, right?
The current batch of Kremlin oligarchs is too eager to resume business with the West simply to enrich themselves. Their loyalty is to money, not country.
The country is a feudal fiefdom for the Russian oligarchs.
Which reminds of something else -- have you noticed how often Peskov, Ushakov, Lavrov, etc. insist that "negotiations" with the US should be kept private and secret?
Why is that, what do you have to hide, and from who?
Yes. Russia will stay autocratic and in the hands of the Siloviki and Oligarchs - much they way it is in the West btw. The difference is the illusions of democracy and much more of the time, the chaos that follows with weak governments and short-sighted leaders.
Russia is too big for liberal democracy - it needs an autocratic regime to hold together.
As for the secret negotiations I think it could be as simple as this:
As long as you negotiate you need to be free to air thoughts an ideas. If everything leaks to the press there is no use to negotiate anything.
Last time ”someone” dropped the 28 points paper to the press and effectively de-railed further talks about it.
It could of course include some secret points or attachments, non-disclosed even after being signed such as trade deals or other ”schocking” agreements.
I dont think Lavrov, Uschakov or Peskov is more sinister than others in their position. What is clear is that Military has all their hands over these negotiations. Both Ukraine and Russia has sent their military Intelligence people to do the job.
The Russian people will have to fight and die in the next war, from a much more disadvantageous position, because of the act of treason that Putin is negotiating now.
A government, regime or dictator must sometimes negotiate and make a decision for the Nation, the People or the greater good without having the irresponsible media or lobbygroups derailing it.
History shows that 99% of the Decisions made wasnt for the population to vote for, have opinions against or made transparant to.
>Russia is too big for liberal democracy - it needs an autocratic regime to hold together.
Oh, that is absolutely correct. No argument. And I am against democracy on principle.
But an autocratic regime can rule in the interest of the people. Stalin did that.
When it rules in the interests of a rapacious oligarchy and against the interests of the people, then we have a problem.
>As long as you negotiate you need to be free to air thoughts an ideas. If everything leaks to the press there is no use to negotiate anything.
That's not what's happening though. They want it to be kept secret so that there is no time for an internal rebellion to organize itself before the fait accompli of the grand treason committed is presented to the public.
Istanbul was exactly like that -- the terms there were absolutely shocking.
The 28-point plan showed it too.
>What is clear is that Military has all their hands over these negotiations.
Not sure about that. Kostyukov was there in Abu Dhabi.
But that is one meeting.
Meanwhile Kiril Dmitriev has met with the Americans dozens of times.
Also, Kostyukov should not have had that meeting in Abu Dhabi at all. Budanov was on the other side, a man who should not have been alive to be in that meeting in the first place, because he is responsible for so many crimes. And you can be sure Kostyukov knows that.
The whole thread following your comment is possibly the most fantastically (literally) delusional argument I have yet read on this site, despite your efforts to inject some sanity. The icing on the cake has to be,
"when Boris Johnson had to intervene to save Russia from Putin."
So, Boris Johnston, arguably the most rabidly Russophobic PM the UK has ever had, or at least since Churchill, was suddenly concerned that Russia was endangering itself! Followed by,
"The next war would have started with NATO on the Perekop isthmus"
Thus, if Bojo had not scuppered the Istanbul agreement then Nato, banned from Ukraine, would have Invaded Russia, presumably by amphibious landing, via Perekop of all places, to my untrained eye one of the most easily defended sites on Russia's whole western border.
Even by GM's standards this is too far 'off the wall' to be given credence.
Yeah. Sometimes I wonder why bother to argue or discuss certain matters. When arguments are based on ”out of the blue or pink heaven” it is hard to follow any logic…
Today is the anniversary of the final defeat of the Nazis at Stalingrad.
Which is a good opportunity to once again remind people that Stalin went from Stalingrad to Erfurt, i.e. 2,400 km, in the 28 months between February 2nd 1943 and May 9th 1945.
The peak of the modern day Operation Barbarossa V2 was in the summer of 2014, when the Nazis touched on the Rostov Oblast border. It's been 12 years since then...
But even if you just count the open kinetic portion of it, it's been four years and Putin hasn't even gotten from Donetsk to Slavyansk/Kramatorsk, i.e. a distance of 80 km.
There is also a huge space of conventional strike options between what we have now and nukes, and that would help tremendously, but is still off limits
Oreshnik has only recently gone into serial production, and is probably being withheld in case of a NATO attack.
As far as levels of mobilization goes, WW2 was seen by the leadership as an existential crisis, whereas the SMO is not seen that way, so voluntary mobilization is seen as preferable, which of course it is.
Territorial acquisition is not seen as necessary in a meatgrinder war of the Ukrainian kind - problems then arise as to subsequent control of that territory.
It would probably be a good idea to look at the number per week of Iskander strikes - this would suggest whether or not these missiles were generally available until relatively recently, or when the increase in strike rate began.
Without them, you cannot really degrade a nation's infrastructure significantly.
Seems like a big risk. The whole point is if GM is right (it’s not just him that’s saying Russia should stop fighting with one hand behind its back btw) is that there won’t be any retrospect.
Stalin never had to deal with 8 years construction of layered, fortified, modern, defences, designed, I suspect, on what was learned then, and Ukraine's army has yet to be routed in the way Germany's was.
So, another sign of Putin's weakness is that he did not launch an illegal war of aggression in 2014? Whatever, the fact is he didn't and those defences did exist in 2022 and have proved difficult to overcome. We will have to wait and see about the wide open spaces when they reach them and if Ukraine insists on continuing their self-destructive strategy.
Cannot argue with that but I do not think Russia was militarily in a position to risk a confrontation with the west such as we are now seeing. Also any intervention in 2014 would have been difficult to justify as anything other than naked aggression.
Just my personal opinion but I suspect Russia needed the ensuing years to strengthen their armed forces and, in particular, time to bring into serial production the technological advances they had recently achieved such as hypersonics, advanced air and ballistic missile defence systems, and so on, not to mention their massive naval ship and submarine building programme and airforce upgrade with SU34, SU35 and SU57, etc.
Illegal war is a Western term that only applies to their opponents. In the end when it comes to hegemony there is no legal or illegal, there is only winning and losing. Yes that means you have to play dirty like they do. If we’re in a boxing ring and the ref says no hitting below the belt and only use gloves and the first thing I do is put on brass knuckles and punch you in the nuts, you can look at the ref but first of all he is on my payroll and second, even if he weren’t, there’s nothing he can do other than telling me I shouldn’t have done it. Then it’s up to you to see how you continue the fight. Putin would keep abiding by the rules, some of us would prefer him to put on his own brass knuckles and punch back.
No it isn't, it is a concept enshrined in the United Nations charter and International Law. Aggression is considered the ultimate war crime. The fact the US does not abide by the law does not mean it does not exist and does not give others the right to ignore it. IMO, Russia gains far more internationally by acting within the law. The enforcement of International law is , after all, one of the fundamental aims of Russia and BRICS, which is why Russia has the implicit backing or neutrality of most countries on Earth, and demonstrably the backing of a vast majority of the population.
In response to your comment above also. It depends on the knuckles, and I think he can still escalate within Ukraine. But, the idea of limited nuclear war is ridiculous. Nobody is going to wait and see where the first missile lands before responding. Constant satellite reconnaissance means they will respond on launch, which is why they always notify of any test launches. Do you imagine Putin, or any rational leader. is going to risk that? It is why it is called deterrence (and it seems to have worked for the last 75 years. ) Directly testing the resolve of your opponent with whom you are not "at war" (and do not want to be) is just insane.
"The SMO will not end on Russian terms - not ever. "
Well, it will if Ukraine does not negotiate and Russia has to occupy the whole country.
Russia has never called for an unconditional surrender, as far as I am aware, so whatever terms they have proposed are obviously open to negotiation and thus, compromise.
The whole Donbas argument is, I suggest, a canard to give the impression that Russia is willing to concede the Ukrainian controlled areas of Kherson and Zaphorhozia. Every statement Russia has made suggests that will never happen.
"IF", and perhaps I should have qualified it by saying "and Russia is in a position to occupy or destroy the whole country" But, It is the only scenario that would guarantee Russia can dictate whatever terms it likes. Of course, Ukraine may capitulate before that but it amounts in essence to the same thing. However, that looks a remote possibility at the moment.
What would be the point of demanding unconditional surrender? It has been very clear from the outset that Russia does NOT want to occupy the whole of Ukraine. It has also been abundantly clear that they will do so if they have to. They do not need to demand unconditional surrender - that is the stark choice Ukraine already faces, negotiate or die. Russia is the only actor honestly working for a negotiated, lasting, peace settlement, that is all they have wanted from day one (actually since about 1952). Why would they refuse to negotiate?
“The essence of war is violence and moderation in war is imbecility”.
Anyhow they are targeting infrastructure, not indiscriminate bombing like US and IDF are used or still do. The US calls it collateral damage nowadays, as if it would turn into a clean act.
Russia is being accused of inhumane actions as they continue to crush Ukrainian infrastructure. However, the blame should instead be directed at Ukrainian leadership and its partners in Europe and America who refuse to accept the reality of a Russian victory. Just as soldiers caught up in a cauldron must recognise their situation and surrender or die, so too must Ukraine surrender or die.
Ukrainian citizens can't speak up against the regime, Victor. Have you seen what they do to them? I saw a picture of a woman tied to a post with her pants down as punishment. That's mild compared to what happens to other civilian protesters. Look at the government you have in the UK. Not too much protesting is going on there, as all your civil rights and freedom of speech are strangled.
Agree. When I say "Ukraine", I of course mean the Ukrainian government - the Ukrainian people have no more say in their government than we in the Western "democracies" have.
We still have a form of democracy - all the polls indicate 11% support for this government.
Accordingly therefore, the Starmer regime knows it has the fabled SoD hanging over its head, and no way out.
We also have the right to petition the government, and some 3m of us stated that we do not want the digital I/D that the homosexual formerly called Keir Starmer wanted to impose on us.
The situation in the two nations is very different.
Keir the Queer knows that what he does determines political outcomes - so if he does something in direct defiance of what the voters want, then there is a particular reality that he will have to face up to in due course.
It's so blindingly obvious that it shouldn't need to be said.
He and his wrecking crew have severely pissed off A LOT of people in this country, and judgement upon them will surely come.
I understand but I really don't think he cares. Three days into his premiership he was asked in a tv interview if he would rather be in Westminster or Davos. He smirked and answered, "Davos". It told me everything I needed to know about him. Being PM is just a stepping stone and his tenure, however brief, has nothing to do with the state of the nation.
It's not fundamentally about him or his career aspirations - it's about what we want.
He can go to Davos for the prostitutes as much as he likes - or to Ukraine for its rent boys - who recently torched a vehicle outside his pig pen in North London - but what counts in the UK is what the electorate want, and an 11% rating for his party / himself personally tells us that both he and his party will shortly be looking at P45s dropping through the letterbox.
They will try to introduce digital I/D, but again, most seem to have seen through the excuses as to why they think they need it.
What the people want is to stop these hellish boats coming ashore - not to decide if they get to work or not once they're here.
Go to Kyiv in the summer and walk around town, where the street poles are and see the ladies in person so you can interview them for your research. You can't beat hands-on work. 😂
No, the fault is 100% on Putin and the Russian oligarchy.
Remember that these are the same people who in the 1990s through the Perestroika and the collapse of the USSR committed pre-meditated mass murder comparable to what Hitler did to the country. Many millions died due to malnutrition, the collapsed health care system, depression, crime, etc. And it would have been much more than that had it not been for the cushion of the remnants of the Soviet system.
That was а deliberate and fully conscious act. Take a look here:
>It was February 1992. At a meeting chaired by Yegor Timurovich, urgent measures to finance social programs were being discussed. A large crowd had gathered in the room where Yegor Ligachev had recently sat. At the same table sat another Yegor -- Yegor Gaidar. The discussion focused on social issues such as school construction, pensions, which had by then been virtually wiped out, and citizens' savings, which had also been reduced to dust. And that same author of this article informed Gaidar that in Zelenograd, our healthcare system had recorded 36 deaths due to starvation. To this, Gaidar responded simply: radical changes are underway, money is tight, and the death of people unable to resist these changes is a natural thing. Then he was asked: Yegor Timurovich, what if your parents are among these people? Gaidar chuckled and said that he did not intend to answer stupid questions. (Yuri Luzhkov, Gavriil Popov. One more word about Gaidar // Moskovsky Komsomolets, January 22, 2010)
You would think that once something of such nature was published, in 2010, under Putin, there would have been immediate investigations and at least a posthumous (the spawn of Satan that was Gaidar had passed away shortly before that) trial, right? And not a posthumous, but a real prosecution for those who were still alive, right? After all, Putin is a Russian patriot who deeply cares about his people, right?
Wrong.
Here is what Putin had to say on the matter:
>This is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin on Gaidar: "Not every statesman has the opportunity to serve the Fatherland at the most crucial moments in its history, to make key decisions that will determine the country's future. Yegor Timurovich Gaidar fulfilled this most difficult task with dignity, demonstrating the finest professional and personal qualities. He did not shirk responsibility and, in the most difficult situations, 'stood the blow' with honor and courage. The bright memory of Yegor Gaidar will forever remain in the hearts of his family and friends—all who knew this remarkable man."
And the rest of the people who thought and acted like that were, of course, not touched at all. Chubais was still in an official governmental position when the war started in 2022, then self-purged to Israel of all places, where he is busy selling Russian state secrets.
So how do you expect Putin, who has such a warm opinion for Gaidar, a man who openly stated that regular people will have to die for the good of the then nascent Russian oligarchy, to think about and protect the ordinary Russian people, whether they carry Russian or Ukrainian passports?
Of course he will not care.
Thus the 2,500 Russian civilians missing in Kursk whose mass graves were gradually discovered that Putin never mentions. And the shitshow in Ukraine.
There has been a clear and obvious solution to this problem -- take out the Ukrainian oligarchy. This isn't Hezbollah, i.e. a grassroots movement by people fighting for their survival against a genocidal external force and generally being the good guys. This is the absolute scum of the earth using their position of power to enrich themselves as the middle men between the working class Ukranian (i.e. mostly ethnically Russian) cannon fodder and the war on Russia.
Take them out and the whole scheme collapses.
Yet Putin has expended many billions worth of missiles and drones to make life absolutely miserable for ordinary Ukrainian people, and now to kill a lot of them too, by freezing them to death, instead of going after the oligarchy.
Which has had and will have close to zero effect on the war. The rate of advance hasn't really moved up from the 500 km^2 a month it has been at for a very long time. A rate at which Ukraine will be liberated some time around the year 2110.
Make that make sense under the hypothesis that Putin is the good Tsar who deeply cares about his people. You can't.
But it makes perfect sense under the alternative hypothesis that he is a puppet of the Russian oligarchy who absolutely does not care about the country and the people beyond the care of the CEO of a corporation about the assets under his management.
In his early days, he suffered from dementia like Taco, then became a crybaby like the green dwarf of kyiv. Like him, he also practiced fraud and embezzlement.
Who cares about the lies of western media ? Only people in the west, way too propagandized to understand anything anyway.
Russia needs to pursue its interests and disregard what the llying western media claims, especially when western media lies about Russia, even when Russia is doing nothing (like bombing itself in the ZNPP or bombing its own pipelines, etc)
In 2022, with the conflict in full swing, someone would have said, "The Russians experienced 70 years of propaganda with the USSR and therefore know how to recognize it; the Westerners are discovering it, which I am not sure about. It dates back further than Bolshevik propaganda, but how could degenerates recognize it?
The 21st century is full of discoveries; viruses kill, the seasons change (heat in summer, cold and snow in winter), war is ugly and deadly, etc. I hope to live long enough to witness the discovery of the stone wheel.
I have a feeling that the cauldron brewing in the south will be one of, if not, the biggest we've seen thus far. On an unrelated note, if you're looking for some brevity I'd recommend to check out Psyop Anime - WW3. I don't much care for AI slop but this is pretty fun and it has zelensky doing blow at Davos
It seems Russia has realized that the Holy Grail toward Ukraine collapse goes through the power grid destruction. If they figure out a way to force the disconnection of the nuclear power stations without nuclear explosions they will win the war. The numbers of drones and ballistic missiles needed are surely available and the act can be organized with low civilian casualty rates. There is no way a modern country can function and fight a war successfully once it is reduced to a 19th century technological level. The sporadic presence of diesel generators running here and there simply will not do the trick.
I think that Putin is shying away from the nuclear PP. It is dangerous to leave them without load and cooling supply. Then there is a psychological thing connected to Atomic Power which the western propaganda may use. And the Russians have still compassion for the Ukranian population. After all, they have to live with them as neighbors and not as hated surpressors.
>I think that Putin is shying away from the nuclear PP.
Because the other side did the same?
The ZNPP is not working because it was forcefully shut down by NATO already back in 2022, through persistent artillery shelling of the connections to the grid and the cooling systems.
If both sides respected the same rules of engagement, the ZNPP would be generating GWs of electricity right now.
But one side doesn't
So if the goal is to blackout Ukraine, why are the grid connections to Yuzhno-Ukrainsk, Khmelnytskyi and Rovno intact?
Of course Putin is shying away. He's weak I'm sure he fought against even targeting the energy grid at all, but after being proven wrong (AGAIN) with the Istambul 2022 "negotiations", the military and the security council in Russia got the upper hand. Let's just face it. The war is not ending sooner, because Putin prevented it from ending sooner, with his absurd decisions to keep appeasing the western psychopaths, not following his own red lines and considering ukrainians "brothers". Once again, Putin is a great peace time leader, but a horrible war time leader...easily one of the worst. He seems to have more consideration for the enemy, than russian's themselves.
You keep saying that and this would be the case if you dealt with reasonable actors who have the same end goal, namely peaceful coexistence. That is not who we’re dealing with however. The only language the neocons in Washington and London understand is power and strength. Because that is how they see the world. If the West would have had Oreshniks they would have launched them already. They perceive Putin’s ‘considerations’ as weakness and it will only embolden them to escalate further, leaving Putin no other option down the line to go nuclear. Or just bow down and let Russia be balkanized. Sometimes you need to escalate to deescalate.
Putin is a wise and careful leader. He does not want an heated exchange, possibly developing in full blown-up war. Considering that Westerners are crazy and have nukes. The war went slowly, but he keps winnig.
Given that he conducts hours-long unscripted interactions with the press and interested persons on a yearly basis, then that is not within the bounds of possibility.
You are 'sure he fought against even targeting the energy grid at all' based on what? As I have said before, it seems that the less people know the more sure they are of their opinions.
>It seems Russia has realized that the Holy Grail toward Ukraine collapse goes through the power grid destruction
Which is complete BS.
If it was true, then why wasn't it done in 2022? It would have saved the lives of 150,000 Russian soldiers and many thousands of Russian civilians.
If collapsing the grid was going to collapse the Ukrainian war effort, then Putin should be on trial at a military tribunal for gross mismanagement and for the unnecessary slaughter of so many of his own people, because he could have collapsed it any time in the past four years, but didn't.
If it isn't true (and indeed it isn't, because Ukraine is just a launch pad for NATO to fire into Russia, and that will continue all the same with or without the grid) then Putin spent many billions in missiles and drones to achieve nothing and to only get Russia dug deeper and deeper into a strategic hole.
Which again brings up the matter of responsibility for that catastrophe.
>There is no way a modern country can function and fight a war successfully once it is reduced to a 19th century technological level.
So when is Putin going to reduce Western Europe and North America to a 19th century technological level? Because those are the modern countries that fight a war on Russia, Ukraine is just the territory where it happens.
So far he (if we may assume gender) has been proven right, because we’re 4 years in and Russia hasn’t liberated the Donbas yet. Matter of fact, they haven’t even recaptured any of the strategic towns they lost in the debacle of 2022: Izium, Kupiansk and Liman. So it’s not Monday morning quarterbacking. With every day, every week, every month that passes, he is proven right and the Putin adepts here are proven wrong.
Nuclear power plants of that type don't undergo "nuclear explosions", they CAN absolutely melt down from interrupted cooling/be broken open by sufficiently heavy conventional weapons attacks and release huge quantities of radioactive contaminants.
I would bet those planning this Ukrainian power grid demolition have those events at top of their list of events NOT to cause?
Why ? That's exactly what Putin is doing and that's wrong. I could care less about ukrainians. But I do care about russians, especially russian soldiers, that have to fight in a war, because ukrainians are the dumbest people on earth, the west is filled with psychopaths and Putin is dumb. Russia has the capabilities to end this war sooner, but Putin's weakness continues to prolong it. Wars of attrition always take time, but Putin's decisions to appease the west and agree to pointless ceasefires, that only help the enemy, makes it even longer. Russia should've destroyed Ukraine's energy grid last year, which would accelerate the collapse of the nazi regime, which would not only need to deal with the russian military, but also the protests from the general population, freezing and without water and such. Which would probably lead them to leave the cities, which in turn makes military operations there, much easier.
We all know the nazis use civilians as shields, The more civilians leave, the less shields the nazis have. All of which is better for Russia, than continuing this charade of "negotiations" and pointless ceasefires.
The Ukrainians in Lviv and the ones that chose the West over Russia, knowing full well what they are capable of (Nuland just oversaw the killing of hundreds of thousands of children in Iraq, but she’s handing out cookies in Maidan because she cares about Ukrainian democracy?) deserve all of this and more. If they could kill off the entire Russian population with a push on an imaginary button, they would gladly do so.
And of course, the Western Rules Based Order barely stirred to save the Palestinians from the two greatest war crimes of all- ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Taking that western playbook at face value, Ukrainians freezing to death, can decamp to Poland and save themselves..... if Poland reopens that border it closed to stop this human tide, that is.
Ah, no, that's the US lie that was used to justify the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In reality Japan had already admitted defeat and had reached out to the US for surrender negotiations. All they wanted was for the Emperor not to be seized, which are the same terms on which the eventual surrender was accomplished.
All that talk of "but for the atomic bombs we would have lost a million dead storming the home islands" is a lie. Yes, military people who did not know of Japan's attempts to surrender were gearing up for an invasion they assumed would be very costly. But given what Truman and jerks like Dulles knew neither that invasion nor the atomic bombing were required.
Declassified documents and war diaries make it clear the main reason the US went ahead with the atomic bombing was to support Truman's plans for war against the US's ally, the Soviet Union. Truman had already decided that after the war the US would destroy the USSR. He wanted to demonstrate the power of atomic weapons to Stalin, to cow him.
At the same time there was a large Deep State constituency within the US that wanted to test atomic weapons on cities, to see how well or not well they would work. That's why they deliberately refrained from bombing Hiroshima and a few other cities prior to the atomic attack: they wanted undamaged cities as test subjects.
So what really happened was that the US regarded it as entirely justifiable to drop an atomic bomb on a nation that was already defeated simply for the purpose of using the civilian population of an undamaged city as lab animals to see how many would die, and how they would die, as the result of an atomic attack, and also for the purpose of shocking and putting fear into an ally, Stalin, who the US intended to attack after the war with Germany, Italy, Japan, Bulgaria, Romania and the other Axis allies was wrapped up.
Totally correct on all counts John. Firebombs and nukes were used as grand terror laboratories by high-minded Anglo-Americans claiming the moral high-ground.
Worse that that actually. They had to hurry to get the second strike in so they could compare the effects of plutonium and uranium based devices on humans before a surrender was signed. For extra credit, ground zero at Nagasaki was the Christian Cathedral. The Los Alamos crowd virtue signalled afterwards that they were innocent technocrats, but they were not. The entire affair was pure evil and dominated by the 2%.
I believe the selection of Nagasaki is billed as an “in the air” decision because of weather conditions at the primary target were less than ideal. The Nagasaki Christians became the paradigm for the thesis of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”!
As is well known now from declassified US documents, Truman's plan (cooked up together with Dulles) was to do exactly that even before WWII was over. The US intended to use its atomic monopoly to attack the Soviet Union with a nuclear first strike, destroying dozens of Soviet cities.
Truman was so intensely ignorant and so easy to manipulate by people like Dulles that, despite all evidence that Stalin and the USSR wanted nothing more than to demobilize the Red Army so millions of men could be put to work rebuilding a country that had been devastated by the war, he believed the USSR wanted to attack the West. So he set out to destroy the USSR.
Truman's problem was he only had a few atomic bombs just after 1945 and then few bombers with the range to reach all the cities the US Deep State wanted to kill in the USSR. So the plan to attack got pushed back to allow the US to build more atomic bombs and work on logistics.
Stalin, of course, knew of the US's planned nuclear attack so the USSR went into crash mode preparation to defend against the US attack. That's what started the Cold War arms race, the Truman/Dulles administration's plan to annihilate the USSR with a nuclear sneak attack. By the time Eisenhower became President the relationship had been well and truly poisoned by the US plan to destroy the USSR.
Anyway, given US misgivings about how successful the USSR's planned defense would work, the plan to attack the USSR kept getting pushed back until more and more nukes could be built by the US until finally, one day, the USSR achieved its own nuclear capability. The US didn't know how many nukes the Soviets had so that, of course, pushed back the plan yet again until yet more hundreds, and then thousands, and then tens of thousands of nukes could be built.
That peaked when the US had over 31,000 active warheads with about 65 different types of nukes. Over the years the US has built over 70,000 nuclear weapons (many being replaced over time by newer versions). Some individual weapons, were produced in the thousands, like 4500 units of the B28/W28 warhead with yield of up to a megaton and a half. And that one was just the second largest production run.
Curtis LeMay is often ridiculed as a psychopath by modern liberals, but he was right about a lot of things. What he was most right about was understanding that once nuclear weapons proliferated it was only a matter of time before they would be used on the US. LeMay felt that the US should have used its atomic monopoly to end war.
He wanted to use the atomic monopoly to erase any other country that attempted to develop nuclear weapons. He felt that doing so and keeping the atomic monopoly in US hands would be a way to end wars between great powers, that it could be used to impose a Pax Americana, like the Roman Peace that kept the Mediterranean world relatively free of wars for a few centuries during the height of the Roman empire. Far from being a war monger, he wanted to end war, to avoid a destructive cycle of spending trillions of dollars on nuclear arms races that could be better spent on educating kids and building better societies.
It's hard to argue with that compared to the alternative that developed, a US and a USSR that were both willing to kill billions of people to ensure the other guy's political system would never be applied to them. But seriously, would living under USSR rule for Americans or living under US rule for Soviets have been so terrible that it would have justified killing a billion and a half people? I think not.
And yet, because of that threat of killing billions of people no nuclear war of any sort was launched. Kind of sounds like the best outcome to me.... That was a very interesting take, John, one I had not heard before. It does make a lot of sense.
You need to add that Soviets where transfering troops from Europe and would decimate japan and end its empire; that is real reason of them surrendering, not ameriKKKa, not atomic bombs... atomic bombs are not even first in damage or number of civilians killed compared to other ameriKKKan bombings of japan...
Let's not forget China, who has also been on the New Roman Empire's snuff list since the end of WWII.
The US wanted control of Japan. They still have it.
There was "island hopping" in WWII, on the US strategy toward Japan. A similar strategy is used for war on China, but for politically capturing entire countries.
And the US has taken Japan, half of Korea, Philippines, and have tried to take others, like Vietnam.
If the US could it would effectively have a front line all around China and Russia. Every single nation. I'm not sure but I think they've tried to make problems and capture everywhere, at least once.
The nation actually accepted reality and was about to surrender because they were facing an invasion by three million red army soldiers. The atomic bombs were merely a genocidal, barbaric and inhumane demonstration of power from people who lacked conscience as Japanese were not of the superior race.
Ironically it was really the US that admitted defeat when it had to capitulate on it’s demand for “Unconditional Surrender” and accept the sovereignty of the Emperor. Something Japan held fast on throughout two atomic attacks.
According to Gen. Curtis LeMay, the bombs had nothing to do with Japan’s surrender.
I seem to recall being told on this board by that great friend of the western alliance, GM, that the Russians could not take out the entire energy system.
Russian troops needed to deal with numerous water courses and ravines to straighten the line. The weeks it took needed meticulous work in horrible weather conditions. As for the Ukie grid, keeping what flows exist balanced is a massive challenge with imbalances causing interruptions.
"According to him, the terrorist UN unnaproved Bombing of Yugoslavia, depriving access to 70% of Serbians not only electricity, but also water supply was deserved to accept illegal NATO's five conditions. As long as he doesn't accepted it, will continue to attack those electricity and water suply targets.[7]"
So your implying the supreme criminal (oopsy) leader Vladimir Putin should be awarded with honours for winning hearts and minds of his own brethren, for diplomacy and service to his own kind just like a NATO Secretary General.
Simple Fact: Many Russians are married to Ukrainians and vise versa, I hope they survive the generations of damage that has unfolded unnecessarily.
The supreme irony here is that Putin now finally is indeed a war criminal.
He wasn't when he started the war, that was real self defense.
And he most certainly wasn't in the case of what he was indicted for -- the "abduction" of children, i.e. rescuing them from an active warzone.
But the freezing of Kiev in the middle of the harshest winter in many years is a real war crime, no questions about it.
Especially given that he not only had the option of not doing it, but that doing it will have no effect on the war. Meanwhile taking out a few hundred key individuals in Kiev with precision strikes would have indeed won the war, and those scoundrels absolutely deserve it too. But they are sacrosanct and untouchable.
The Soviet-born elderly people freezing to death at -30C on the 12th floor of high rises are not sacrosanct and untouchable, so they will suffer what they must...
You say when the West and its allies destroy powergrids and water infrastucture week 1 is just fine and dandy but when Russia does it after almost 4 years of combat then its a warcrime??? Btw it was Ukraine that started the energy infrastructure hits by blowing up the bridge with western backing. You are hilariously delusional and biased as usual, atleast you are consistent lol
What sort of an braindead Putin groupie do you have to be to not understand what I am saying?
Of course both what NATO does and what Putin is doing now are war crimes.
But what makes it doubly bad in this case is that when NATO did it to Serbia it did win the war. Because the Serbian government had to take care of its people and thus capitulated.
The people who have taken control of Ukraine have absolutely no loyalty to or care about the population of Ukraine. There would be no war if they did. They are a combination of the absolutely worst criminal elements from within that population and people who are ethnically alien to it. They don't care what happens to the masses. And neither do their equally monstrous backers outside Ukraine.
You are not going to win a war in such a situation by freezing regular people to death. Nobody cares about that.
The only ways to win the war are to stop the Western military support and to physically eliminate the Ukrainian leadership and oligarchy.
Both things Putin had the means to do on the first day of the war but steadfastly refuses to do to this day.
"braindead Putin groupie" is the correct diagnosis of the mental condition. After 4years (12years from 2014) they never learned the truth unfortunately, will deny truth even when evidence is presented. It is a mental disease that takes over and arguing with them is a mute point.
I've seen the light, and no longer support this war criminal Vladimir Putin. I've never supported 'puppet' Zelensky either.
As for evidence, please don't make me laugh, all that is ever presented here is opinions. Yours are not necessarily any closer to the truth than anyone else's. Something I heard once about splinters, planks and eyes comes to mind.
So you're equating what NATO did to Yugoslavia and what's happening in Ukraine? I would prefer the war in Ukraine never happened but understand why it did. And yes, everyone involved will be damaged in some way, that's what happens in war. Which is why NATO and the US should have agreed to craft a new security architecture for the region as the Russians requested repeatedly over the years instead of using Ukraine as a battering ram to further their geopolitical aims.
Spam again
Well put
Once the grid begins to collapse it's difficult to stabilise. Luckily they still have some big spinning assets in the nuclear plants. If these get disconnected it would be grid Armageddon.
Sounds like a grid holocaust to me.
6 million megawatts of electrical distribution equipment were heartlessly murdered.
(I just checked again, it's possibly over 7 gigawatts now?!)
Ah, the magic number.
It's an electrical, Ukrainian Nazi Cuckoldomor.
Agree. A disaster for the whole of Center/Eastern Ukraine and their population. Irreparable for decades with destroyed cities due to burst water pipes and sewage all over the place…Horror.
The Russsians ar quick to restore, see Mariupol. Luckily, they have no EU regulations. It could a piece of the negotiations that Russia will help in all Ukraine with restoration material, equipment and logistics.
After all many things in Ukraine are from old Soviet infrastructure, which has to renewed at some point.
I wonder how you think then. Do you really believe Russia will conquer Ukraine and then rebuild it? Or will they pay for the rebuilding even if no peace is achieved? Soviet infrastructure was built to withstand War more or less. If something is built today you know how much corruption eats up the material and results in faulty buildings… This is pure horror and people still believe in their own wishful thinking.
Did Putin reveal to you the secret that he wants to conquer Ukraine?
They will rebuild only what is worth rebuilding:
1. Demine agricultural zones
2. Open and modernize mines
3. Strategic or PR important cities, like Mariupol;prbably Kiev, Odessa, Harkiv
4. They are going to leave the rest to rot. They did so with a big finish they took in the peace settlement.
They will have to occupy all of Ukraine, although it is not clear how much will be integrated into Russia, and how much will be left as a Belarus.
”They will have to occupy all of Ukraine”
Too late. Should have been done 2022.
Nah. Just the right time. You can't unify like S Vietnam with N Vietnam unless the people are exhausted.
Axtually, were South Vietnam not propped up the with American bayonets, the South Vietnamese regime would have collapsed a decade or more earlier.
"Exhaustion" had nothing to do with it.
Impossible without nukes. Maybe still impossible with nukes... Chip
Did the Taliban have nukes? Or did the N Vietnamese?
"They will have to occupy all of Ukraine"
I don't think so. They will likely force a surrender of Ukraine, and as part of the terms of surrender, a temporary military/civilian junta will be formed whose responsibility it will be to arrange a Russia-friendly government, remove remaining nazis from power, reduce the Ukrainian military (what is left of it), rebuild and restore services. Just enough Russian force would be necessary to keep order and help with the denazification and demilitarisation effort.
But we will see.
There is no one in Kiev who'd surrender. The entire political class has the bags packed and ready to go live the good life in the West. Nobody will surrender. So who'll remain in Lvov after Kiev,Odessa and Harkiv fall? Azov. They won't surrender. It's the same idelology and fanatism that led Germany to 1945 Berlin. Taking Kiev and/or Odessa won't matter, Lvov will be the last battle, followed up, by some weak resistance in the mountains. Sure the russians want a deal, but there's no one to deal with.
Entire political class != everybody in Kiev.
A lot of people there don't have the wherewithal to go anywhere else. If the current political class departs, a new political class of some sort will be constituted from those who remain behind. They will have a different set of priorities than the current one.
The two cases are entirely different, so should not be conflated.
Millions of German women and girls were raped by soviet brutes as the SU invaded Germany - egged on by the pamphlet "Kill!" airdropped to them by the jewish commissar Ilya Ehrenburg - so Germany had to fight to the last Hitler Jugend.
Ukraine's invasion, should it occur today, will be of an entirely different nature.
I can already picture Kyiv enriching the Donbas, which concentrates something like 60% of Ukraine's industrial activity. We will certainly see an influx of Ukrainian workers towards the Donbas and the two southern oblasts, agricultural regions.
Bill Gates has said it can be made into nutritional biscuits, and has offered to build a factory.
By adding insect protein to the mix, a complete food can be made available to Ukrainians.
Coupled with free vaxxination for everybody, we are starting to see workable solutions to Ukraine's difficulties emerge.
To think that after having ruined the EU and put the American economy in difficulty, Ukraine will still be begging for food aid from the UN.
A little morning sarcasm, thanks Tim!
Interesting to me that the West finances all these games by debasing their own currencies.
China is a huge adversary, yet our major stores continue to profit from big markups on China's products?
Yeah it seems obvious to me, start WW3 so we can lose our civilian populations and property. Meanwhile all the MIC keep making money and gaining power. Just move head quarters.
Then we have UN drip, after so many travesties, this is actually flying?
China has no adversarial intent - as regards the west, anyway.
Taiwan seems to be the bee in their bonnet, not the US or the west.
What we are exposed to is gaslighting on an international level by our great jewish leaders.
They are the ones who want worldwide dominance - it's their religion.
Nobody else does.
Is this sarcasm or satire?
A dictionary will probably help.
Not necessary, there's a fine line between the two and this looks like satire. If sarcasm it should include /sarc as some comments are not always easily to discern between witless stupidity and genuine wit.
The two are very different.
The former is as you describe and can be conflated with irony, ie saying the opposite of what you actually mean, for comic effect.
Had I laid it on any thicker, you could have built a house on it.
Sarcasm though, as the name suggests, ( Greek for "ripping the flesh" ) has an entirely more brutal intent, and is associated with bitterness, rather than with light humour.
SARC/ on!
Endgame near? Not at all.
Like the description of ”Eastern Express” and ”Russia Spring offensive”.
It is Monday morning again - Groundhog day style. Fifth year is starting soon…
Good explanation, though, about the play with Donbass and how they will use the eventual capture of Donbass against Russia. And it also shows the weakness in Russias stance in this matter. The SMO will not end on Russian terms - not ever. The War between West and Russia may be lost or won, though.
Elections are coming, Putin (pro-Zionist) will be gone, and Russian Nationalism will return to power.
I just watched several footage of NATO drones striking civilians car, homes, and killing several Russians today, daily occurrence (groundhog day). Obviously no-condolences from the Kremlin.
Reyn, I hope the Russian Nationalists return to power.
They would be less inclined to cozy up to the West, right?
The current batch of Kremlin oligarchs is too eager to resume business with the West simply to enrich themselves. Their loyalty is to money, not country.
Yes, you are right. The Russian oligarchs want to stop this war immediately.
Hmm. The next presidential elections in Russia are scheduled for 2030.
Correct.
And if anyone thinks there will be real choice in 2030, they are in la-la-land
Introduce yourself, there will be a choice.
I'd vote for GM as Russian leader.
Never heard of any elections soon.
There is not going to be any real choice anyway.
The country is a feudal fiefdom for the Russian oligarchs.
Which reminds of something else -- have you noticed how often Peskov, Ushakov, Lavrov, etc. insist that "negotiations" with the US should be kept private and secret?
Why is that, what do you have to hide, and from who?
Yes. Russia will stay autocratic and in the hands of the Siloviki and Oligarchs - much they way it is in the West btw. The difference is the illusions of democracy and much more of the time, the chaos that follows with weak governments and short-sighted leaders.
Russia is too big for liberal democracy - it needs an autocratic regime to hold together.
As for the secret negotiations I think it could be as simple as this:
As long as you negotiate you need to be free to air thoughts an ideas. If everything leaks to the press there is no use to negotiate anything.
Last time ”someone” dropped the 28 points paper to the press and effectively de-railed further talks about it.
It could of course include some secret points or attachments, non-disclosed even after being signed such as trade deals or other ”schocking” agreements.
I dont think Lavrov, Uschakov or Peskov is more sinister than others in their position. What is clear is that Military has all their hands over these negotiations. Both Ukraine and Russia has sent their military Intelligence people to do the job.
Exactly.
The Russian people will have to fight and die in the next war, from a much more disadvantageous position, because of the act of treason that Putin is negotiating now.
Trying to understand your perspective…but fails.
A government, regime or dictator must sometimes negotiate and make a decision for the Nation, the People or the greater good without having the irresponsible media or lobbygroups derailing it.
History shows that 99% of the Decisions made wasnt for the population to vote for, have opinions against or made transparant to.
This isn't an attorney-client relationship. Nor are American legal ethics universal.
>Russia is too big for liberal democracy - it needs an autocratic regime to hold together.
Oh, that is absolutely correct. No argument. And I am against democracy on principle.
But an autocratic regime can rule in the interest of the people. Stalin did that.
When it rules in the interests of a rapacious oligarchy and against the interests of the people, then we have a problem.
>As long as you negotiate you need to be free to air thoughts an ideas. If everything leaks to the press there is no use to negotiate anything.
That's not what's happening though. They want it to be kept secret so that there is no time for an internal rebellion to organize itself before the fait accompli of the grand treason committed is presented to the public.
Istanbul was exactly like that -- the terms there were absolutely shocking.
The 28-point plan showed it too.
>What is clear is that Military has all their hands over these negotiations.
Not sure about that. Kostyukov was there in Abu Dhabi.
But that is one meeting.
Meanwhile Kiril Dmitriev has met with the Americans dozens of times.
Also, Kostyukov should not have had that meeting in Abu Dhabi at all. Budanov was on the other side, a man who should not have been alive to be in that meeting in the first place, because he is responsible for so many crimes. And you can be sure Kostyukov knows that.
Yes, autocratic China is functioning (what we know and see).
Hard to believe the Russians will serve some fait compli to their own people, more likely the Ukrainians have to bend over.
But so many weird things happening all over - you could be right about some ”treason”.
ReynMeLo isn't known for his factual comments.
The whole thread following your comment is possibly the most fantastically (literally) delusional argument I have yet read on this site, despite your efforts to inject some sanity. The icing on the cake has to be,
"when Boris Johnson had to intervene to save Russia from Putin."
So, Boris Johnston, arguably the most rabidly Russophobic PM the UK has ever had, or at least since Churchill, was suddenly concerned that Russia was endangering itself! Followed by,
"The next war would have started with NATO on the Perekop isthmus"
Thus, if Bojo had not scuppered the Istanbul agreement then Nato, banned from Ukraine, would have Invaded Russia, presumably by amphibious landing, via Perekop of all places, to my untrained eye one of the most easily defended sites on Russia's whole western border.
Even by GM's standards this is too far 'off the wall' to be given credence.
Extraordinary.
Yeah. Sometimes I wonder why bother to argue or discuss certain matters. When arguments are based on ”out of the blue or pink heaven” it is hard to follow any logic…
Today is the anniversary of the final defeat of the Nazis at Stalingrad.
Which is a good opportunity to once again remind people that Stalin went from Stalingrad to Erfurt, i.e. 2,400 km, in the 28 months between February 2nd 1943 and May 9th 1945.
The peak of the modern day Operation Barbarossa V2 was in the summer of 2014, when the Nazis touched on the Rostov Oblast border. It's been 12 years since then...
But even if you just count the open kinetic portion of it, it's been four years and Putin hasn't even gotten from Donetsk to Slavyansk/Kramatorsk, i.e. a distance of 80 km.
Also a good opportunity to remind everyone about the scale of losses sustained whilst he did that.
Total war vs. a SMO.
I wonder how far he would have got if his forces had to deal with constant FPV involvement in his operations.
1) This war being an FPV quagmire is a choice Putin has made.
It didn't have to be that way.
Still doesn't
2) We should also compare the level of mobilization of society
I know you favour dropping nukes on Ukraine, but that approach has colossal consequences.
In the final, certain strategies were adopted, and it's not over til it's over.
Only in retrospect will we be able to see who had the better strategy, you or him.
I think I'll go with the latter.
There is also a huge space of conventional strike options between what we have now and nukes, and that would help tremendously, but is still off limits
Oreshnik has only recently gone into serial production, and is probably being withheld in case of a NATO attack.
As far as levels of mobilization goes, WW2 was seen by the leadership as an existential crisis, whereas the SMO is not seen that way, so voluntary mobilization is seen as preferable, which of course it is.
Territorial acquisition is not seen as necessary in a meatgrinder war of the Ukrainian kind - problems then arise as to subsequent control of that territory.
For example it took Putin 4 years to start seriously strikijg infrastructure. Something we have been calling for from day 1
It would probably be a good idea to look at the number per week of Iskander strikes - this would suggest whether or not these missiles were generally available until relatively recently, or when the increase in strike rate began.
Without them, you cannot really degrade a nation's infrastructure significantly.
Seems like a big risk. The whole point is if GM is right (it’s not just him that’s saying Russia should stop fighting with one hand behind its back btw) is that there won’t be any retrospect.
There is never just one way to fight a war.
GM favours one of them, and others do too - but assuredly, whichever way you do it, there will always be pros and cons.
Stalin never had to deal with 8 years construction of layered, fortified, modern, defences, designed, I suspect, on what was learned then, and Ukraine's army has yet to be routed in the way Germany's was.
Putin didn't have to deal with such fortifications either.
There were no such fortifications in 2014, nor were there such fortifications in the wide open space between Donetsk and Kiev.
So, another sign of Putin's weakness is that he did not launch an illegal war of aggression in 2014? Whatever, the fact is he didn't and those defences did exist in 2022 and have proved difficult to overcome. We will have to wait and see about the wide open spaces when they reach them and if Ukraine insists on continuing their self-destructive strategy.
In 2014, Ukrainian nationalists were fringe. Most people supported Russia. Strolling to the Dnieper would have been relatively easy
Cannot argue with that but I do not think Russia was militarily in a position to risk a confrontation with the west such as we are now seeing. Also any intervention in 2014 would have been difficult to justify as anything other than naked aggression.
Just my personal opinion but I suspect Russia needed the ensuing years to strengthen their armed forces and, in particular, time to bring into serial production the technological advances they had recently achieved such as hypersonics, advanced air and ballistic missile defence systems, and so on, not to mention their massive naval ship and submarine building programme and airforce upgrade with SU34, SU35 and SU57, etc.
Illegal war is a Western term that only applies to their opponents. In the end when it comes to hegemony there is no legal or illegal, there is only winning and losing. Yes that means you have to play dirty like they do. If we’re in a boxing ring and the ref says no hitting below the belt and only use gloves and the first thing I do is put on brass knuckles and punch you in the nuts, you can look at the ref but first of all he is on my payroll and second, even if he weren’t, there’s nothing he can do other than telling me I shouldn’t have done it. Then it’s up to you to see how you continue the fight. Putin would keep abiding by the rules, some of us would prefer him to put on his own brass knuckles and punch back.
No it isn't, it is a concept enshrined in the United Nations charter and International Law. Aggression is considered the ultimate war crime. The fact the US does not abide by the law does not mean it does not exist and does not give others the right to ignore it. IMO, Russia gains far more internationally by acting within the law. The enforcement of International law is , after all, one of the fundamental aims of Russia and BRICS, which is why Russia has the implicit backing or neutrality of most countries on Earth, and demonstrably the backing of a vast majority of the population.
In response to your comment above also. It depends on the knuckles, and I think he can still escalate within Ukraine. But, the idea of limited nuclear war is ridiculous. Nobody is going to wait and see where the first missile lands before responding. Constant satellite reconnaissance means they will respond on launch, which is why they always notify of any test launches. Do you imagine Putin, or any rational leader. is going to risk that? It is why it is called deterrence (and it seems to have worked for the last 75 years. ) Directly testing the resolve of your opponent with whom you are not "at war" (and do not want to be) is just insane.
"The SMO will not end on Russian terms - not ever. "
Well, it will if Ukraine does not negotiate and Russia has to occupy the whole country.
Russia has never called for an unconditional surrender, as far as I am aware, so whatever terms they have proposed are obviously open to negotiation and thus, compromise.
The whole Donbas argument is, I suggest, a canard to give the impression that Russia is willing to concede the Ukrainian controlled areas of Kherson and Zaphorhozia. Every statement Russia has made suggests that will never happen.
” Russia has to occupy the whole country.
Russia has never called for an unconditional surrender”
One is false, one is sadly true.
"IF", and perhaps I should have qualified it by saying "and Russia is in a position to occupy or destroy the whole country" But, It is the only scenario that would guarantee Russia can dictate whatever terms it likes. Of course, Ukraine may capitulate before that but it amounts in essence to the same thing. However, that looks a remote possibility at the moment.
What would be the point of demanding unconditional surrender? It has been very clear from the outset that Russia does NOT want to occupy the whole of Ukraine. It has also been abundantly clear that they will do so if they have to. They do not need to demand unconditional surrender - that is the stark choice Ukraine already faces, negotiate or die. Russia is the only actor honestly working for a negotiated, lasting, peace settlement, that is all they have wanted from day one (actually since about 1952). Why would they refuse to negotiate?
I havent argued about the negotiations. The unwilling coalition made it impossible until Trump entered the scene.
True re. Trump.
My point is I see demanding unconditional surrender as refusing to negotiate. Maybe I misunderstood your "sadly true".
I agree with your point. Demanding unconditional surrender or for that matter, unconditional ceasefire, is sure to prolong the War. My fault.
Once someone in the West said.
“Hit, hit again, keep hitting”
First Lord of the Sea, Admiral Fisher
Yes, but he wasn't referring to hitting the civilian population.
True, that was Churchill.
Check comments of
NATO spokesman at Bruxelles SHAPE HQ
25 May 1999
I can’t post the photo, pitty.
He had one that covered that too.
“The essence of war is violence and moderation in war is imbecility”.
Anyhow they are targeting infrastructure, not indiscriminate bombing like US and IDF are used or still do. The US calls it collateral damage nowadays, as if it would turn into a clean act.
He tried that one on at Jutland, with somewhat unfortunate results.
As he said, "There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships."
You got almost all correct except, It was Beaty who say that!👍
Thanks!
The principle remains, though.
As HMS Hood proved.
Russia is being accused of inhumane actions as they continue to crush Ukrainian infrastructure. However, the blame should instead be directed at Ukrainian leadership and its partners in Europe and America who refuse to accept the reality of a Russian victory. Just as soldiers caught up in a cauldron must recognise their situation and surrender or die, so too must Ukraine surrender or die.
The paradox…aint it?
Ukrainian citizens can't speak up against the regime, Victor. Have you seen what they do to them? I saw a picture of a woman tied to a post with her pants down as punishment. That's mild compared to what happens to other civilian protesters. Look at the government you have in the UK. Not too much protesting is going on there, as all your civil rights and freedom of speech are strangled.
Agree. When I say "Ukraine", I of course mean the Ukrainian government - the Ukrainian people have no more say in their government than we in the Western "democracies" have.
All good, King of Firsts.
We still have a form of democracy - all the polls indicate 11% support for this government.
Accordingly therefore, the Starmer regime knows it has the fabled SoD hanging over its head, and no way out.
We also have the right to petition the government, and some 3m of us stated that we do not want the digital I/D that the homosexual formerly called Keir Starmer wanted to impose on us.
The situation in the two nations is very different.
Yes, I signed, but how much notice will they really take. Over 2 million took to the streets to protest the Iraq war and were blithely ignored.
It's easy enough to understand.
Keir the Queer knows that what he does determines political outcomes - so if he does something in direct defiance of what the voters want, then there is a particular reality that he will have to face up to in due course.
It's so blindingly obvious that it shouldn't need to be said.
He and his wrecking crew have severely pissed off A LOT of people in this country, and judgement upon them will surely come.
I understand but I really don't think he cares. Three days into his premiership he was asked in a tv interview if he would rather be in Westminster or Davos. He smirked and answered, "Davos". It told me everything I needed to know about him. Being PM is just a stepping stone and his tenure, however brief, has nothing to do with the state of the nation.
Also, I don't think the digital id is dead yet.
It's not fundamentally about him or his career aspirations - it's about what we want.
He can go to Davos for the prostitutes as much as he likes - or to Ukraine for its rent boys - who recently torched a vehicle outside his pig pen in North London - but what counts in the UK is what the electorate want, and an 11% rating for his party / himself personally tells us that both he and his party will shortly be looking at P45s dropping through the letterbox.
They will try to introduce digital I/D, but again, most seem to have seen through the excuses as to why they think they need it.
What the people want is to stop these hellish boats coming ashore - not to decide if they get to work or not once they're here.
From 2014 to 2022 they could have, but there was silence. Our children blah blah blah, their children, blah blah blah. Now they can say "we know".
"I saw a picture of a woman tied to a post with her pants down as punishment."
Please send me that pic Denis. For strictly research purposes only.
Haha, Grr. Too funny.
Go to Kyiv in the summer and walk around town, where the street poles are and see the ladies in person so you can interview them for your research. You can't beat hands-on work. 😂
No, the fault is 100% on Putin and the Russian oligarchy.
Remember that these are the same people who in the 1990s through the Perestroika and the collapse of the USSR committed pre-meditated mass murder comparable to what Hitler did to the country. Many millions died due to malnutrition, the collapsed health care system, depression, crime, etc. And it would have been much more than that had it not been for the cushion of the remnants of the Soviet system.
That was а deliberate and fully conscious act. Take a look here:
https://maysuryan.livejournal.com/1327621.html
Quote:
>It was February 1992. At a meeting chaired by Yegor Timurovich, urgent measures to finance social programs were being discussed. A large crowd had gathered in the room where Yegor Ligachev had recently sat. At the same table sat another Yegor -- Yegor Gaidar. The discussion focused on social issues such as school construction, pensions, which had by then been virtually wiped out, and citizens' savings, which had also been reduced to dust. And that same author of this article informed Gaidar that in Zelenograd, our healthcare system had recorded 36 deaths due to starvation. To this, Gaidar responded simply: radical changes are underway, money is tight, and the death of people unable to resist these changes is a natural thing. Then he was asked: Yegor Timurovich, what if your parents are among these people? Gaidar chuckled and said that he did not intend to answer stupid questions. (Yuri Luzhkov, Gavriil Popov. One more word about Gaidar // Moskovsky Komsomolets, January 22, 2010)
You would think that once something of such nature was published, in 2010, under Putin, there would have been immediate investigations and at least a posthumous (the spawn of Satan that was Gaidar had passed away shortly before that) trial, right? And not a posthumous, but a real prosecution for those who were still alive, right? After all, Putin is a Russian patriot who deeply cares about his people, right?
Wrong.
Here is what Putin had to say on the matter:
>This is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin on Gaidar: "Not every statesman has the opportunity to serve the Fatherland at the most crucial moments in its history, to make key decisions that will determine the country's future. Yegor Timurovich Gaidar fulfilled this most difficult task with dignity, demonstrating the finest professional and personal qualities. He did not shirk responsibility and, in the most difficult situations, 'stood the blow' with honor and courage. The bright memory of Yegor Gaidar will forever remain in the hearts of his family and friends—all who knew this remarkable man."
And the rest of the people who thought and acted like that were, of course, not touched at all. Chubais was still in an official governmental position when the war started in 2022, then self-purged to Israel of all places, where he is busy selling Russian state secrets.
So how do you expect Putin, who has such a warm opinion for Gaidar, a man who openly stated that regular people will have to die for the good of the then nascent Russian oligarchy, to think about and protect the ordinary Russian people, whether they carry Russian or Ukrainian passports?
Of course he will not care.
Thus the 2,500 Russian civilians missing in Kursk whose mass graves were gradually discovered that Putin never mentions. And the shitshow in Ukraine.
There has been a clear and obvious solution to this problem -- take out the Ukrainian oligarchy. This isn't Hezbollah, i.e. a grassroots movement by people fighting for their survival against a genocidal external force and generally being the good guys. This is the absolute scum of the earth using their position of power to enrich themselves as the middle men between the working class Ukranian (i.e. mostly ethnically Russian) cannon fodder and the war on Russia.
Take them out and the whole scheme collapses.
Yet Putin has expended many billions worth of missiles and drones to make life absolutely miserable for ordinary Ukrainian people, and now to kill a lot of them too, by freezing them to death, instead of going after the oligarchy.
Which has had and will have close to zero effect on the war. The rate of advance hasn't really moved up from the 500 km^2 a month it has been at for a very long time. A rate at which Ukraine will be liberated some time around the year 2110.
Make that make sense under the hypothesis that Putin is the good Tsar who deeply cares about his people. You can't.
But it makes perfect sense under the alternative hypothesis that he is a puppet of the Russian oligarchy who absolutely does not care about the country and the people beyond the care of the CEO of a corporation about the assets under his management.
" A rate at which Ukraine will be liberated some time around the year 2110."
Too funny.
Russians seem to like him with 80% approvals
Only the older people. Younger people dont like him much
Are you Navalny's son?
Funny enough early Navalny was a pretty hardcore nationalist
In his early days, he suffered from dementia like Taco, then became a crybaby like the green dwarf of kyiv. Like him, he also practiced fraud and embezzlement.
Well, well, 11 likes. How time changes things eh. Well done.
TL;DR?
Who cares about the lies of western media ? Only people in the west, way too propagandized to understand anything anyway.
Russia needs to pursue its interests and disregard what the llying western media claims, especially when western media lies about Russia, even when Russia is doing nothing (like bombing itself in the ZNPP or bombing its own pipelines, etc)
In 2022, with the conflict in full swing, someone would have said, "The Russians experienced 70 years of propaganda with the USSR and therefore know how to recognize it; the Westerners are discovering it, which I am not sure about. It dates back further than Bolshevik propaganda, but how could degenerates recognize it?
Russia is.
The 21st century is full of discoveries; viruses kill, the seasons change (heat in summer, cold and snow in winter), war is ugly and deadly, etc. I hope to live long enough to witness the discovery of the stone wheel.
I have a feeling that the cauldron brewing in the south will be one of, if not, the biggest we've seen thus far. On an unrelated note, if you're looking for some brevity I'd recommend to check out Psyop Anime - WW3. I don't much care for AI slop but this is pretty fun and it has zelensky doing blow at Davos
https://youtu.be/qeANZIfik9A?si=2ezSxAEKcjzsAcqW
@KomradDirty
Erm.
It's hard to produce near current dystopian SF stuff like this when physical reality can outrun it before it is even released (as happened here).
Iran regime change unrest didn't quite work out to Mossad/CIA's plan.
Davos was a clusterfuck by most accounts.
Ukraine isn't effectively pressuring RF energy sector and forcing them into some kind of indiscriminant all out attack, quite the reverse in fact.
(And what's with the bloody lion wandering 'round, trying to look like Aslan?!)
It seems Russia has realized that the Holy Grail toward Ukraine collapse goes through the power grid destruction. If they figure out a way to force the disconnection of the nuclear power stations without nuclear explosions they will win the war. The numbers of drones and ballistic missiles needed are surely available and the act can be organized with low civilian casualty rates. There is no way a modern country can function and fight a war successfully once it is reduced to a 19th century technological level. The sporadic presence of diesel generators running here and there simply will not do the trick.
I think that Putin is shying away from the nuclear PP. It is dangerous to leave them without load and cooling supply. Then there is a psychological thing connected to Atomic Power which the western propaganda may use. And the Russians have still compassion for the Ukranian population. After all, they have to live with them as neighbors and not as hated surpressors.
The older generations are still living with the nasty word: C-h-e-r-n-o-b-y-l.
Or F-u-k-u-s-h-i-m-a.
>I think that Putin is shying away from the nuclear PP.
Because the other side did the same?
The ZNPP is not working because it was forcefully shut down by NATO already back in 2022, through persistent artillery shelling of the connections to the grid and the cooling systems.
If both sides respected the same rules of engagement, the ZNPP would be generating GWs of electricity right now.
But one side doesn't
So if the goal is to blackout Ukraine, why are the grid connections to Yuzhno-Ukrainsk, Khmelnytskyi and Rovno intact?
Of course Putin is shying away. He's weak I'm sure he fought against even targeting the energy grid at all, but after being proven wrong (AGAIN) with the Istambul 2022 "negotiations", the military and the security council in Russia got the upper hand. Let's just face it. The war is not ending sooner, because Putin prevented it from ending sooner, with his absurd decisions to keep appeasing the western psychopaths, not following his own red lines and considering ukrainians "brothers". Once again, Putin is a great peace time leader, but a horrible war time leader...easily one of the worst. He seems to have more consideration for the enemy, than russian's themselves.
He's just a lot more considered in his actions than any westerner would be, and in the long run, that is a very good thing.
You keep saying that and this would be the case if you dealt with reasonable actors who have the same end goal, namely peaceful coexistence. That is not who we’re dealing with however. The only language the neocons in Washington and London understand is power and strength. Because that is how they see the world. If the West would have had Oreshniks they would have launched them already. They perceive Putin’s ‘considerations’ as weakness and it will only embolden them to escalate further, leaving Putin no other option down the line to go nuclear. Or just bow down and let Russia be balkanized. Sometimes you need to escalate to deescalate.
Escalation has never been ruled out by the Kremlin.
Putin is a wise and careful leader. He does not want an heated exchange, possibly developing in full blown-up war. Considering that Westerners are crazy and have nukes. The war went slowly, but he keps winnig.
So the West is crazy and therefore has deterrence, whereas Russia is rational and therefore does not. Go a level deeper and who is the crazy one?
So, Putin's behavior is not logical in fact.
Is that also dementia, like in Biden's case?
Given that he conducts hours-long unscripted interactions with the press and interested persons on a yearly basis, then that is not within the bounds of possibility.
You are 'sure he fought against even targeting the energy grid at all' based on what? As I have said before, it seems that the less people know the more sure they are of their opinions.
Are you sure about that, though?
I consider Moscow to be one of the cities slated for destruction via the Samson Option. Talk about a Damocles Sword over one's head.
Hence leaving the Chabad Lubavicher somewhat alone.
>It seems Russia has realized that the Holy Grail toward Ukraine collapse goes through the power grid destruction
Which is complete BS.
If it was true, then why wasn't it done in 2022? It would have saved the lives of 150,000 Russian soldiers and many thousands of Russian civilians.
If collapsing the grid was going to collapse the Ukrainian war effort, then Putin should be on trial at a military tribunal for gross mismanagement and for the unnecessary slaughter of so many of his own people, because he could have collapsed it any time in the past four years, but didn't.
If it isn't true (and indeed it isn't, because Ukraine is just a launch pad for NATO to fire into Russia, and that will continue all the same with or without the grid) then Putin spent many billions in missiles and drones to achieve nothing and to only get Russia dug deeper and deeper into a strategic hole.
Which again brings up the matter of responsibility for that catastrophe.
>There is no way a modern country can function and fight a war successfully once it is reduced to a 19th century technological level.
So when is Putin going to reduce Western Europe and North America to a 19th century technological level? Because those are the modern countries that fight a war on Russia, Ukraine is just the territory where it happens.
You have no idea what MAY happen next.
All you seem to present is "hindsight is 20/20".
So far he (if we may assume gender) has been proven right, because we’re 4 years in and Russia hasn’t liberated the Donbas yet. Matter of fact, they haven’t even recaptured any of the strategic towns they lost in the debacle of 2022: Izium, Kupiansk and Liman. So it’s not Monday morning quarterbacking. With every day, every week, every month that passes, he is proven right and the Putin adepts here are proven wrong.
Or just leave the grid in such a precarious state that simple mechanical failures could black out most of the country. But that couldn't happen....
@Kennewick Man
Nuclear power plants of that type don't undergo "nuclear explosions", they CAN absolutely melt down from interrupted cooling/be broken open by sufficiently heavy conventional weapons attacks and release huge quantities of radioactive contaminants.
I would bet those planning this Ukrainian power grid demolition have those events at top of their list of events NOT to cause?
The kindest thing Russia could do is keep up the pressure. Short moratoriums for weather or other excuses just prolong the agony of the citizens.
Indeed.
Why ? That's exactly what Putin is doing and that's wrong. I could care less about ukrainians. But I do care about russians, especially russian soldiers, that have to fight in a war, because ukrainians are the dumbest people on earth, the west is filled with psychopaths and Putin is dumb. Russia has the capabilities to end this war sooner, but Putin's weakness continues to prolong it. Wars of attrition always take time, but Putin's decisions to appease the west and agree to pointless ceasefires, that only help the enemy, makes it even longer. Russia should've destroyed Ukraine's energy grid last year, which would accelerate the collapse of the nazi regime, which would not only need to deal with the russian military, but also the protests from the general population, freezing and without water and such. Which would probably lead them to leave the cities, which in turn makes military operations there, much easier.
We all know the nazis use civilians as shields, The more civilians leave, the less shields the nazis have. All of which is better for Russia, than continuing this charade of "negotiations" and pointless ceasefires.
The Ukrainians in Lviv and the ones that chose the West over Russia, knowing full well what they are capable of (Nuland just oversaw the killing of hundreds of thousands of children in Iraq, but she’s handing out cookies in Maidan because she cares about Ukrainian democracy?) deserve all of this and more. If they could kill off the entire Russian population with a push on an imaginary button, they would gladly do so.
And of course, the Western Rules Based Order barely stirred to save the Palestinians from the two greatest war crimes of all- ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Taking that western playbook at face value, Ukrainians freezing to death, can decamp to Poland and save themselves..... if Poland reopens that border it closed to stop this human tide, that is.
Yes. Who cared about the Gazans freezing to death in tents.
Let us remember that the US regarded it as entirely justifiable to drop an atom bomb on a nation that just would not face reality and admit defeat.
Ah, no, that's the US lie that was used to justify the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In reality Japan had already admitted defeat and had reached out to the US for surrender negotiations. All they wanted was for the Emperor not to be seized, which are the same terms on which the eventual surrender was accomplished.
All that talk of "but for the atomic bombs we would have lost a million dead storming the home islands" is a lie. Yes, military people who did not know of Japan's attempts to surrender were gearing up for an invasion they assumed would be very costly. But given what Truman and jerks like Dulles knew neither that invasion nor the atomic bombing were required.
Declassified documents and war diaries make it clear the main reason the US went ahead with the atomic bombing was to support Truman's plans for war against the US's ally, the Soviet Union. Truman had already decided that after the war the US would destroy the USSR. He wanted to demonstrate the power of atomic weapons to Stalin, to cow him.
At the same time there was a large Deep State constituency within the US that wanted to test atomic weapons on cities, to see how well or not well they would work. That's why they deliberately refrained from bombing Hiroshima and a few other cities prior to the atomic attack: they wanted undamaged cities as test subjects.
So what really happened was that the US regarded it as entirely justifiable to drop an atomic bomb on a nation that was already defeated simply for the purpose of using the civilian population of an undamaged city as lab animals to see how many would die, and how they would die, as the result of an atomic attack, and also for the purpose of shocking and putting fear into an ally, Stalin, who the US intended to attack after the war with Germany, Italy, Japan, Bulgaria, Romania and the other Axis allies was wrapped up.
Cool. My bad. But the point is that US considered that to be a good justification if it were the case.
Totally correct on all counts John. Firebombs and nukes were used as grand terror laboratories by high-minded Anglo-Americans claiming the moral high-ground.
Worse that that actually. They had to hurry to get the second strike in so they could compare the effects of plutonium and uranium based devices on humans before a surrender was signed. For extra credit, ground zero at Nagasaki was the Christian Cathedral. The Los Alamos crowd virtue signalled afterwards that they were innocent technocrats, but they were not. The entire affair was pure evil and dominated by the 2%.
I believe the selection of Nagasaki is billed as an “in the air” decision because of weather conditions at the primary target were less than ideal. The Nagasaki Christians became the paradigm for the thesis of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”!
Then came the six (or was it eight?) detailed plans by the US to first-strike Russia before they got the bomb. That level of cynicism is jaw-dropping.
Nagasaki and Hiroshima were the major Christian cities in Japan. I don't think that's a coincidence.
Curtis Lemay: "Let's bomb the Soviets back to the stone age".
(.. and Kenny Everett's "Let's Bomb Russia!")
As is well known now from declassified US documents, Truman's plan (cooked up together with Dulles) was to do exactly that even before WWII was over. The US intended to use its atomic monopoly to attack the Soviet Union with a nuclear first strike, destroying dozens of Soviet cities.
Truman was so intensely ignorant and so easy to manipulate by people like Dulles that, despite all evidence that Stalin and the USSR wanted nothing more than to demobilize the Red Army so millions of men could be put to work rebuilding a country that had been devastated by the war, he believed the USSR wanted to attack the West. So he set out to destroy the USSR.
Truman's problem was he only had a few atomic bombs just after 1945 and then few bombers with the range to reach all the cities the US Deep State wanted to kill in the USSR. So the plan to attack got pushed back to allow the US to build more atomic bombs and work on logistics.
Stalin, of course, knew of the US's planned nuclear attack so the USSR went into crash mode preparation to defend against the US attack. That's what started the Cold War arms race, the Truman/Dulles administration's plan to annihilate the USSR with a nuclear sneak attack. By the time Eisenhower became President the relationship had been well and truly poisoned by the US plan to destroy the USSR.
Anyway, given US misgivings about how successful the USSR's planned defense would work, the plan to attack the USSR kept getting pushed back until more and more nukes could be built by the US until finally, one day, the USSR achieved its own nuclear capability. The US didn't know how many nukes the Soviets had so that, of course, pushed back the plan yet again until yet more hundreds, and then thousands, and then tens of thousands of nukes could be built.
That peaked when the US had over 31,000 active warheads with about 65 different types of nukes. Over the years the US has built over 70,000 nuclear weapons (many being replaced over time by newer versions). Some individual weapons, were produced in the thousands, like 4500 units of the B28/W28 warhead with yield of up to a megaton and a half. And that one was just the second largest production run.
Curtis LeMay is often ridiculed as a psychopath by modern liberals, but he was right about a lot of things. What he was most right about was understanding that once nuclear weapons proliferated it was only a matter of time before they would be used on the US. LeMay felt that the US should have used its atomic monopoly to end war.
He wanted to use the atomic monopoly to erase any other country that attempted to develop nuclear weapons. He felt that doing so and keeping the atomic monopoly in US hands would be a way to end wars between great powers, that it could be used to impose a Pax Americana, like the Roman Peace that kept the Mediterranean world relatively free of wars for a few centuries during the height of the Roman empire. Far from being a war monger, he wanted to end war, to avoid a destructive cycle of spending trillions of dollars on nuclear arms races that could be better spent on educating kids and building better societies.
It's hard to argue with that compared to the alternative that developed, a US and a USSR that were both willing to kill billions of people to ensure the other guy's political system would never be applied to them. But seriously, would living under USSR rule for Americans or living under US rule for Soviets have been so terrible that it would have justified killing a billion and a half people? I think not.
Thank you John.
I never considered looking up, I guess the Yalta agreement.
I keep on learning things.
And yet, because of that threat of killing billions of people no nuclear war of any sort was launched. Kind of sounds like the best outcome to me.... That was a very interesting take, John, one I had not heard before. It does make a lot of sense.
You need to add that Soviets where transfering troops from Europe and would decimate japan and end its empire; that is real reason of them surrendering, not ameriKKKa, not atomic bombs... atomic bombs are not even first in damage or number of civilians killed compared to other ameriKKKan bombings of japan...
Let's not forget China, who has also been on the New Roman Empire's snuff list since the end of WWII.
The US wanted control of Japan. They still have it.
There was "island hopping" in WWII, on the US strategy toward Japan. A similar strategy is used for war on China, but for politically capturing entire countries.
And the US has taken Japan, half of Korea, Philippines, and have tried to take others, like Vietnam.
If the US could it would effectively have a front line all around China and Russia. Every single nation. I'm not sure but I think they've tried to make problems and capture everywhere, at least once.
The nation actually accepted reality and was about to surrender because they were facing an invasion by three million red army soldiers. The atomic bombs were merely a genocidal, barbaric and inhumane demonstration of power from people who lacked conscience as Japanese were not of the superior race.
I don't demur from any of that!
Maybe the bombs were to prevent (or derail) the invasion by “three million Red Army soldiers”?
Yes, very good reminder. Never forget.
Ironically it was really the US that admitted defeat when it had to capitulate on it’s demand for “Unconditional Surrender” and accept the sovereignty of the Emperor. Something Japan held fast on throughout two atomic attacks.
According to Gen. Curtis LeMay, the bombs had nothing to do with Japan’s surrender.
The Japanese surrendered to the Soviets before the atomic genocide. That was a message to Stalin, not the Japanese leadership.
I seem to recall being told on this board by that great friend of the western alliance, GM, that the Russians could not take out the entire energy system.
Using nukes in the quantity advocated ad nauseum by GM would *certainly* take out the entire grid....and most of Europe.
Sorry N, wrong shill. I think it was feral finister, but there were many singing that song.
They play in each others pants.
Sorry Feral.
I shat post.
General Massnuke ..
Russian troops needed to deal with numerous water courses and ravines to straighten the line. The weeks it took needed meticulous work in horrible weather conditions. As for the Ukie grid, keeping what flows exist balanced is a massive challenge with imbalances causing interruptions.
How they even suppling Lyman? 7 Russian planes lost isn’t small!
"7 Russian planes lost isn’t small!" It's not real, either. Can't believe a word Oryx writes.
I archived Shea's page here since eventually it will be "corrected": https://archive.md/17VyG
"According to him, the terrorist UN unnaproved Bombing of Yugoslavia, depriving access to 70% of Serbians not only electricity, but also water supply was deserved to accept illegal NATO's five conditions. As long as he doesn't accepted it, will continue to attack those electricity and water suply targets.[7]"
So your implying the supreme criminal (oopsy) leader Vladimir Putin should be awarded with honours for winning hearts and minds of his own brethren, for diplomacy and service to his own kind just like a NATO Secretary General.
Simple Fact: Many Russians are married to Ukrainians and vise versa, I hope they survive the generations of damage that has unfolded unnecessarily.
The supreme irony here is that Putin now finally is indeed a war criminal.
He wasn't when he started the war, that was real self defense.
And he most certainly wasn't in the case of what he was indicted for -- the "abduction" of children, i.e. rescuing them from an active warzone.
But the freezing of Kiev in the middle of the harshest winter in many years is a real war crime, no questions about it.
Especially given that he not only had the option of not doing it, but that doing it will have no effect on the war. Meanwhile taking out a few hundred key individuals in Kiev with precision strikes would have indeed won the war, and those scoundrels absolutely deserve it too. But they are sacrosanct and untouchable.
The Soviet-born elderly people freezing to death at -30C on the 12th floor of high rises are not sacrosanct and untouchable, so they will suffer what they must...
You say when the West and its allies destroy powergrids and water infrastucture week 1 is just fine and dandy but when Russia does it after almost 4 years of combat then its a warcrime??? Btw it was Ukraine that started the energy infrastructure hits by blowing up the bridge with western backing. You are hilariously delusional and biased as usual, atleast you are consistent lol
What sort of an braindead Putin groupie do you have to be to not understand what I am saying?
Of course both what NATO does and what Putin is doing now are war crimes.
But what makes it doubly bad in this case is that when NATO did it to Serbia it did win the war. Because the Serbian government had to take care of its people and thus capitulated.
The people who have taken control of Ukraine have absolutely no loyalty to or care about the population of Ukraine. There would be no war if they did. They are a combination of the absolutely worst criminal elements from within that population and people who are ethnically alien to it. They don't care what happens to the masses. And neither do their equally monstrous backers outside Ukraine.
You are not going to win a war in such a situation by freezing regular people to death. Nobody cares about that.
The only ways to win the war are to stop the Western military support and to physically eliminate the Ukrainian leadership and oligarchy.
Both things Putin had the means to do on the first day of the war but steadfastly refuses to do to this day.
"braindead Putin groupie" is the correct diagnosis of the mental condition. After 4years (12years from 2014) they never learned the truth unfortunately, will deny truth even when evidence is presented. It is a mental disease that takes over and arguing with them is a mute point.
I've seen the light, and no longer support this war criminal Vladimir Putin. I've never supported 'puppet' Zelensky either.
So why do you bother?
BTW. It would be welcome relief if it was mute.
As for evidence, please don't make me laugh, all that is ever presented here is opinions. Yours are not necessarily any closer to the truth than anyone else's. Something I heard once about splinters, planks and eyes comes to mind.
So you're equating what NATO did to Yugoslavia and what's happening in Ukraine? I would prefer the war in Ukraine never happened but understand why it did. And yes, everyone involved will be damaged in some way, that's what happens in war. Which is why NATO and the US should have agreed to craft a new security architecture for the region as the Russians requested repeatedly over the years instead of using Ukraine as a battering ram to further their geopolitical aims.
Thank you for archiving it! I'm here 6 days late and indeed, Wiki has been "corrected"
La falta de humanidad de los hijos de la Gran Bretaña a los que les encanta dirigir las guerras nunca deja de alucinarme.
In English: The lack of humanity of the sons of Great Britain who love to lead wars never ceases to amaze me.
Thanks for the trans. “Nunca deja de alucinarme”. I’m stealing that!
A mi no me alucina, me flipa.
Correcto!