Russia and Ukraine

[Azeem]

 

[Tommy]

Putin is Nato's employee of the month. 

[Azeem]

4 hours ago, Tommy said:

Putin is Nato's employee of the month. 

[Azeem]

Turkey blocks the talks of Finland Sweden joining NATO. 

[Azeem]

Now its a three way race between pandemic, nukes and food crisis in killing us all

[Azeem]

 

[Azeem]

I understand the hesitation from Germany about arms. What is US plan by endlessly arming Ukraine ? until one or both sides are exhausted !?

They are hoping that if they drag the conflict long enough it will be seen as some kind of 'failure' putting pressure on Putin to oust him. Did US accept 'failure' after 20 years of quagmire in Afghanistan? Putin is also gonna keep changing goal posts and claim victory. 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Aladdin

[RandoEFC+]

You can't win. Direct conflict with Putin to achieve a Ukraine victory risks nuclear war. Not sending some sort of aid is essentially leaving Ukraine for dead. The only answer really is something in between. Not sure exactly what though.

[Azeem]

Plot twist Ukraine has a sizeable historical Muslim population 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Aladdin said:

Plot twist Ukraine has a sizeable historical Muslim population 

"It's natural for us to like the white refugees more than the brown ones who's lives we ruined with our own government's actions, so please keep those people in Iran and Pakistan while we also pretend to be upset about the horrific images we saw in Afghanistan that we're pretty much directly responsible for. Did I mention the Ukrainian refugees are Christian and not Muslim?"

Twat.

[MUFC]

On 31/05/2022 at 22:02, Dr. Gonzo said:

"It's natural for us to like the white refugees more than the brown ones who's lives we ruined with our own government's actions, so please keep those people in Iran and Pakistan while we also pretend to be upset about the horrific images we saw in Afghanistan that we're pretty much directly responsible for. Did I mention the Ukrainian refugees are Christian and not Muslim?"

Twat.

Any pics?

[Dr. Gonzo]

On 28/05/2022 at 22:58, Aladdin said:

I understand the hesitation from Germany about arms. What is US plan by endlessly arming Ukraine ? until one or both sides are exhausted !?

They are hoping that if they drag the conflict long enough it will be seen as some kind of 'failure' putting pressure on Putin to oust him. Did US accept 'failure' after 20 years of quagmire in Afghanistan? Putin is also gonna keep changing goal posts and claim victory. 

It's basically a proxy war at this point.

Russia's lost a significant amount of it's standing army, but Ukraine's lost a lot of people as well and yesterday Zelensky said they're losing 60-100 troops a day. In a war of attrition where your proxy force is suffering large losses a day, the people helping the proxy will need to give the proxy better and better weapons.

One big difference between Afghanistan for the US and Ukraine for Russia is the staggering amount of loss that Russia's felt in a few months. But it's also largely in part because Ukraine's military is significantly better equipped and organised than Afghanistan... and they've got overwhelming international support.

But yeah, Putin's going to keep changing goal posts and claim victory - but clearly the West is unwilling to not help Ukraine fight so Russia doesn't go back to putting puppets in power in Ukraine/seize more land in Europe. The US is very much trying to maximise the hurt Russia feels before Putin decides he needs to take the next exit.

And I don't think Russia's going to be able to get anything like serious sanctions relief until Putin is no longer in charge - so I suspect Russia will still feel some hurt from this war even after it is over.

[Waylander]

I agree it is a proxy war or has at least become one.

Next steps are difficult to assess, the US has allegedly promised long range missiles and also a missile defence system for Kiev.

Russia now seems to be focusing on the Donbas rather than trying to expand and take the whole of the Black Sea area including Odessa. 

Because of propaganda with both sides trying to encourage their preferred side it is difficult to know how effective the war of attrition is. The supplying of new long range weapons is either the US worried about Ukrainian morale or they are looking to battle test new equipment which they can then sell to other NATO allies.

Russia by venturing deeper into Donbass will be closer to Kiev ominous if this remains a shooting war for a longer period.

Re Finland and Sweden I would not be surprised if Russia is arming other countries which will make an announcement after NATO's announcement.

Remember the US and UK gave nuclear material to India and Pakistan. The US was the first to use depleted Uranium.

None of this bodes well for the future.  

 

[Waylander]

This interesting - Ukraine and Taiwan discussion

 

[OrangeKhrush]

more is coming out about western lies on what is really happening.   I am in the Russell Brand boat, i would say I have similar left of center libertarian political preferences to his but he is correct that the West uses democracy as a blanket to cover what it really is, a globalist technocracy where the government, media and corporates are all one and they are after your freedoms.

 

there is a renowned Canadian journalist that goes to war zones and reports on what is happening.  she is by political ideology liberal but because her message is not what the powers want you to hear she is censored and branded far right the typical narrowness of a modern liberal regime.

nations closer to the fighting have also called BS on most western propaganda, as either partial truth or completely fabricated.   

its basically Americans trying to lie about how good their crap is to sell them to countries in which they help perpetuate a war.   American equipment is so crap their weapons contract is outsourced to Fabrique Nationale because colt is crap.

[RandoEFC+]

Paul Joseph Watson is one of the most bad faith unreliable sources of insight and "news" on the Internet. Many of his followers like to treat him as the guy who's "actually telling us the truth" while ignoring the most logical conclusion, that actually there's a very good reason the stuff he comes out with isn't being said anywhere else, because it's heavily warped at best or completely untrue at worst.

[Azeem]

U.S has given so far the longest ranged missiles to Ukraine with the strict assurance that they will be not be used to target inside Russian territory.

Are the currently occupied lands Russian or Ukrainian ? 

[Waylander]

I thought this was interesting - my bolding for interest only.

Disquiet at Davos

The unspoken fear disquieting Davos attendees is the fear of another débacle, following that of Afghanistan.

Klaus Schwab, passionate for Ukraine, essentially configured the World Economic Forum (WEF) to showcase Zelensky and to leverage the argument that Russia should be kicked out of the civilised world. Schwab’s target was the assembled crème de la crème of the world’s business leaders assembled there. Zelensky pitched big: “We want more sanctions and more weapons”; “All trade with the aggressor should be stopped”; “All foreign business should leave Russia so that your brands are not associated with war crimes”, he said. Sanctions must be all encompassing; values must matter.

Disquiet ran through the Davos set: The WEF is high-octane globalist, right? Yet this Schwab line suggests a de-coupling ‘on stilts’. It precisely reverses interconnectedness. Plus, the western generals in charge are saying that this conflict may last not just years, but decades. What will this signify for their markets in parts of the world that refuse action against Russia, the moneymen were wondering?

It is unlikely that this whiff of disorientation is what Schwab had intended. Perhaps the latter was more aligned with Soros’ later intervention that a quick victory over Russia was needed to save the ‘Open Society’ and civilisation itself – and that this was intended as the WEF 2022 message.

The Davos ‘greater disquiet’ emerged however, from an unexpected quarter. Just before the WEF began, the NY Times had run a piece from the editorial team urging Zelensky to negotiate with Russia. It argued that such engagement implied making painful territorial sacrifices. The piece attracted indignant and angry push-back in Europe and the West, possibly because – albeit couched as advice to Kiev – its target was evidently Washington and London (the arch belligerents).

Eric Cantor, a former whip in the U.S. House of Representatives (a legislator well versed on Iran sanctions), also at Davos, questioned whether the West would be able to maintain a united front in pursuit of such maximalist aims as Zelensky and his Military Intelligence Chief have demanded. “We may not get the next vote”, Cantor opined (in wake of the $40 bn vote ostensibly earmarked for Ukraine).

Cantor said excluding Russia entirely would require secondary sanctions against other countries. This would place the West into a head on clash with China, India, and the almost 60 states which had refused to back a UN resolution denouncing Russia’s invasion. He warned that the U.S. may be in danger of overplaying its hand.

Then spoke the redoubtable Henry Kissinger, also at Davos. He warned the West to stop trying to inflict a crushing defeat on Russian forces in Ukraine, saying that such would have disastrous consequences for the long-term stability of Europe. He said it would be fatal for the West to get swept along in the mood of the moment and forget the proper place of Russia in the European balance of power.

Dr Kissinger said the war must not be allowed to drag on and came close to calling on the West to instruct Ukraine to accept terms that fall very far short of its current war aims: “Negotiations need to begin in the next two months, before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome”.

What is going on here? In a nutshell, we are seeing the first inklings of fractures appearing in the U.S. stance on Ukraine. The fissures in Europe are already very plain, both on sanctions and mission aims. But Cantor’s comment that “we may not get the next vote” needs further unpacking.

In an earlier piece, I argued that Senator JD Vance’s win in the Ohio primaries for a Senate seat could be telling. His candidature was backed by Trump, who later issued an ‘End the war’ call. Now the key tell-tale is Republican Senator Josh Hawley – ambitious and known to have leadership aspirations.

Early in the Ukraine war, Senator Hawley was calling Zelensky, lauding him highly and egging him on. But then he pivoted. Hawley subsequently blasted the $40 billion in proposed aid to Ukraine, after voting ‘no’ on the procedural vote to move forward with the aid package “as not being in America’s interests”.

At first, as some may recall, there were 6 House votes against the bill – then 60. And in the Senate, first there were zero then there were 11 votes. The Bill was rushed through as vote managers were concerned that the vote could crumble further.

What is going on? Well, the Republican ‘populist’ current, never enamoured at foreign aid, was shocked at the $ 40 billion for Ukraine when the U.S. lacked baby milk, (and itself had to rely on foreign baby milk aid). This political current is becoming more significant and having more impact as a result of a structural shift. Political candidates, and now even some U.S. think-tanks are turning to crowd-funding as a principal source of finance – moving away from the ‘established’ donors. Thus, the broad ‘anti-foreign entanglement’ sentiment is gaining heft.

Of course, the $40 billion is not all going to Ukraine. Not at all. According to the details of the Bill, the bulk will go to the Pentagon (for equipment already supplied by the U.S. and its allies). And a big chunk will go to the State Department, to fund all sorts of ‘helpful’ non-state actors and NGOs – i.e. it is a deep state budget with Ukraine packaging. The six billion allocated directly for new arms to Ukraine in fact comprises both training and weapons, so much of that will end in the pockets of states such as UK and Germany, giving ‘out of theatre’ training to Ukrainians in their own, or in neighbouring countries’ territory.

Eric Cantor, and other Americans at WEF may frame their disquiet over western objectives in ‘polite company’ as simply articulating their uncertainties over America’s grand strategy – whether the U.S. is trying to punish Russia for its aggression, or whether the goal is a subtler use of policy that gives the Kremlin a ‘route out of sanctions’, were it to changes course. But behind the narrative lies a darker fear. The unsaid fear of failure.

What does this mean? It means that the West’s ultimate war aims in Ukraine have so far been able to stay opaque and undefined, the details swept aside in the mood of the moment.

Paradoxically, this opacity has been preserved despite the public failure of the West’s first statement of aims – which was that the seizure of Russia’ offshore foreign reserves; the Russian bank expulsions from SWIFT; the sanctioning of the Central Bank; and the broadside of sanctions would, in and of itself alone, turn the rouble to rubble; cause a run on the domestic banking system; collapse the Russian economy; and provoke a political crisis that Putin might not survive.

In short, ‘victory’ would be quick – if not immediate. We know this, because U.S. officials and the French Finance Minister, Bruno Le Maire bragged about it publicly.

So confident in a quick financial-war success were these western officials that there seemed little need to invest deep strategic reflection on the aims or the course of the secondary Ukrainian military thrust. After all, a Russia already economically collapsed, with its currency ruined and its morale broken, would likely put up little or no fight as the Ukrainian army swept across Donbas and into Crimea.

Well, the sanctions have proved a bust and Russia’s currency and oil revenues are bountiful.

And now, western politicians are being warned in the media, and by their own military, that Russia is ‘close to a major victory’ in Donbas.

This is the unspoken fear disquieting Davos attendees – fear of another débacle, following that of Afghanistan. One made all the worse as the ‘war’ on Russia boomerangs into an economic collapse in Europe, and with NATO’s eight-year investment in building-up a successful proxy-army to NATO standards turning to dust.

This is what Kissinger’s comments – decoded – urge: ‘Don’t procrastinate’; get a quick deal (even an unfavourable one), but one that can be dressed up, and somehow spun as a ‘win’. But don’t wait, and let events lead the U.S. into yet another unmistakeable, undeniable débacle.

This is still ‘under the kitchen table talk’ in the U.S. for now, as the power of a narrative, invested with so much emotion, and bolstered by unprecedented info-war peer-pressure has masked such thoughts from public expression. Fractures nonetheless are beginning to be apparent. Something stirs – and Europe inevitably will follow wherever America leads. But for now, the hawks remain firmly in ‘the chair’ (in the U.S., in London, Poland, the EU Commission and in Kiev).

The big question, however, is why Moscow would take such a ‘way out’ (even if it was offered it). A compromise deal would be seen there as simply Kiev given the chance to regroup, and to try again.

Source:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/05/30/disquiet-at-davos-and-unsaid-fear-of-failure-the-first-shoots-of-us-ukraine-shift/

Attributed to Alistaire Crooke former diplomat

[Azeem]

DC think tanks are fully capable of starting another world war. 

[Azeem]

Donetsk's government has given two British and one other foreign fighter death sentences.

[OrangeKhrush]

NBC putting out a hit piece on "very liberal" eye witness reporter who has been in Ukraine since day 0 and has shown that not everything we get shown has been true.

[RandoEFC+]

 

Painful reading.

[Azeem]

If people start seeing this as a great patriotic war then yes that poll is understandable, sadly 

[OrangeKhrush]

Europe is urging ceasefire.  Ukraine are unable to push back and now running low on men and weapons.

[Waylander]

Following on from last week's piece on Davos and Kissinger.

Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase updated his risk of the financial scene from stormy nine days ago to Hurricane. He added the Bank is preparing itself for 'a non-benign environment and bad outcomes' 

The Wests fiat currencies risk a mjaor upset if the commodity based nations come together.

Higher interest rates following sactions to Russia  are making the debt based Western currencies in danger of financial collapse as they are already over leveraged.

His view as senior exec of the US major commercial bank was moderated by Bruce Kasman as chief economist of JP Morgan as a slow down ahead.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/protection-currency-collapse