Putin Invades Ukraine II

[dualstow]

There’s no doubt that Putin is highly intelligent. Just like Castro was.
The thing about these guys is that they don’t give a second thought to the happiness of their own subjects.

I might worry when people stop flocking to the US, UK, France from the rest of the world. How many people are dying to live in Russia or China beyond the odd journalist or language student?

The losers of this war are of course Ukrainian civilians.

[boglerdude]

> what we had was reliability of our governance and our currency

and...the Nimitz + Gerald Ford class.

I dunno if Putin has the tech for this drone war. He might need to nuke something to stop NATO pushing East.

Would China like to annex Russian land, or do they have their hands full with the real estate + demographics deflation.

Thousands in camps https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/ ... 40719.html

Are there American politicians who envy that power?

[ppnewbie]

There’s no doubt that Putin is highly intelligent. Just like Castro was.
The thing about these guys is that they don’t give a second thought to the happiness of their own subjects.

I might worry when people stop flocking to the US, UK, France from the rest of the world. How many people are dying to live in Russia or China beyond the odd journalist or language student?

The losers of this war are of course Ukrainian civilians.

Good points. And yours too @boglerdude.

[Kbg]

While people like to throw out Afghanistan and Iraq as "whatabouts" the facts are that both had internationally recognized sanction to do so.

To do so… i can’t tell from your sentence if there was international agreement to invade, to condemn the invasions, or to mark the invasions as whataboutism in the context of Ukraine. Throw out as in give an example or throw out as in discard/discount?

Back to Ukraine:
Train station bombed in Kramatorsk, Eastern Ukraine yesterday. Of course the Russians deny the allegation.
Is it legally a war crime? Don’t know. But, 50+ civilians were killed.
Wiki\Kramatorsk railway station attack

For Afghanistan there's no question we were legally covered so no comment.

Iraq is more iffy. Here's a bunch of articles to review if one is interested (I'm not.) http://www.hrcr.org/hottopics/Iraq.html
I'm on record as saying I don't think the invasion of Iraq was a great idea. I'm not a lawyer nor do I pretend to be one...it appears to me that we can safely say legally it is disputed and the case was not compelling and largely fell apart when WMDs were not discovered. For whatever it's worth, I'd love to see someone make the case that Zelensky is as remotely bad as Saddam was. I'd also like to see someone make the case Iraq isn't a better place today. (Editorial comment...I wouldn't waste me time. You'll be on the losing end of that debate.)

Probably the most challenging part of the laws of arm conflict is what is known as proportionality. Basically proportionality requires the military gain from striking a military target be greater than the associated human loss/suffering. Obviously that is completely in the eye of the beholder and ultimately the victor gets to decide if it was or wasn't.

I think everyone should be completely clear of the fact that armed conflict generally decides things at least in the short to medium term. So all the other stuff is interesting but to a degree irrelevant. The Law of Armed Conflict is/was a mechanism to put some dampening effect on it's brutality...but if you win it's highly likely no one is hauling any of your soldiers to the Hague.

Professionally, good militaries know it is in their own best interest to try to mitigate human suffering and particularly if you are the invader. At this point in time I don't see Ukraine ending for the Russians at all. They've ticked off way too many Ukrainians and most of the west because of the fact they invaded and how they are fighting the war.

[dualstow]

Gotcha. Thank you for the follow-up.
(Off topic but for what it’s worth I’ve got a good friend from Iraq who moved to the States as a direct result of the invasion. He definitely has mixed feelings. For him, Iraq is “broken” and will probably not be whole again in his lifetime. On the other hand, he’s building a good life here).

[vnatale]

Gotcha. Thank you for the follow-up.
(Off topic but for what it’s worth I’ve got a good friend from Iraq who moved to the States as a direct result of the invasion. He definitely has mixed feelings. For him, Iraq is “broken” and will probably not be whole again in his lifetime. On the other hand, he’s building a good life here).

Same here. One New Year's Eve not long ago I met a young woman from Iraq who stated that life for her and her family was much better pre-invasion of Iraq.

[Kbg]

Gotcha. Thank you for the follow-up.
(Off topic but for what it’s worth I’ve got a good friend from Iraq who moved to the States as a direct result of the invasion. He definitely has mixed feelings. For him, Iraq is “broken” and will probably not be whole again in his lifetime. On the other hand, he’s building a good life here).

My entire mid-east experience was generally not a positive one. I think the middle east was broken before we got there and it is still broken. At some point in time you have to look in the mirror and face up to the fact that not everything jacked up in your country is/was due to European/US imperialism/military actions. Some of the most democratic, well functioning countries in the world are a direct product of British imperialism?

It took me a while to figure something out but I think worth commenting on here...Americans as a whole are a very self-centric lot. American or foreign reporters love to find (smart) Arabs who will blame everything on the US and then we feel guilty about it. But the smart American will ask themselves...why is that Arab guy/gal blaming history for a "now" thing?

No doubt we did hard break the previous governmental structure of Iraq and we did so in hind site on inaccurate reasons. But the facts on the ground are this...tyrannical brutal dictatorship gone, former religious minority control (based solely on force) also gone. Replaced by religious majority control that is power shared with Iraq's largest non-Arab ethnic group. All the above hugely shaped by Iran next door. Finally, they also have elections that actually mean something and have an impact.

You tell me, better, worse, or no real change essentially?

[vnatale]

Gotcha. Thank you for the follow-up.
(Off topic but for what it’s worth I’ve got a good friend from Iraq who moved to the States as a direct result of the invasion. He definitely has mixed feelings. For him, Iraq is “broken” and will probably not be whole again in his lifetime. On the other hand, he’s building a good life here).

My entire mid-east experience was generally not a positive one. I think the middle east was broken before we got there and it is still broken. At some point in time you have to look in the mirror and face up to the fact that not everything jacked up in your country is/was due to European/US imperialism/military actions. Some of the most democratic, well functioning countries in the world are a direct product of British imperialism?

It took me a while to figure something out but I think worth commenting on here...Americans as a whole are a very self-centric lot. American or foreign reporters love to find (smart) Arabs who will blame everything on the US and then we feel guilty about it. But the smart American will ask themselves...why is that Arab guy/gal blaming history for a "now" thing?

No doubt we did hard break the previous governmental structure of Iraq and we did so in hind site on inaccurate reasons. But the facts on the ground are this...tyrannical brutal dictatorship gone, former religious minority control (based solely on force) also gone. Replaced by religious majority control that is power shared with Iraq's largest non-Arab ethnic group. All the above hugely shaped by Iran next door. Finally, they also have elections that actually mean something and have an impact.

You tell me, better, worse, or no real change essentially?

The way you put it...it seems better.

However, what about the costs to get there?

An often quote amount is 100,000 Iraq lives. What would that in our country prorated to how larger population (being a self-centric American, myself!)?

[Kbg]

Gotcha. Thank you for the follow-up.
(Off topic but for what it’s worth I’ve got a good friend from Iraq who moved to the States as a direct result of the invasion. He definitely has mixed feelings. For him, Iraq is “broken” and will probably not be whole again in his lifetime. On the other hand, he’s building a good life here).

My entire mid-east experience was generally not a positive one. I think the middle east was broken before we got there and it is still broken. At some point in time you have to look in the mirror and face up to the fact that not everything jacked up in your country is/was due to European/US imperialism/military actions. Some of the most democratic, well functioning countries in the world are a direct product of British imperialism?

It took me a while to figure something out but I think worth commenting on here...Americans as a whole are a very self-centric lot. American or foreign reporters love to find (smart) Arabs who will blame everything on the US and then we feel guilty about it. But the smart American will ask themselves...why is that Arab guy/gal blaming history for a "now" thing?

No doubt we did hard break the previous governmental structure of Iraq and we did so in hind site on inaccurate reasons. But the facts on the ground are this...tyrannical brutal dictatorship gone, former religious minority control (based solely on force) also gone. Replaced by religious majority control that is power shared with Iraq's largest non-Arab ethnic group. All the above hugely shaped by Iran next door. Finally, they also have elections that actually mean something and have an impact.

You tell me, better, worse, or no real change essentially?

The way you put it...it seems better.

However, what about the costs to get there?

An often quote amount is 100,000 Iraq lives. What would that in our country prorated to how larger population (being a self-centric American, myself!)?

Again, I didn't think the invasion was a good decision so I'm not going to defend it. I do think any discussion should look at the good and the bad of the aftermath. On casualties, I'm relatively certain (though I don't know the details) that a majority and perhaps a large majority, post invasion combat actions, were a result of political violence (Iraqi on Iraqi) vs. US military forces. Unfortunately urban combat, both in Iraq and Ukraine is a really bad deal for civilians that remain.

Lastly, innocent people getting killed in wars is always a bad thing. Doing one's best to avoid those deaths is always noble and good. Unfortunately, civilians getting killed in wars is a fact of war and if one's personal standard is none, they are going to be in for a lot of disappointment. I would also add the same applies to most combatants many of whom would rather not have their lives at risk either.

[dualstow]

ok, we're way off topic here. I'm not going to move the posts above, but how about we continue over here for non-Ukraine stuff

[I Shrugged]

So on the false flag idea....

I don't think the various atrocities are false flags by the Ukes. But when I apply the cui bono test, the Uke government benefits more than the Russian. Arguably it hurts the Russian efforts, although they might not think so. That's an important test. Heck it even has a cool Latin name.

And undoubtedly there have been false flags in war before. So who knows. I'll stick with the mainstream on this, though. I just don't want to think the other way.

[Dieter]

So on the false flag idea....

I don't think the various atrocities are false flags by the Ukes. But when I apply the cui bono test, the Uke government benefits more than the Russian. Arguably it hurts the Russian efforts, although they might not think so. That's an important test. Heck it even has a cool Latin name.

And undoubtedly there have been false flags in war before. So who knows. I'll stick with the mainstream on this, though. I just don't want to think the other way.

I think Ukraine leadership would know that they have more to lose than win by false flag operations — they are winning the messaging war

Can’t guarantee no idiot on the ground

Or Russian agent pretending to be a Ukrainian Nazi

But can’t see it being organized by Ukrainian leadership

[Dieter]

I wish Biden would call up Zelinsky and tell him to end the war. 72 hours later it would be over (IMHO). But the US and Europe would have to eat some crow. Give up some regions, reverse sanctions, return seized stuff. Shake Putins hand, retract war criminal statements, remove Ukraine from consideration of NATO membership. Internally, stop trying to regime change anything in that region. I don’t see that happening based on the foolish (again IMHO) escalation in rhetoric by the west. You can use calmer words that do not force you and the entire world into a bad hand.

Help me out here. “Give up some regions” means what? How much of the Ukraine should be carved up and handed to Putin on a platter to reward him for invading another sovereign nation? I’m of the belief that it wouldn’t appease him for long. In fact fact, I’m quite sure he’d be more emboldened than ever before to invade other parts of Europe, but I’m still curious about the details you have in mind.

I’m not OP, but Peter Zeihans take seems plausible — to paraphrase (probably badly), Russia wants a defensible border that is under their dominion

Basically , all that was part of the Warsaw Pact.

Plus maybe Finland and Sweden now that they are being upitty and talking about joining NATO

Then they have decent borders

Except China, but have told China that Russia would go nuclear if China invaded

(And the wests actions didnt cause this. Mongol, French, German and other historical invasions and geography )

I think that would be a pretty horrible world if it came to pass.

[dualstow]

…
I’m not OP, but Peter Zeihans take seems plausible — to paraphrase (probably badly), Russia wants a defensible border that is under their dominion

Basically , all that was part of the Warsaw Pact.
…

I really need to read his Accidental Superpower. Haven’t seen his take on the current war.

[I Shrugged]

Excerpt from Glenn Greenwald's article today on censorship & propaganda in this war. I don't have a link, it's on Substack though. I just get an email with no link. On one hand, I get the de-platforming of RT News and Sputnik. But on the other, it feels sinister.

If one wishes to be exposed to news, information or perspective that contravenes the prevailing US/NATO view on the war in Ukraine, a rigorous search is required. And there is no guarantee that search will succeed. That is because the state/corporate censorship regime that has been imposed in the West with regard to this war is stunningly aggressive, rapid and comprehensive.

On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet. In early March, barely a week after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the twenty-seven nation European Union — citing "disinformation” and “public order and security” — officially banned the Russian state-news outlets RT and Sputnik from being heard anywhere in Europe. In what Reuters called “an unprecedented move,” all television and online platforms were barred by force of law from airing content from those two outlets. Even prior to that censorship order from the state, Facebook and Google were already banning those outlets, and Twitter immediately announced they would as well, in compliance with the new EU law.

[foglifter]

Excerpt from Glenn Greenwald's article today on censorship & propaganda in this war. I don't have a link, it's on Substack though. I just get an email with no link. On one hand, I get the de-platforming of RT News and Sputnik. But on the other, it feels sinister.

If one wishes to be exposed to news, information or perspective that contravenes the prevailing US/NATO view on the war in Ukraine, a rigorous search is required. And there is no guarantee that search will succeed. That is because the state/corporate censorship regime that has been imposed in the West with regard to this war is stunningly aggressive, rapid and comprehensive.

On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet. In early March, barely a week after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the twenty-seven nation European Union — citing "disinformation” and “public order and security” — officially banned the Russian state-news outlets RT and Sputnik from being heard anywhere in Europe. In what Reuters called “an unprecedented move,” all television and online platforms were barred by force of law from airing content from those two outlets. Even prior to that censorship order from the state, Facebook and Google were already banning those outlets, and Twitter immediately announced they would as well, in compliance with the new EU law.

Here's the link: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/wester ... ato-policy
The full text is only available to subscribers though.

Glenn Greenwald is one of the few journalists that are brave enough to go against the mainstream point of view. He was one of the three reporters that interviewed Snowden in Hong Kong.

[Dieter]

…
I’m not OP, but Peter Zeihans take seems plausible — to paraphrase (probably badly), Russia wants a defensible border that is under their dominion

Basically , all that was part of the Warsaw Pact.
…

I really need to read his Accidental Superpower. Haven’t seen his take on the current war.

I need to read some of his stuff

I think this is a video interview of him I saw (no idea about the channel) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8o-nPyPlBdw

[Kbg]

I’m not OP, but Peter Zeihans take seems plausible — to paraphrase (probably badly), Russia wants a defensible border that is under their dominion

Let's cut to the chase of this entire thing.

I’m not OP, but Peter Zeihans take seems plausible — to paraphrase (probably badly), Russia wants a defensible border that is under their dominion

It's no more complex than the large font.

[dualstow]

Everybody knows it by now but for the record, the Russian navy’s flagship cruiser, Moskva has sunk.

The Ukrainians claim to have hit it with a cruise missile. This has not been independently confirmed. Not yet, anyway. Some ammunition on the ship exploded, and the vessel sank from structural damage while being towed to port.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_cruiser_Moskva

[dualstow]

Ok, since My Lai seems like it won’t meander back to Ukraine but instead become its own topic, it has its own space.
If necessary, can combine Iraq, Vietnam, etc for all our off-topic America-bashing needs.

[dualstow]

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov admitted Thursday that the Russians deliberately targeted the maternity hospital in Mariupol.

- https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ukrain ... 1646953225

[dualstow]

Who's a war criminal depends on who wins. Or on who's doing the judging.

I wouldn't argue your point, there's some definite truth to it.

However, that doesn't mean it still isn't a good idea and legal process to hold people and countries accountable. It definitely shapes how war is conducted and is a moderating influence on an elsewise very unmoderated human activity. It is likely Putin will never be held accountable for his decision to invade Ukraine with zero legal cover. While people like to throw out Afghanistan and Iraq as "whatabouts" the facts are that both had internationally recognized sanction to do so.

While it is likely Putin will never be held accountable at the Hague, I doubt he's ever leaving Russia again in his lifetime if he is criminally charged.

Unfortunately there's quite a bit of nuance in what is and isn't considered lawful that would be good if it was more broadly known in the general public. News sources rarely if ever get or understand what is and is not an actual war crime.

I wonder if the slaughter of civilians such as what which occurred at Bucha will increasingly be seen as something like mustard gas. Something to be unambiguously outlawed in writing.

[ppnewbie]

I think that America can be foolish if it has no costs. But I am fearing for millions of people - famine - collapses of society with scarce energy. I think we are getting much closer to sacrificing our own loved ones or ourselves for Ukraine than we think.

We made a mess. We installed a clown. This time a nuclear bomb can hit any NATO country or the US. Biden keeps upping the Ante. It feels like he is unaware that this could be world war three over….Ukraine. I hear Russian state media is even calling it World War Three.

[dualstow]

I thought Russian media were avoiding the word “war” altogether and instead calling it a “special operation.”

[Dieter]

I think that America can be foolish if it has no costs. But I am fearing for millions of people - famine - collapses of society with scarce energy. I think we are getting much closer to sacrificing our own loved ones or ourselves for Ukraine than we think.

We made a mess. We installed a clown. This time a nuclear bomb can hit any NATO country or the US. Biden keeps upping the Ante. It feels like he is unaware that this could be world war three over….Ukraine. I hear Russian state media is even calling it World War Three.

I don't see Russia stopping in Ukraine

If they had gotten Ukraine easily, LOTS more leverage for things like Food and Energy production

Either way, there would be impacts