barbos
Contributor
That's ironic. I think the same about you.
-
Features
How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?
- Thread starter Harry Bosch
- Start date
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
I'm not sure what barbos meant, either. Putin was facing opposition in 2011 and claimed that Hillary Clinton was a kind of outside agitator who supported the opposition against him. He got payback in 2016, when Russia helped Trump get elected by dumping hacked emails at strategic times during her election campaign. So, if Putin's claim had an ounce of truth to it, she was a "help" to his re-election by actually trying to be a hindrance. Generally speaking, most of the world took Putin's criticism of Clinton as a gratuitous attempt to blame his troubles on foreign influence, and that may have helped his campaign within Russia. If one really believed that the US really did stoke up his opposition, then one could see her alleged meddling would be seen as helping him. Maybe that is what barbos is trying to claim? Anyway, Putin pretty much engineered his own takeover of the Russian Federation, beginning with his successful effort to get Yeltsin to resign abruptly on New Year's Eve in 1999. Years later he changed their constitution to make himself essentially President for Life, assuming that he can control the election machinery.
See: Vladimir Putin's Bad Blood With Hillary Clinton
Elixir
Made in America
Unresponsive. I guess you don't know jack about your own country either.
FYI, the Russian people re-elected Yeltsin.
If you disagree, you should explain why, and how someone else ("Murka"?) put him in office, and how their interference is responsible for your current leader. Otherwise there is no discussion here and you're wasting everyone's time.
If you can't explain how Americans elected Yeltsin, by all means go ahead and pretend America is all that is wrong with Russia.
You might start by blaming George Washington for Catherine the Great.
Elixir
Made in America
Yeah, that was all I could come up with too. Kinda like the faux Democrats who say AOC is a great asset for Republicans.
I guess the takeaway is that Democrats should only nominate people of whom Putin and his Republicans approve.
This isn't really a secret. Actual collusion. I liked Yeltsin, glad he won, but no need to bury history.
RESCUING BORIS
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
Speaking of not burying history, we are coming up on the 8th anniversary of Yanukovych fleeing Kyiv to go into exile in Russia (February 22, 2014). Russian soldiers without insignias took control of Crimea on March 1, 2014, triggering the Russo-Ukraine war that has become the topic of this thread.
The Euromaidan revolution (aka
Revolution of Victory) had lasted three months--from November 2013 thru February 2014. It became extremely violent. Over 125 people were confirmed killed, 18 of whom were police. Yanukovych employed special police forces Berkut and undercover agents provocateurs known in Ukraine as Titushky to brutalize the protesters.
For those who have a Netflix subscription, you can watch a brilliant documentary on the Euromaidan called Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom. It was nominated for an Academy Award and Emmy but lost to competing documentaries. Nevertheless, it has stunning footage and interviews with protesters from all walks of life. The courage of the citizens is absolutely stunning in the face of brutal attacks by Yanukovych's Berkut and the Titushky. The protests grew primarily because of the brutal violence that killed and wounded so many (almost 2000). One of the protest leaders was even stripped naked and displayed to the crowd in an attempt to humiliate him and frighten resisters. It only emboldened them. So did the fact that the Berkut attacked medics and destroyed medical facilities. Nothing would convince the protesters to leave.
Anyway, this documentary is obviously banned in Russia and shown everywhere in Ukraine, not to mention around the world (e.g. Hong Kong and anti-Maduro protests in Venezuela). It shows how Russian occupiers are likely to be met, if they do attempt to take over the country with a blitzkrieg. The Euromaidan happened in the dead of winter, and most of what evolved was completely spontaneous self-organization from all over Kyiv. The protesters spoke mostly Russian, but there was also a lot of Ukrainian. There were pro-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists trying to take advantage of the protest, but they were marginal. Such groups always show up at any protest they think they can gain recruits from. The documentary itself does not comment on their presence, although their symbols were on display in a few scenes. Russian propaganda has tried to exaggerate their role in overthrowing Yanukovych.
The Euromaidan revolution (aka
Revolution of Victory) had lasted three months--from November 2013 thru February 2014. It became extremely violent. Over 125 people were confirmed killed, 18 of whom were police. Yanukovych employed special police forces Berkut and undercover agents provocateurs known in Ukraine as Titushky to brutalize the protesters.For those who have a Netflix subscription, you can watch a brilliant documentary on the Euromaidan called Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom. It was nominated for an Academy Award and Emmy but lost to competing documentaries. Nevertheless, it has stunning footage and interviews with protesters from all walks of life. The courage of the citizens is absolutely stunning in the face of brutal attacks by Yanukovych's Berkut and the Titushky. The protests grew primarily because of the brutal violence that killed and wounded so many (almost 2000). One of the protest leaders was even stripped naked and displayed to the crowd in an attempt to humiliate him and frighten resisters. It only emboldened them. So did the fact that the Berkut attacked medics and destroyed medical facilities. Nothing would convince the protesters to leave.
Anyway, this documentary is obviously banned in Russia and shown everywhere in Ukraine, not to mention around the world (e.g. Hong Kong and anti-Maduro protests in Venezuela). It shows how Russian occupiers are likely to be met, if they do attempt to take over the country with a blitzkrieg. The Euromaidan happened in the dead of winter, and most of what evolved was completely spontaneous self-organization from all over Kyiv. The protesters spoke mostly Russian, but there was also a lot of Ukrainian. There were pro-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists trying to take advantage of the protest, but they were marginal. Such groups always show up at any protest they think they can gain recruits from. The documentary itself does not comment on their presence, although their symbols were on display in a few scenes. Russian propaganda has tried to exaggerate their role in overthrowing Yanukovych.
Last edited:
barbos
Contributor
Yes, plus all future oligarchs were promised rights on privatization (also known as theft) if they donate money and efforts for his campaign.
Imagine if that happened in US. looser would cry bloody murder. And even then, it's not all that clear that Eltsin won, some say Zyuganov actually won but results were falsified. There was no way to verify.
US media always support US foreign shenanigans - Iraq War, Libya, Bombing of Yugoslavia, Cuba, Central America, Pinochet for fuck's sake. All that shit, and somehow what US does with Russia is right and everyone supports it unconditionally.
Free press is not worth a shit when it comes to foreign affairs. They all lie, literally lie.
And why would not they? what benefits telling the truth has? none.
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
The US and EU played a minor role in the Euromaidan, which caught them by surprise, as well. They did try to engineer a diplomatic solution with the Yanukovych regime. The Verkhovna Rada had essentially given him dictatorial powers and passed laws trying to justify suppression of the protests. However, the revolution itself was entirely spontaneous and self-organized. The suppression tactics were so brutal that no diplomacy was going to be accepted by the crowd. Yanukovych even negotiated with the protesters and promised to hold another election in the following December. When that was presented to the crowd in exchange for going home, they immediately rejected it.
Harry Bosch
Contributor
The situation in Ukraine seems to be cooling down. Not sure why. I think that Biden must have said something to Putin to cool it a little. Secondly, could be that Putin is prioritizing the gas pipeline over Ukraine. Perhaps the thrill of taking Kazakhstan will satisfy Russian imperialistic feelings for a while. Either way, I fully expect Kazakhstan to be a relic of the past very shortly...
barbos
Contributor
Because your stupid media talks about it less, that's why.
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
I think that everyone is looking forward to what, if anything, will come out of the Geneva talks, so it is most likely that little will happen before then, outside of both sides preparing for conflict. Tomorrow is the Russian Orthodox celebration of Christmas, so we are also looking at a holiday weekend there.
What is happening in Kazakhstan bears some similarity to the Maidan uprising, and Putin is not going to risk another one of those succeeding in a former Soviet territory. Apparently, he is involving Armenia in the effort to put down a popular resistance that started with the government announcing fuel price hike a few days ago. The government there is trying a strict crackdown, which is what triggered the full-blown revolution in Ukraine. The one in Belarus failed, putting Lukashenko firmly in Putin's pocket. The Kazakhstan revolt is likely to result in that country sliding more firmly back under Russian dominance, but it is difficult for international monitors and news organizations to see what is happening. With Russian troops in the country, Putin will have firm control of yet another major supplier of fossil fuel to other countries, so prices of those commodities will probably ratchet up even more on the world market, helping Russia's economy.
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
It would seem that the Kazakhstan uprising is separate from Ukraine, but it really has become somewhat intertwined as the date for the Geneva meeting approaches. Russian troops have entered Kazakhstan, but as part of a "peacekeeping force" by an organization known as the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). This group is currently chaired by Armenia and includes Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. It was allegedly invited in by the local dictator Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, who replaced the tyrant Nursultan Nazarbayev in 2019. Nazarbayev became head of the Kazakh National Security organization and was said to have retained control of the country from that position. However, Tokayev has allegedly fired him and may have him under house arrest now.
On the face of it, the CSTO is supposed to maintain regional security, just as the Warsaw Pact did during the Cold War. Such organizations seem to be Russia's counterpart to regional security alliances like NATO, but there is one important difference. They don't seem to play any role in defending against foreign incursions. When Azerbaijan seized Armenian-held territory in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, the CSTO did not deploy troops there. Instead, Putin used his clout to negotiate a ceasefire, and Azerbaijan retained control of territory it had occupied. This, despite the fact that Armenia is a member of CSTO and Azerbaijan is not. In fact, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Belarus had left an earlier regional alliance with former CIS members and did not join CSTO in 2002.
So the CSTO operates something like the Warsaw Pact did. It doesn't really handle foreign threats. The one and only time that it has ever deployed troops to defend one of its members was just days ago--to help put down a domestic uprising. The Warsaw Pact military did that several times during the Cold War--particularly to put down an internal revolt in Czechoslovakia in 1968. The Red Army had earlier prevented a revolt in Hungary in 1956, where the rebels had declared they were withdrawing from the Warsaw Pact. NATO, whatever its faults, does not send troops into NATO countries in order to ensure that they remain in the alliance when there are local disturbances. It exists primarily to keep other nations from invading NATO members.
Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). This group is currently chaired by Armenia and includes Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. It was allegedly invited in by the local dictator Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, who replaced the tyrant Nursultan Nazarbayev in 2019. Nazarbayev became head of the Kazakh National Security organization and was said to have retained control of the country from that position. However, Tokayev has allegedly fired him and may have him under house arrest now.On the face of it, the CSTO is supposed to maintain regional security, just as the Warsaw Pact did during the Cold War. Such organizations seem to be Russia's counterpart to regional security alliances like NATO, but there is one important difference. They don't seem to play any role in defending against foreign incursions. When Azerbaijan seized Armenian-held territory in the 2020
Nagorno-Karabakh war, the CSTO did not deploy troops there. Instead, Putin used his clout to negotiate a ceasefire, and Azerbaijan retained control of territory it had occupied. This, despite the fact that Armenia is a member of CSTO and Azerbaijan is not. In fact, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Belarus had left an earlier regional alliance with former CIS members and did not join CSTO in 2002.So the CSTO operates something like the Warsaw Pact did. It doesn't really handle foreign threats. The one and only time that it has ever deployed troops to defend one of its members was just days ago--to help put down a domestic uprising. The Warsaw Pact military did that several times during the Cold War--particularly to put down an internal revolt in Czechoslovakia in 1968. The Red Army had earlier prevented a revolt in Hungary in 1956, where the rebels had declared they were withdrawing from the Warsaw Pact. NATO, whatever its faults, does not send troops into NATO countries in order to ensure that they remain in the alliance when there are local disturbances. It exists primarily to keep other nations from invading NATO members.
TV and credit cards
Contributor
Ukraine Prepares to Fight. - by Olga Tokariuk, independent journalist in Kyiv.
US small arms and ammo.
US small arms and ammo.
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
The diplomats are finally sitting down together to see what, if anything, can be worked out to stop the invasion. Russian troops are massed in Belarus, probably for a flanking operation on the front lines facing the Donbas. The troops in Crimea may try to establish a land passage back to Russian-held territory in Ukraine. It's probably unlikely that Russia will try to assault Odessa or Kyiv, but they are poised to slice off another large chunk of Ukrainian territory. Since Putin has doubled down on his demands, a diplomatic solution looks very unlikely right now. He has warned that the Geneva meeting could end quickly, but I would not be surprised if it didn't take place at all. If he intends to invade, he doesn't need any meeting except as a delaying tactic. If he can engineer a coup in Kyiv, then the union of Ukraine with Russia would be eerily similar to Hitler's Anschluss of Germany with Austria.
Anschluss of Germany with Austria.
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
Things are heating up now with a major cyber attack from Russia on Ukraine. I expect Russian cybercriminals will also be attacking the US, simultaneously with any military attack, especially when the inevitable sanctions from the West start coming into play. The latest intelligence announced by the White House is that Russia may be mounting a false flag exercise to produce an apparent attack from the Ukrainian side on Russian troops or Russian proxy troops in eastern Ukraine. That would be sold to the Russian public as the pretext for its military invasion.
See: White House: Russia prepping pretext for Ukraine invasion
Russian media are also stepping up their domestic propaganda campaign to vilify the Ukrainians as aggressors egged on by the West, which is supposedly hoping for a Russian invasion.
Although this activity may just be a clumsy attempt by Putin to extort concessions during negotiations, it is likely to stiffen resistance to any concession. So an invasion is becoming more likely now, since I don't see any other face-saving option for Putin. This is how things spin out of control. Once a war gets going, there will be all sorts of unexpected actions that could even take the war beyond the borders of Ukraine. Wars seldom go the way their planners intend.
See: White House: Russia prepping pretext for Ukraine invasion
Russian media are also stepping up their domestic propaganda campaign to vilify the Ukrainians as aggressors egged on by the West, which is supposedly hoping for a Russian invasion.
Although this activity may just be a clumsy attempt by Putin to extort concessions during negotiations, it is likely to stiffen resistance to any concession. So an invasion is becoming more likely now, since I don't see any other face-saving option for Putin. This is how things spin out of control. Once a war gets going, there will be all sorts of unexpected actions that could even take the war beyond the borders of Ukraine. Wars seldom go the way their planners intend.
Elixir
Made in America
All this posturing solely for the benefit of the Russian public?
Pootey must really be feeling the heat. It’s not like anyone outside Russia is gonna have a hard time discerning that the fake “Ukrainian attack” was Russia’s own doing to provide a pretext.
Pootey must really be feeling the heat. It’s not like anyone outside Russia is gonna have a hard time discerning that the fake “Ukrainian attack” was Russia’s own doing to provide a pretext.
Sad but true. But no American should die for this.
TV and credit cards
Contributor
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
Thanks for the video link. Well worth the listen.
Absent some big concession at the negotiating table, I don't see how Putin can stop himself from some kind of military action just to save face. Even if Putin gets a face-saving way out, he'll only be back at it later. This is so similar to what Hitler did with Chamberlain and the
Munich Agreement. That, too, was about claiming territory based on ethnicity, but Hitler got the concessions he sought. Czechoslovakia was forced to capitulate. Nevertheless, Hitler went on to annex all of Czechoslovakia, not just the Sudetenland, and plunge Europe into war anyway. Putin wants Ukraine back under Russian control, but he wants more than that. He wants the Soviet empire back and revenge for its collapse. So I don't think he would be content with a NATO pullback and getting Nord Stream 2 approved. Without NATO membership, the Baltics and former eastern European satellites would also be under pressure to comply with his demands.Harry Bosch
Contributor
It does appear that armed conflict can't be avoided. Putin has pushed himself into a corner that he can't escape from. Putin is supposed to be this great chessmaster, expertly maneuvering countries and naive US and European politicians into doing his bidding. And yet his main policy, to weaken Nato and grow the Russian zone of influence over the Eastern block is failing. Poland, Sweden, Finland and others are all moving more and more away from Russia.
Story on Finland and how they are reacting to Russia:
www.newsweek.com
It appears that Germany is also willing to make Russia pay if it invades:
Germany has great leverage due to Nord2.
I think that the most likely scenario, is that Putin invades the eastern parts of Ukraine then stops. The west will enact severe economic sanctions. But the end result will be a strengthened Nato and a strengthened resolve of the former soviet bloc countries to unite to blunt Russia and move further westward.
Story on Finland and how they are reacting to Russia:
Amid Russian-Ukrainian Tensions, Neighbor Finland Reaffirms NATO Stance
"Finland does not discuss with NATO joining it, nor does Finland have such a project upcoming," Finnish Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto said.
www.newsweek.com
It appears that Germany is also willing to make Russia pay if it invades:
Germany has great leverage due to Nord2.
I think that the most likely scenario, is that Putin invades the eastern parts of Ukraine then stops. The west will enact severe economic sanctions. But the end result will be a strengthened Nato and a strengthened resolve of the former soviet bloc countries to unite to blunt Russia and move further westward.