How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Jayjay]

So it's confirmed to be bullshit.

No, it is not. It was real poll.

And I have a really hot girlfriend, but you wouldn't know that because she lives in Canada.

I gave you a link to a real poll that shows a different result. You haven't given any reason to think that the phantom poll that shows "Crimea was Russian". And Alex Christoforou is a known liar and a shill for Kremlin so even if such a poll did exist, he's probably misrepresenting it.

 

[Jayjay]

If it was a surprise to anyone, UN concludes that Olenivka prison bombing was a Russian false-flag operation:

UN says Ukrainian POWs in Donetsk not killed by rocket, as Russia claimed

The U.N. human rights chief on Tuesday called for accountability for the deaths of at least 50 Ukrainian prisoners of war last year in an explosion in a Donetsk region detention facility, rejecting Moscow's claim that they were killed by a rocket.

www.reuters.com

Russia didn't let UN inspect the site, but they did let Steven Seagal do it.

 

[barbos]

And I have a really hot girlfriend, but you wouldn't know that because she lives in Canada.

That's not impossible. On the other hand, poll does exist and it WAS conducted by regime in Washington in preparation for the nazi coup in 2014 in Ukraine. It's impossible for that poll to not exist. Alex has shown pages of that report it in his youtube.

I gave you a link to a real poll that shows a different result

No, you did not. There have never been any polls showing that Crimea was Ukraine.
there are polls showing different support of Russianness but ukrainness has always been close to zero,

 

[barbos]

If it was a surprise to anyone, UN concludes that Olenivka prison bombing was a Russian false-flag operation:

UN says Ukrainian POWs in Donetsk not killed by rocket, as Russia claimed

The U.N. human rights chief on Tuesday called for accountability for the deaths of at least 50 Ukrainian prisoners of war last year in an explosion in a Donetsk region detention facility, rejecting Moscow's claim that they were killed by a rocket.

www.reuters.com

Russia didn't let UN inspect the site, but they did let Steven Seagal do it.

Are these the same guys who say one thing and then next day after meeting with Washinton Regime representatives say another?

It said that it has not identified the source of the explosion but would continue to follow up on the incident.

[removed]

As for these UN scambags, they are the same people who say "We don't know who is bombing nuclear plant"
translations: "We can't say it's Ukraine"

This is the usual "shit on the wall" technique the western propaganda uses. They used it in Nord Stream bombing, they used in Alfa Bank scam, and in RussiaGate in general.

 

[barbos]

You wanted to talk about Jeffrey Sachs. He quit in 1993, and his criticism is about IMF not backing Russian economy enough in 1991-1992. You claimed that this was because Americans "wanted Russians to die"

Yes, what does the date of his quitting has to do with anything?
He suggested treating Russia the same way as Poland. And he was replied "No way"
What's is your problem with this fact?
Yes, Bush Sr was an asshole. People on record telling him "we need to show some real good will toward russians", to which he replied "We fucking won Cold War!!!!!"

 

[barbos]

I honestly don't understand this insistence on all these lies.
I understand why western establishment does that. They have to, otherwise they will become history, all their careers will be destroyed.
Why random people here insist on every single bit of this retarded narrative CNN pushes?

 

[TV and credit cards]

I don't know what Wagner is going to attack anybody with. They left all their armament behind in Russia. Unless Belarus is bursting at the seams with surplus.

Presumably, they would be armed, resupplied, and directed from Moscow. That assumes that corrupt individuals won't steal everything before it reaches them. Putin really needs the Wagnerites back working for him.

I think Putin is losing his grip on power, if only somewhat. I read these events as Lukashenko and Prigozhin flexing a bit and Putin having to accept it, putting a good public face on it. Putin must be debating whether or not rearming Wagner is in his best interest. They are closer to Moscow now than they were being stationed in Russia by half.

It looks like the Russian State Duma is making sure a PMC as strong as Wagner does not happen again, ensuring PMCs are decentralized, operate under internal security, and are answerable to the Kremlin. Prigozhin's march on Moscow scared the shit out of Putin. Of note, no orders were issued from the Kremlin while it was happening, regional officials had to go it alone in how to respond or not. Why no orders? Because the worst thing that can happen to a leader is to issue direct orders and have them disobeyed. It is a direct and clear message. It could have exacerbated the problem.
Further Wagner looks to still be a hot topic between Putin and Lukashenko. They had an extended meeting in St. Petersburg supposedly to get everyone on the same page in their struggle against the evil NATO regime. Or maybe... Lukashenko and Prigozhin smell blood in the water; the weakness of the Putin regime, poor morale of the military, and took much notice of the paralysis during the Wagner rebellion. So while paying Putin lip service, they are keeping in mind there may be a bigger prize to collect if Putin has to go all in.

 

[Gospel]

Translation:

There was Putin, immersed in a metaphorical game of tag with the PMC. He was pulling all the strings he could, moving as swiftly as a marmot , yet he couldn't quite outmaneuver them. The seed of frustration began to grow within him, sprouting an innovative idea. "Hold on a moment comrade," he asserted, "I've got a proposition. Let's adjust the rules. If you tag me, you have to pause and allow me to tag you back." The PMC looked at him with a touch of perplexity. "What? Why should we accept this change?" they inquired. "Call it an equality measure," Putin proposed. "I'm not the grandmaster of this game, so a bit of a handicap wouldn't be amiss." The PMC, after a moment of contemplation, broke into laughter. "Fine comrade," they relented. "We'll let you tag us back," they agreed, smirking, "But be warned, Comrade Putin, the next time we tag you, it'll be as gentle as a Siberian bear hug!"

 

[Jayjay]

And I have a really hot girlfriend, but you wouldn't know that because she lives in Canada.

That's not impossible. On the other hand, poll does exist and it WAS conducted by regime in Washington in preparation for the nazi coup in 2014 in Ukraine. It's impossible for that poll to not exist. Alex has shown pages of that report it in his youtube.

I'm not saying the poll does not exist, I'm saying you haven't linked to the poll, or given enough information to find it. Saying that it is on some know propagandists's youtube video somewhere is not enough. I'm not going to watch hours of his drivel just to find that it was misrepresented.

So cough up the link or concede you don't have it.

I gave you a link to a real poll that shows a different result

No, you did not.

You are replying to the post where I provided the link, so either you don't read or you have the memory of a gold fish. In case it's the latter, here it is again:

Utter bullshit. US conducted the poll in Ukraine before the nazi coup - it showed clearly that Crimea is Russia.

So no source for this poll? Sounds like bullshit.

Reputable polls conducted in Ukraine and Crimea prior to Russian annexation have shown that a considerable portion of the population there wanted to join Russia, but not the majority. In the poll conducted in 2014 (i.e. after Maidan, but before Russian annexation), 41% were of this opinion. Also, this number went up from 36% since 2013.

News - How relations between Ukraine and Russia should look like? Public opinion polls’ results

www.kiis.com.ua

There have never been any polls showing that Crimea was Ukraine.
there are polls showing different support of Russianness but ukrainness has always been close to zero,

All the way back in 1992 Crimea voted to be part of Ukraine, so that's obviously a lie.

And like the KIIS polls show majority of Crimeans never wanted to join Russia. Here is another one, commissioned by IRI and USAID in 2013:

https://www.iri.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/201320October20720Survey20of20Crimean20Public20Opinion2C20May2016-302C202013.pdf

People who considered ("Regardless of your passport, what do you consider yourself?") themselves Ukrainian was around 15%, not "close to zero". And number of people who consider themselves Russian going down from 45% in 2011 to 40% in 2013. So it's clear that Crimea didn't want to be part of Russia, and a majority of the people before Maidan didn't even identify as Russian. This is not to say that they weren't speaking Russian, or ethnic Russians (59% according to the poll)... but not all of them self-identified as such, instead preferring to be "Crimeans".

And in the same poll, only 23% said that Crimea should be separate from Ukraine and given to Russia... which means that not even all Russians in Crimea wanted the annexation.

So, I've got two separate polls now that disagree with your allegation that "Crimea was Russia" or ever wanted to be part of Russia. You've given zero polls that show otherwise.

 

[Jayjay]

You wanted to talk about Jeffrey Sachs. He quit in 1993, and his criticism is about IMF not backing Russian economy enough in 1991-1992. You claimed that this was because Americans "wanted Russians to die"

Yes, what does the date of his quitting has to do with anything?
He suggested treating Russia the same way as Poland. And he was replied "No way"
What's is your problem with this fact?

Well the US didn't owe Poland anything either. And there are a million reasons that could explain why Poland was a success, and Russia (or any of the former soviet republics) weren't. One being size and the fact that Poland was less corrupt to begin with. Jeffrey Sachs may have a point that pouring more money into Russia could have helped, but we can't rewind history and say that this would have been enough to change anything, and it's still a fact that it was Russia who got itself into that mess, and failed to pull itself out of it. Yeltsin didn't have to listen to the American advisers and Chubais didn't have to go about the privatization the way he did. They fucked it up all by themselves.

As for Jeffrey Sachs quitting, it shows the timeline that he is talking about and when, according to his argument, the money would have been needed: 1992 to 1993. Bringing up McCain's or Graham's animosity towards Putin's Russian in 2000s is completely irrelevant.

If there is any lesson to be learned here, it's that skimping out on money for Ukraine would probably be a bad idea. The west didn't support Russia enough in the 1990s, which caused problems down the line. The same mistake shouldn't be repeated with Ukraine and we should give them everything they need to win or at least survive the war, and to rebuild afterwards.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't know what Wagner is going to attack anybody with. They left all their armament behind in Russia. Unless Belarus is bursting at the seams with surplus.

Presumably, they would be armed, resupplied, and directed from Moscow. That assumes that corrupt individuals won't steal everything before it reaches them. Putin really needs the Wagnerites back working for him.

I think Putin is losing his grip on power, if only somewhat. I read these events as Lukashenko and Prigozhin flexing a bit and Putin having to accept it, putting a good public face on it. Putin must be debating whether or not rearming Wagner is in his best interest. They are closer to Moscow now than they were being stationed in Russia by half.

It looks like the Russian State Duma is making sure a PMC as strong as Wagner does not happen again, ensuring PMCs are decentralized, operate under internal security, and are answerable to the Kremlin. Prigozhin's march on Moscow scared the shit out of Putin. Of note, no orders were issued from the Kremlin while it was happening, regional officials had to go it alone in how to respond or not. Why no orders? Because the worst thing that can happen to a leader is to issue direct orders and have them disobeyed. It is a direct and clear message. It could have exacerbated the problem.
Further Wagner looks to still be a hot topic between Putin and Lukashenko. They had an extended meeting in St. Petersburg supposedly to get everyone on the same page in their struggle against the evil NATO regime. Or maybe... Lukashenko and Prigozhin smell blood in the water; the weakness of the Putin regime, poor morale of the military, and took much notice of the paralysis during the Wagner rebellion. So while paying Putin lip service, they are keeping in mind there may be a bigger prize to collect if Putin has to go all in.

Igor Girkin and a couple of his fellow warmongers also got arrested recently. I think Putin is finally waking up to the fact that maybe letting people like Girkin or Prigozhin criticize the war effort openly wasn't such a good idea, and now they're shutting them down.

All this means though is that the "warbloggers" and ultra-nationalists are going to feel even more betrayed by Kremlin. It will affect the morale. As for Wagner in particular, Russia needs it or something like it in Africa, and I think they will try to make some use of Wagner in Belarus (better to have them march to Minsk next time rather than Moscow).

 

[Copernicus]

If there is any lesson to be learned here, it's that skimping out on money for Ukraine would probably be a bad idea. The west didn't support Russia enough in the 1990s, which caused problems down the line. The same mistake shouldn't be repeated with Ukraine and we should give them everything they need to win or at least survive the war, and to rebuild afterwards.

The main problem with support for both Russia and Ukraine at the time was that it was more likely to end up in the pockets of those engaged in organized crime. The Soviet Union always had a huge black market economy, and it continued to thrive after the collapse. Bribery and corruption was endemic from bottom to top. Matters began to improve after the 2000s, but Putin worked closely with corrupt thugs like Prigozhin. Even in 2015-16, the US government had the openly corrupt prosecutor Shokin fired before it would send promised aid. That became the whole basis for the Burisma scandal. So I wouldn't call it a mistake that the US didn't do enough to support Russia. There were really barriers to getting aid where it was needed.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

There are a number of amusing videos of Russian missile launches failing spectularly. I shudder to imagine such a failure with missile with a nuclear warhead. On the other hand, such a failure would be worth many laughs.

Just another reason to not take the Russian dictator's threats seriously. Granted, any nuclear accident anywhere in the world is a global problem, but I seriously doubt there is enough confidence in the weaponry to hit the launch button.

Accidental nuclear explosions aren't a thing. Making a nuclear explosion is really, really difficult; Ask Oppenheimer.

And a single nuclear bomb explosion isn't a worldwide problem. We've already had 530 nuclear explosions above ground worldwide (almost half of those in the USA); And three times as many again have been exploded underground.

One more could be a seriously bad day for people nearby (say, within a hundred km or so), but it wouldn't hurt anyone who wasn't.

Even a correctly constructed nuclear warhead can only cause a nuclear explosion if it's correctly triggered by its own detonation mechanism, and if it's damaged in any way, it simply won't work.

You could get an accidental conventional explosion from the thing, but that's true of pretty much all conventional explosive ordnance.

Knowing a Russian nuclear launch failed would be sobering. And quite funny. If such a launch is attempted, a failure is not out of the realm of possibility.

 

[Patooka]

I honestly don't understand this insistence on all these lies.
I understand why western establishment does that. They have to, otherwise they will become history, all their careers will be destroyed.
Why random people here insist on every single bit of this retarded narrative CNN pushes?

Putin is no better than George W Bush. Both invaded countries on a lie. You have been a member of this forum (allegedly) since 2005. You know the critiques that have been laid against W. It is you who is being ignorant not seeing the parallels between them. Once you realise Putin is no different than Bush, and that everyone here hates Bush, you might understand.

I suspect you are going to put on your pom poms and skirt instead though and keep on being a cheerleader for Putin, but hey - you could prove me wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There are a number of amusing videos of Russian missile launches failing spectularly. I shudder to imagine such a failure with missile with a nuclear warhead. On the other hand, such a failure would be worth many laughs.

If their warhead controls are remotely sane it wouldn't detonate. Ours know better and won't arm unless the missile has performed as expected.

 

[ZiprHead]

The formatting of this article is completely FUBAR but they're basically saying the cluster munitions provided to Ukraine are being quite effective.

Russia forces are being devastated by a game changing weapon |

thedailydigest.com

 

[pood]

The formatting of this article is completely FUBAR but they're basically saying the cluster munitions provided to Ukraine are being quite effective.

Russia forces are being devastated by a game changing weapon |

thedailydigest.com

Who thinks it’s a good idea to format an article like this? Anyone? Anywhere? Anytime?

 

[Gospel]

If there is any lesson to be learned here, it's that skimping out on money for Ukraine would probably be a bad idea. The west didn't support Russia enough in the 1990s, which caused problems down the line. The same mistake shouldn't be repeated with Ukraine and we should give them everything they need to win or at least survive the war, and to rebuild afterwards.

The main problem with support for both Russia and Ukraine at the time was that it was more likely to end up in the pockets of those engaged in organized crime. The Soviet Union always had a huge black market economy, and it continued to thrive after the collapse. Bribery and corruption was endemic from bottom to top. Matters began to improve after the 2000s, but Putin worked closely with corrupt thugs like Prigozhin. Even in 2015-16, the US government had the openly corrupt prosecutor Shokin fired before it would send promised aid. That became the whole basis for the Burisma scandal. So I wouldn't call it a mistake that the US didn't do enough to support Russia. There were really barriers to getting aid where it was needed.

This should have propelled the US and supporting nations to create more stringent checks and balances on aid distribution, rather than deciding to limit or withdraw their support altogether. Such an investment would not only have been beneficial, but also a valuable source of knowledge and experience we could draw upon today.

Just sayin

 

[ZiprHead]

Idiot. And people actually cheer for this shit.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

France has just pledged to send 50 SCALP cruise missiles to Ukraine. These are the French version of Storm Shadow long range cruise missiles. Russia is not happy. Maybe Russia should stop sending its cruise missiles to attack Kyiv.