Youtube comments of John Adam (@johnadam2885).
-
934
-
555
-
486
-
Generally, the western media underestimates Russia and tries to paints a rosy picture of Ukranians. We are told Russians don't have missiles left; their soliders are demoralised; they are making gains so slowly; Putin's hand is trembling and he has Parkinson's or cancer etc. On the Ukrainian side, the Azovstahl was an evacuation, Severodonetsk was a strategic retreat; in Lysichank, the Ukranians are impregnable due to high ground; Ukraine is planning a summer offensive to retake Kherson; the west is clearing a path to lift the blockade etc.
Piers Morgan is reasonably honest and admits that the future is dark for Ukraine, it has lost land, there is no hope to get it back, and Russia is strangling Ukraine's economy. He cannot see what the end will be for Ukraine but he knows it will be bad, no matter what support it gets.
However, there is no discussion in the western media about whether NATO and the west did anything wrong to precipitate this showdown with Russia. What was the purpose of reckless NATO expansion to Ukraine when Russia had warned against it, and when western Russia experts like John Mearsheier and even George Kennan (1990s) had warned NATO expansion will end the goodwill of the Gorbachov era and bring war ?
The west portrays itself as innocent and constantly bleats pious humbug. It talks about belief in an international rules-based order (freezing bank accounts of others is stealing), NATO is a defensive organisation (what was it doing invading Afghanistan which did not invade Europe), it denounces false flag attack (Iraq was one), it boasts about European values (what are these ? supporting Ukro Nazis because they are with you ?), they assert Ukraine is part of the European family (is that different from the human family ?).
Europe is a shameless dependent and doormat of the US. And the US is fading as it gets into confrontation with Russia and China. It has been living in debt, printing dollars which was possible because of the agreement with Saudi Arabia to sell oil only in dollars. But that system is being chipped away - as Russia, China and others launch and promote non-dollar based trade. And with the fade away of the US, Europe will also go.
284
-
269
-
263
-
254
-
250
-
229
-
197
-
187
-
164
-
150
-
149
-
149
-
145
-
142
-
140
-
137
-
132
-
128
-
125
-
118
-
117
-
116
-
114
-
113
-
112
-
111
-
110
-
109
-
109
-
105
-
105
-
103
-
102
-
101
-
99
-
96
-
95
-
94
-
92
-
89
-
88
-
87
-
83
-
83
-
82
-
82
-
79
-
78
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
74
-
74
-
72
-
72
-
70
-
70
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
67
-
67
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
64
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
At the start of the counter offensive, this Sean Bell fellow said, the first 72 hours are critical, Ukraine has to do a breaching operation quickly, and then do a blitzkrieg to the Sea of Azov and the Russians would be so dazed, they would surrender. He said Ukraine must not get bogged down in a war of attrition as the Russians would win on that.
But what we observe is that Ukraine could not breach the Russian defence lines after 2 months, they could not even reach the first line and in trying, they lost much western equipment and got massacred. Then a month ago, this Sean Bell said the Ukranians are doing probing operations. After they had found the weak spot and worn the Russians down, he said they would bring their strike force and uncommitted equipment into the fray and force the Russians into surrender !
Meanwhile Ukraine's handlers in the US are beginning to voice the opinion that Ukraine cannot win. The US military is saying the Ukrainians are wasting their time and western resources with attacks on the bridge and on Moscow, and they should stick with the plan of breaching the Russian defences and heading towards Azov Sea. Meanwhile, Russia is advancing on Kupiansk with a view to get Kharkhov oblast back.
In Vilnius, the US signalled acceptance of defeat when it said Ukraine cannot join NATO and there is no plan - they conceded THE key Russian demand.
61
-
60
-
60
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
56
-
54
-
53
-
Lithuanians talk like they are a superpower ! Ukranians had the same feeling but have lost 20% and the rest is being rendered into a failed state. If you fight with Russia, you will lose.
As for Russia not challenging a NATO country, you are being foolish. Article 5 only says each country of NATO in case of an attack against a NATO country will do what it deems is necessary to counter the attack - it does not necessarily say everyone will engage in a military fight, some may put sanctions, some may send arms etc. NATO depends on the US. The chance that the US will fight a nuclear war risking its cities, to save Lithuania, is zero. Kissinger had said the US would not fight a nuclear war with the USSR to save Germany and Europe.
ARTICLE 5
"The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.'
I suggest you get a Lithuanian translation so your delusions are cured.
53
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
49
-
48
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
The British have Churchill nostalgia. They feel Zelensky is a present day Churchill. Boris Johnson treated him as such. Hence, their support for Ukraine, and enthusiasm for firing Storm Shadows, with complete obliviousness to their own economic and physical suicide. They think they are still powerful as in the 19th century, and they have relevance and they are leading the 'free world'. In this Starmer, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Ben Wallace and the rest are no different.
In the case of Germany, it was not a free country, appeasing the US has occupied their minds as a result of WW2, they are so fearful that they want to be on the right side of the US, even if it means committing economic suicide. It is impossible for them to break ranks with the US and state their self interest. They have been socialised into dependency on the US.
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
The lady lies about the Budapest Memorandum. It was not in exchange for giving away nukes. Ukraine would not have got independence in the first place without giving up the nukes. Those nukes were built by Russia and the command and control was with Russia. Secondly, the Budapest Memorandum envisages that Russia, the UK and the US would not threaten the security of Ukraine - but it states that the security of ALL signatories would not be threatened (that is, it is not just about Ukraine's security). Ukraine was not going to threaten US and UK. The Budapest Agreement did not envisage that Ukraine will be used by the US to threaten Russia. In effect, the US, UK and Ukraine ganged up against Russia which was against the letter and spirit of the Budapest Memorandum. The three refused negotiations just before the war started in 2022. They thought that Russia was bluffing and then when military action started, they thought they could defeat Russia with economic and military means. In 2022, three months into the war, Russia and Ukraine reached an agreement in Istanbul, but the UK and US blocked it and asked Ukraine to continue the war. It did not work out for Ukraine and the west, after the failure of the 2023 counter offensive. Now Ukraine has lost more and it cannot get back what it lost; and if it continues, it will lose more. Ukraine and the west cannot complain after defeat. Due to the defeat, the US wants to withdraw and is ordering Russia to cease fire and negotiate ! The loser wants to set the terms of peace. But it does not work that way. Sir Vladimir had said when Ukraine reneged on the Istanbul agreement that next time, the settlement will be on Russian terms.
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
@mag-s7 'Russia GDP = Spain GDP'
That is an irrelevant comparison. It matters what is in the GDP. Spain's GDP is olives, tourism some cars, parts of Airbus. Russia's GDP includes steel, metals like titanium alloys, gold, uranium, planes, tanks, fertilisers, it is the biggest supplier of wheat, it launches satellites and has its own GPS, and now its own banking system. Can Spain do any of these ? Can any European countries do this ? So don't make dumb comparisons. Russia has beaten the collective west. Get it ? Don't dare to mess with Russia again.
33
-
33
-
32
-
This is a remarkably rational analysis from a westerner, free of emotional thinking. Westerners are governed by fright and get into a quivering frenzy about Russia coming after Sweden and Finland. The analyst says Russia is not interested in Sweden and Finland, they only want no NATO presence in Ukraine. Their objective is limited, but the US is interested in portraying to the Europeans a doomsday scenario saying that the Russians want to devour all of them, and Ukraine has to keep fighting to save Europe. Zelensky also uses the same rhetoric.
The defence analyst is also shrewd in admitting the only card the west had, that is sanctions, is only hurting the west ! The west needs oil and gas at affordable prices, and other countries will not go with sanctions. The west comes up with hare brained schemes, one after the other. The latest being putting a price cap on Russian oil !
In contrast to the west, the Russians are far more focussed, sobre and calculating.
I have always said Russia has all the strong cards in Ukraine and it was western folly to expand NATO. Even reconstruction of Ukraine needs Russian permission. The Ukrainians have been stupid and have been taken for a ride by the west.
The west will continue for some more time due to false pride.
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
@bgcvetan 'given that West European countries often engage in purely selfish immoral policies, often into the detriment of US'
The European countries were brutal and selfish with their colonies, and not with the US.
With the US, the Americans had the advantage and they were ripping off Europe. Yes, there is a trade deficit in EU's favour. However, NATO expansion has benefited US arms companies as they re-kitted Warsaw Pact countries, but it has led to a devastating war in Europe. The US forced Germany to give up Russian gas and buy LNG from the US at 4x the price. But it has led to de-industrialisation of Germany and Europe. Plus Europe will be saddled with 10 million Ukrainian refugees, and they will have to subsidise any rump Ukraine for however long it takes. As the economies sink, Nazis groups will take over Europe and create violence and chaos. You see it in Germany, France, Italy, Hungary and Poland, even UK.
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
@callsigndd9ls897 Germans were also angry when their cities were firebombed. They were angry when the Red Army came and smashed them. But they had to submit and surrender. That will be the same with Ukraine.
The Ukranians had the option to go back to neutrality and implement the Minsk accords in Dec. 2021 to avert the war. Russian would have preferred not to go to war. But the Ukranians thought with US and NATO help, they could get US bases in Ukraine to fight Russia. Their country got smashed, part of it is gone, and the rest will be turned into a wasteland like Libya. After some time, the US will get tired, or Trump will come back, and they will leave Ukraine to its fate, like Afghanistan and Iraq.
If the Ukranians don't want those 'innacurate rockets' destroying them, then they should surrender and negotiate a settlement. But they are pawns in America's hands. There is no way Russia will allow the US to get naval bases in Ukraine. If Ukraine does not surrender/negotiate, then it will be destroyed, and so be it, however angry they or anyone feels. I am telling you the stark reality.
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
'...country with a GDP of the size of Italy's....'
The west makes all these shallow one-point analyses. It also matters what is in that GDP. Italy can make shoes, some fashion, luxury cars, cheese and agricultural products. Russia can launch space vehicles, hypersonic missiles, planes, ships, metals and alloys including titanium, and gold, it is the country with the complete nuclear fuel supply chain, it has oil and gas, it makes fertiliser, and is the largest producer of wheat. Italy and nobody in Europe can do that. Russia is self sufficient which Italy and Europe are not.
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
The notion that Ukraine is European has gone to its head. Ursula von Leyen encouraged this by saying 'you are part of the European family' - as if that is superior than the rest of the human family. Western Ukraine has been a hot bed of Nazi style ethnic nationalism - they are followers of the Ukro Nazi Bandera. Their nationalism is based on ethnicity. They treated the Russians as second class citizens - although all that Ukraine has was built by the Soviet Union, with the largest contribution from Russia. The steel mills, the Antonov aircraft factory, the tank factory, the nuclear power plants, the educational institutions were all built due to the Soviet Union. Under Soviet rule, the Ukro Nazis were kept under check. In the German invasion, the Bandera Ukrainians collaborated with the German Nazis. In fact, the Ukranians were favoured as guards in German concentration camps. After the war, Stalin sent Bandera type Ukranians to Siberia. But Krushchev, a Ukranian, released them back to Ukraine. The Ukrainian penchant for racialism was shown when it told Africans should not comment on the war as they have no understanding of Europe - so they should have no views. When Asian and African students were fleeing from Ukraine, they were not allowed on trains. Ukrainian refugees settled in Britain said they did not want to be located with Asians, Muslims and African origin people, as they felt unsafe - as if they would be safer in Ukraine. Hence, it is no surprise that the Ukrainians think Russians are inferior because they are Asian whereas Ukrainians have been reclassified as superior Europeans.
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
Why is it in all these discussions, we hear only western and Ukranian perspectives, without the Russian view ? That is the reason why these people have underestimated Russia, and both west and Ukranians have delusions about fighting Russia.
Ukraine, NATO and EU miscalculated by trying to expand NATO to Russia's borders. It was predicted that Russia would go to war if this happened. When Russia goes for war, they will not back down, and in the end, Russia will prevail. The Ukrainians can fight (they are like the Russians), but Russians can also fight, and they have superior military strength and economic strength.
The west also over estimated its capacity for economic warfare against Russia. The sanctions did not work, and the west did not realise Russia has powerful economic leverage to strike back. Russia has created economic hardship for the west, and they have also strangled Ukraine's economy by the Black Sea blockade. They just have to wait, Ukraine needs 5 billion per month for monthly expenditure, and the west has to fork out the money. Supporting Ukraine with arms and monthly expenses for an indefinite period is beyond European capability. Russia has all the strong cards.
Weapons deliveries are not going to change matters. The Ukranians as usual say send us more weapons and we shall get back Crimea. The west is not capable of delivering the weapons quickly and it cannot afford it. Already NATO and western leaders are dropping hints that Ukraine must negotiate and cede territory. Even Biden says the new arms is for strengthening Ukraine's negotiating hand ! So the US also knows Ukraine cannot win, and in the end Ukraine has to cede more land.
What is the mood in Kiev like ? The lady Tatiana tries to put on a positive spin on a losing game. She says Russia is struggling to capture Severodonetsk, it is a small city, they are taking so much time.
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
Putin said some while back, there are only 4 independent nations : Russia, US, China and India. These countries take decisions based on their national interest, while the rest follow others. They are not part of any alliance. The US has an alliance where it is the master, and the others (UK and Europe) are merely dogs that wag their tails.
The UK and Europe need to understand they can keep their friendship with each other and engage in their colonial invasions, but really your time is past, and you are once-upon-a-time nations. Your collective, unholy record is well known in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, you are in no position to tell India or other countries who they should not engage with.
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
Goodness, this is only summer. What will be the situation in winter ?
The EU wanted to hasten the reduction of Russian gas. Russia is helping them on the way.
Why do they interview the PMs of less useful countries like Sweden and Latvia ?
Sweden's priority was to join NATO and be an unfriendly country to Russia. Now the Swedish PM says 'we are in a difficult situation'. I thought it was Russians who were in a difficult situation.
So she has realised putting money in citizens' pockets will not solve the problem of inflation. The problem is shortage of goods - which comes from shortage of energy.
NATO expansion has backfired, even for the US. But the west has to continue defending their surrogate Ukraine, out of false pride. Due to that false pride, they want to expand the war to Lithuania - which is even dumber. The 'European family' which they are so proud of, is empty headed. They cut their noses to spite their faces. And they are like lemmings, committing suicide jointly because they are a family !
In all this, the west did not realise that Russia is equally capable as the west of economic warfare. The west could sanction Iran or Afghanistan, but it does not work with Russia. The Europeans set out to make sure Russia will not have money to wage war. But it looks like Europe will not have money to wage NATO expansion.
And Ukraine should start realising that Europe is not in a position to continue subsidising their war, and pretty soon, all the European talk of stopping Putin from winning will not work. Ukraine will be a forgotten casualty. It would be better off outside the EU and NATO.
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
Emil, there are better arguments to show that Ukraine, UK and US violated the Budapest Memorandum. Many western supporters of Ukraine say Russia breached the Budapest Memorandum. They have never read it. There is a commitment that Ukraine's sovereignty is guaranteed by the signatories (US, UK and Russia), but there was an exception clause in the guarantee in the (unexpected) case Ukraine threatens any of the signatories. An unexpected situation occurred in which Ukraine teamed up with one set of signatories (US and UK) to threaten the key signatory (Russia). That is, by Ukraine seeking to join NATO thereby allowing US bases. Therefore the Ukraine - and also US and UK - made the Budapest Memorandum invalid. Further, the last Article of the Budapest Memorandum says if there is a dispute, the signatories will confer and try to resolve any dispute by negotiations. However, the US refused to give Russia a security guarantee and Ukraine refused to go back to neutrality in Dec. 2021. Hence, Ukraine, the US and UK violated the last Article which said that the signatories will resolve any dispute by negotiation. Instead, the US created a coup and installed a govt. which would allow US bases in Ukraine.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
@КАБы_да_КАБы Talking about de-industrialisation of Europe, I know glass, aluminium and steel factories are shut in France and Germany. Some of these will not re-open again. BASF is in a critical position. They have several tens of ingeniously integrated chemical plants in Ludwigshafen. They are dependent on Russia gas. BASF said if their gas supply is reduced by the govt. by 50%, the entire complex will shut down with cascading effects on many industries in Europe. Even if the govt. gives them over 50% gas allocation, the prices are so high, some of the plants in the complex have to shut. The European leaders are forced to put on a brave front out of false pride. They are door mats of America. Backing down on Ukraine means defeat for them and that is unbearable humiliation. Some of their middle class public goes along with the narrative of their leaders, that is, innocent Ukraine was faced with an unprovoked attack, and the Ukranians are part of the European family, and we have to defend them. The lower orders do not have any strong views, but if they face the pinch (and they will be the first to face it), they may come out on the streets.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
'Nato summit: Allies refuse to give Ukraine timeframe on joining'
It is the US that decided that Ukraine cannot join NATO in 2023 and there should be no time frame for joining. The rest of the Allies have no say.
In 2008, Merkel and Sarkozy opposed Ukraine in NATO as they feared it would lead to war; but Bush twisted their arms. In 2014, the US staged the Euromaidan coup that brought various groups including Ukro Nazis (Right Sector and Azov Batallion) into power. The neocon Jewess Victoria Nuland and John McCain were in the crowds distributing sweets (what were they doing there ?). The 2014 US implanted govt. of Poroshenko immediately announced that Ukraine would seek to join NATO - the key goal of the US was to have missile and naval bases in Ukraine to contain Russia by blocking its access to the Black Sea.
So why has the US decided that Ukraine cannot join NATO in 2023 and there should be no time frame for joining ?
Biden said it is because Ukraine does not meet democratic norms and standards for low corruption. Says the country that engineered a coup to over throw the previous democratically elected leader, and whose current President's family (Hunter Biden) benefited from Ukrainian corruption !
But that is not the reason US decided that Ukraine cannot join NATO in 2023 and there should be no time frame for joining. The reason is if Ukraine joins, it will demand Article 5, and the US will have to send troops to Ukraine. In which case, the Russians will kill Americans on a scale higher than in Vietnam.
The Americans are intrinsically cowardly and cannot take casualties. Recall their exodus from Iran, and Somalia, and Kabul 2 years ago. The US sent troops to Somalia to save the faction they favoured. All it took was for Somali fighters using RPGs to shoot down 3 Black Hawks and kill 20 Americans - and Clinton withdrew. Imagine what the Russians will do to the Americans if they went into Ukraine.
It is time for the Europeans to realise the Americans started the game of NATO expansion for their arms business, and the European elite went along, till it led to a fight with Russia. The war is now lost for the west. America does not want to fight Russia directly. They are happy to use a proxy to fight, but if the proxy fails, the US will slither away.
That is the end of the Ukraine story.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
'Russia, with an economy the size of Spain's. '
This is a fallacy and simplistic way of looking at things. One needs to compare Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) when one compares the economy of different countries. When analysed this way, Russia's economy is comparable to Germany.
Further, the Russian economy is largely self sufficient - unlike that of any small country. It has plenty of land, water, energy, it is the biggest supplied of wheat, metals and alloys. No European country has all these. Energy is critical; as Gazprom CEO said, it is more valuable than currency. If you have euros and dollars and you cannot buy energy, it is no use. Russians will not be freezing this winter. Zelensky is pleading to end the war before winter.
Russia's manufacturing is in Russia. The US economy is 70% services. People can do without Facebook, but not energy.
Other factors also come into play. Russia is very strong militarily, since the USSR days. There is no one in Europe that can remotely compare. It has incredible full-spectrum military technology. It has army, airforce, navy, it is capable of knocking out satellites, it is an expert at cyber warfare.
The Russians now understand how to wage economic warfare (which the USSR did not know). Besides using energy, Russia has taken steps for non-dollar trade. They realise that the creation of a non-dollar trade system undermines the dollar in the long run, and with that, US economic and military strength, and EU also is reduced as it follows the US.
I hope the above explains the mystery of how Russia is able to hit the west if they trouble it, and why it does not flinch. Russia is not what is painted by the west.
12
-
12
-
Zelensky is a very sorry wreck, just like Ukraine. In 2022, Zelensky was feted as Mr. Churchill and got standing ovations in western parliaments. He stood for democracy, and righteous western values. But by 2023, in the NATO summit in Vilnius, he started getting the cold shoulder. The British told him to show gratitude and not whinge, and Biden told him Ukraine cannot enter NATO, that magical universe Ukrainians are dying for. The 2023 counter offensive flopped, the Ukrainians could not cross even the first defence in the Surovikin line.
In 2024, Zelensky was touring the west with a victory plan. Now for 2025, he seeks a negotiated settlement. He had a chance for that in Dec. 2021, he could have agreed on neutrality and avoided the war. In 2022, Ukraine reached a negotiated settlement with Russia but Biden and Boris Johnson ordered him to scrap it. Zelensky passed a law against negotiations as long as Putin is alive. Now Zelensky wants a negotiated settlement because he sees that Trump will order him to do so.
Ukraine is not a free country. It died for imaginary western values. The shameless Americans will move on to their next war, and the useless Europeans will go with them.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
'I think over 150 or 200 million people came out of poverty in India since 2014.'
300-400 million were lifted out of poverty in the period 2003 to 2014 by Singh and Chidambaram.
Modi is living off that. During Modi's period, there was no job creation, and Indian economy sank by 2.5% of GDP after by demonetisation. Covid was handled badly, and hospitals did not have oxygen, and people were cremated on streets and bodies were floating on the Ganges - it was the worst record in the world.
Modi has created a couple of oligarchs, Ambani and Adani, and concentrated wealth in their hands, and they fund his election. It is crony capitalism.
Where did you get your statement from ? You are taken in by Modi and Indian media's projections that India has become some sort of Hindu superpower. Modi's appeal is to Hindus who regard him as a Hindu god. He shows off his Hinduness and that is the basis of his appeal, nothing more.
If Modi has done so much development, why does his party organise attacks against minorities at election time ? If he was confident of what he has done, he will be able to win elections on development alone.
India aspires to be a great power like China, Russia, the US. But it cannot be.
I have visited India and it is like a giant slum. I asked a Modi supporter, a Hindu in the north, what Modi has achieved that improved his life. He said 'nothing', but for us, he is the first Hindu king in 1000 years.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Decisive months of battle ahead which will lead only to Russian gains. Russia has the initiative, Ukraine has lost too many soliders in Soledar and Bakhmut. Soledar has fallen, Bakhmut is encircled. Even the Americans are advising the Ukrainians to pull out of Bakhmut - so they have some save troops left for American training ! Once Bakhmut falls, Donbass will be completed with the capture of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. Then the Russians will be ready to move to central Ukraine.
This expert is trying to live off the past, he recounts Russia did not succeed in capturing Kiev, he claims Donbass front has remained static etc. We can see the effort to gloss over and try to present a brave face for the west. Russia has neutralised the Himar led Kherson offensive. Zelensky's tall talk of taking Crimea by last December was just vain boasting.
Russia on the other hand can mount a major offensive. For Ukraine, this time round, it will be difficult to defend. Ukrainians forces have been attritioned and depleted in the Donbass, so they are not in a position of mounting a significant counter offensive. The paltry western tanks will make as much difference as the Himars. The west is staring at the writing on the wall, but cannot admit it. Ukraine cannot push back Russia the second time, Russia will prevail.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@NOFX0890 Russia does not talk much, it does. It does not announce 3 months before that it is planning an offensive. It withdrew from the Kiev area, but reappeared through the backdoor, it did not announce its plans, the west had to guess - the west said the Russians aim to take Donbass, and the coastal areas up to Transnistria. The Russians have never stated how much they are going to take, and which area they are going to target. They are more professional and keep their enemies guessing. Ukraine and the west are childish - they announce the Kherson offensive months before, they boast about the Himars, there is no element of surprise, and they make tall claims, and make scarcely credible claims like Russia shelled the nuclear plant they now own, they have run out of shells and men etc.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@gottfriedheumesser1994 The Soviet Union ended German Nazism, and compacted and resized Germany into a limited geography. Stalin redrew the map of Europe at Potsdam. That was the contribution of the great Soviet Union. Russia is now ending the Ukro Nazis, and reshaping the geography of Ukraine. Even more important, and of lasting importance, is that Russia has catalysed the de-dollarisation move. Even if no replacement global currency comes, the fact that a large set of countries is starting to settle trade between themselves in other currencies (their own, or the yuan) when earlier they only used dollars, automatically spells the end for the demand of the dollar, and its value. With the end of dollar hegemony, US power to print dollars and reinforce that system with the use of military power, will come to an end. As Putin explained in a recent speech, the US was extracting tribute from other countries and living beyond its means, and this will be ended by Russia and others.
The Soviet Union played a stellar and unique role in the defeat of Nazi Germany, it played a very supportive role to the countries emerging from western colonialism, and it supported the struggle against apartheid - something which is not forgotten by Africans. Likewise, the world sees Russia is now playing a stellar role in ending US led western hegemony, by creating alternatives to the dollar, and alternative financial systems. You should watch the Eritrean President requesting Russia to take up the role of freeing Africa and the world from rapacious exploitation by the west. He says only Russia has the will and the military capacity to stand up to the US.
As for your dream of resizing Russia, many Europeans have tried and all failed. The Swedes, Poles, French and Germans invaded Russia. All were beaten and had to withdraw and Russia remained powerful. The US itself had the same dream. One of Woodrow Wilson's aide's said Russia should be broken into 3 or 4 states. Putin cites this, so Russia is aware of your wicked designs. Modern Russia has the capacity to destroy all European and US cities in a blink of an eye. If it were not for that capacity, you would have sent troops to Ukraine, and even to Russia.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Russia did make a mistake attacking on multiple fronts and miscalculating the Ukranian resistance. But now Russia has regrouped, taken Mariopol and the coastal regions, they are making slow but relentless progress in Severodonetsk and Donbas, and the Russians will make the remaining Ukraine landlocked and strangle its economy. Besides, they have forced Ukraine to accept it cannot join NATO and NATO also understands that. The Russians are not going to stop till Ukraine signs up for neutrality and distances itself from NATO. Westerners have been predicting imminent collapse of the Russian economy due to sanctions, high losses, antiquated equipment, malfunctioning equipment, running out of equipment, Putin has cancer, he will be overthrown etc. They have been predicting Ukranian victory due to high morale, western training, western equipment. But the evidence now is Ukraine is losing strategic land and Russia has the all the strong cards.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@notalefty999 The immigration coming from non-war countries like India and Nigeria is controlled on the basis of work visas. There are labour shortages and to maintain your countries, you need to import qualified people. Take UK for example. It went for Brexit, based on uncontrolled migration of Romanians, Eastern Europeans etc. After Brexit, they all went back. Then what happened to the vaunted NHS ? It had a shortage of nurses, doctors and healthcare workers after the Europeans left. Could the 'native' British fill the posts ? No. Why ? Because you do not produce children, then who will keep your NHS looking after the old 'natives' ? It is the same in Germany. They took in a lot of Syrian war refugees due to shrinkage of the native population - due to lack of reproduction. Don't blame the immigrants for that.
Some of the new Indians, Nigerians, Hong Kongers etc. you complain about are given settlement status on basis of bringing in vast sums of money for investment. If you want others money, you have to be free to the movement and settlement of 'foreigners'. Does Britain and Germany have money for investment ? Yes - for Ukraine and US led war projects.
You are part of the elite that enjoyed a life style which would not be possible without the immigrants. When you removed the Romanians, pretty soon the Brexiteers needed the Indians. Get it ?
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@samuelvera5048 'I can tell you If russia can't even handle ukraine how you gona handle 30 nations with much more military power than russian and also far more advanced'
Russia is able to handle 30 nations because none of them is willing to fight if it means getting killed. The 30 nations you refer to are intrinsically cowards who are not be able to stomach death. Those who are afraid of death cannot win wars. In 2022, Sir Putin invited those in NATO who think they can defeat Russia to come to the battlefield and show it. Needless to say that no one in NATO took up Sir Putin's challenge. If for one moment the US believed it could win, the US would have sent NATO troops to Ukraine.
NATO's flaw is it cannot take a quick decision like Russia does, it is a very cumbersome, bureaucracy. It all depends on US direction and willingness to fight, and the rest of the 29 are useless. The US will never fight a stronger power if it means a large number of Americans killed.
As for your equipment being more advanced, what is the evidence ? Russia has destroyed all of NATO's game changers : Bradleys, Leopards, Challengers, Abrams; HIMARS were defused with electronic jamming; it has destroyed Patriot batteries; the F16 was downed in its first sortie. Russia has fired Kinzhal hypersonic missiles. The US has failed to make hypersonic missiles, and its four tests to make them have failed. The Russian Yazen class super quiet submarines are patrolling both US coasts equipped with conventional missiles; if equipped with hypersonic missiles, the reaction time will be less than 1 minute. The US is not going to fight Russia directly. Get it ?
Hence, I suggest you come out of your delusions and make claims based on evidence. The evidence shows Russia is the more powerful militarily, no one has the weapons they have, and their soldiers are hardier and tougher than NATO's chocolate soldiers.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@johnwayne-kd1pn What you are saying is logical but there are practical difficulties.
On the first point, sending war refugees back once war is over is not easy. Iraq and Afghanistan wars were over long before 2010. But the refugees have grown up in Europe, UK etc., they have families and children who have grown up here, so what do you do ? There are no Nazi solutions.
'US is saying Europe should pay for defence etc and that they should bill us, we should say the US should pay for the people who had to flee from US wars to Europe'.
Europe has been entwined with the US. In some of these wars pioneered by the US, Europe has been a tacit supporter - for example, in the Israel wars with Palestine and neighbours. The UK created the Palestine problem, but they have never tried to solve it - it supports Israel. The Israeli historian Ilan Pappe says that Israel was the European solution to a European problem, at the expense of making Palestinians refugees. The French have colonial wars still in Africa. Europe did not go with the Iraq war, but UK was a key mover. Different parts of Europe have to bill not just the US, but also each other. In Europe itself, there was a genocide of the Bosnians by he Serbs, and Europe did not do anything.
Take the Ukraine war. The US, UK and Europe have been active partners in NATO expansion. The Ukraine war has brought 9 million refugees. Ukraine is destroyed, so it would be difficult to send the Ukrainians refugees back. They would not be going to Ukraine, they will be going to Russia.
The US is the main culprit. It created many wars in the Latin America - and it faces a refugee problem.
However, Europe is not unique in the refugee problem. The US led Afghan war created massive refugee problem for Pakistan. The US war in Vietnam brought some boat refugees but neighbours like Cambodia, Laos soaked a lot up. They do not complain, they took them. Lot of Palestinian, Lebanese etc. refugees are in the Gulf states, Turkey etc. but they do not create a hue and cry.
Europe is too highly embedded with the US, so it has to share the problems.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@Duck-wc9de Europe will always be weak. There are 700 million people and about 50 countries. Asia has about 3 billion people and less countries.That is, there are too many small countries in Europe, so there are many vested interests.
Once there were 4 European powers : Britain, France, Germany and Russia. Britain, France, Germany are now once upon-a-time countries. They think too much about themselves still, but the reality is of the former big 4 European powers, only Russia is the default power in Europe. Europeans cannot digest that. But to confront Russia, they need America. America realising Europe's weakness exploits Europe and keeps it dependent. France and Germany sought accomodation with Russia, but America would not allow that as it would lose relevance in Europe. America has sought to exploit the eastern Europeans for inciting Russophobia.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jesan733 You are indulging in a vague plea that America does not incite wars. But somehow you are always embroiled in all wars on the planet - Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Ukraine/Russia.
Then you argue America has no financial and social problems arising from sponsoring conflicts the world over. Alright then, carry on !
'People conflate budget deficit and printing dollars. It's not the same thing, and the problems are vastly overblown. '
You forced the Saudis and others to sell oil only in dollars; and when the Iraqis and Libyans tried to sell in Euros, like Saddam and Gaddafi, you invaded and did regime change. Why ? You should have let them sell oil in whatever currency they wanted.
As a result of the wars you engaged in, the rest of the world wants alternatives to the dollar. Russia and China are leading this effort. We see trade emerging slowly in national currencies, the Chinese and Saudis are selling off US treasuries and buying gold. As more and more countries settle bills without using dollars, you will weaken. You are putting on a brave face. But you will see the US will lash out and engage in more reckless wars to preserve the dollar.
The lasting and most impactful blow that Russia has delivered the US is de-dollarisation. It has kicked off the movement, and others have joined the bandwagon. Considering the fact that the US went to war to stop Saddam and Gaddafi selling oil in other currencies, it is sure the US is very concerned - but it cannot go to war against big boys like Russia and China who have the capacity to incinerate US cities. If it were not for that, you would have done what you did to Iraq and Libya.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@pynn1000 You exaggerate NATO's capabilities. Not so long ago, NATO ran away from Kabul in the most cowardly manner. They were all vying with each other to board planes lest they were captured. The captain of the pack, the US, cut and run first, without even informing its 'allies', that is subordinates. Normally, when a ship sinks, the captain leaves last. With NATO, the captain runs away first.
Do you think such abject cowards are strong enough to fight Russia ? NATO refused to send troops to Ukraine and also refused Ukrainian request for a 'no fly zone'. Why ? Because no one in NATO wants to be killed by the Russians.
Even collectively, NATO is not strong. NATO is the US with a collection of weaklings. The US decides policy. If the US decides it needs NATO, it will ask the weaklings to come to Afghanistan to fight its war, and subordinates have to go. However, for an European war, the subordinates cannot ask the US to come and fight. The NATO command structure is run by the US, so if the US does not fight, the rest of the 30 subordinates cannot do anything.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@joseaca1010 Due to geography and history, Ukraine's independence was always conditional - Ukraine had to give up nuclear weapons, not join any military alliance and allow Russian navy to use Sevastopol. Otherwise, there would have been no independence. There is no absolute independence, so don't impose your western views. Palestine wants independence, Israel does not allow it, the EU and US solidly back Israel - so hypocrites should not be shouting about Ukraine's absolute right to do what it wants.
Ukraine cannot join any organisation it pleases if it threatens a neighbour. If you don't understand that concept, at least understand the reality now - there will be no Ukraine as it was in 1992.
Russia did not violate the Budapest Memorandum first. It says 'The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense '.
Read the exception clause. An exceptional situation has arisen : Ukraine conspired with two (US and UK) of the three guarantors of its security against the first guarantor (Russia), to threaten the security of Russia. In this Ukraine, US and UK are guilty. Hence, the Budapest Memorandum has been violated by Ukraine, US and UK, so it is null and void for Russia, and Russia is administering the beating that is due to Ukraine. The US and UK are howling on the sideline and trying to give some aid to Ukraine, but they cannot stop the beating. Finally, it means in future negotiations, Russia cannot allow the US and UK to be guarantors of Ukraine. It will have to be Turkey, China, UN, maybe France and Germany.
Think about your shameless western duplicity that has landed Ukraine in this mess. Ukrainains are also at fault for backstabbing and not realising geography and history play a role in statecraft.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
'I don't understand either what is the point of helping Ukraine in the war if it is not to win it.'
What you need to understand is that Ukraine did not have the capacity and never will have the capacity to defeat Russia. The west should never have encouraged Ukraine to think it could join NATO and it could fight Russia and win. It was a strategic miscalculation of the US.
The west has thrown Ukraine under the bus by encouraging it to fight, and then not having the resources to do so.
'On the contrary, at the moment it seems very messy and as if the alliance does not know which way to go and what to do.'
The reason the alliance is confused is the west is fighting Russia and not Iraq or Afghanistan. Russia dangles the nuclear sword and can incinerate all western cities. So your capability to fight is restricted. Unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, the economic consequences of the war were felt immediately by the west - high inflation, de-indsutrialisation of Germany, de-dollarisation. This has led to confusion about what to do. The west said it will be with Ukraine for however long it takes, but it cannot afford it.
'Ukraine must have F16 aircraft, so start training their pilots asap. And give them the missiles they think they need most, long-range artillery, anti-aircraft defense, etc.'
None of it will make much difference. It is always going to be too little too late. The Bandera army has been massacred and there is not much left of it. The west cannot supply enough artillery shells. And if pushed, Russia will use tactical nuclear weapon on Kiev (Russia has said all weapons in its arsenal will be used if Ukraine crosses into Crimea). Don't come back and say the US will use nuclear weapons against Russia; Russia will incinerate all US cities. The Americans do not want to be exterminated for Ukranians.
Russia has Ukraine by the scruff of the neck, it will not let go and allow Ukraine to host US military bases to threaten Russia.
5
-
5
-
There is a recent interview of Rahul Gandhi in Georgetown University where he analyses issues of income, job and price, manufacturing, sustaining democracy and defending democratic institutions which are being undermined in India. China is also discussed. He said that China has built a manufacturing economy with an authoritarian state, whereas democratic India, US and Europe have become service economies managing consumption. And as the economies of the latter stagnate, democracy is attacked by Modi in India, AfD in Germany, Meloni in Italy, Wilders in NL, Trump in the US.
That Modi character's following is not based on income, job and price, it is based on Hindu chauvinism against minorities. Likewise, Trump's following is based on white chauvinism and anger.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Ukraine was assured it would be independent only if it gave up nuclear weapons. It had no choice. If it did not want to give up, it would have remained part of Russia. Get it ? No point claiming if only Ukraine had not given up nukes....
Next, the Budapest Memorandum did not foresee that one signatory, the US, would engineer a coup in Ukraine in 2014 and usher in a govt. that would conspire with the US to threaten Russia with NATO bases. The Budapest Memorandum says in case of any disputes on security, all four parties would have meetings to resolve it through negotiations. When Putin asked for security negotiations in 2021 for Russia, Biden declined. Hence, the US, UK, Ukraine reneged on the the Budapest Memorandum. The US thought Ukraine could defeat Russia by arming it. By 2024, it became clear that Ukraine had lost, so the US would like to go back to negotiations. Since the US, UK and Ukraine spurned negotiations to avert war in Dec. 2021, it follows any future negotiations will be on Russian terms. Those terms are : Ukraine has to cede what it has lost AND it cannot be in NATO. There can be no NATO or EU peacekeepers in Ukraine, as they took part in the war against Russia. If Ukraine does not accept, Russia will not negotiate and the war continues. Get it ?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Concord003
'Nationalistic military units such as Azov, Aidar, and The Right Sector where armed and integrated into military or national guard AFTER annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014.
Poroshenko, who later campaigned on the slogans of "Army. Language. Faith." was elected President of Ukraine AFTER the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014.
The law that more strictly mandates the use of Ukrainian language instead of Russian in official settings, was passed in parliament AFTER annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014.'
You are missing out a key detail: Russia annexed Crimea only in the aftermath of the so called 'Revolution of Dignity'. They saw that the Russophobes had taken over with American support, and they would push for NATO entry. Russia had to act quickly and secure Crimea as it has Sevasatpol, the HQ of Russia's Black Sea fleet. If they did not do this, the US Seventh Fleet would be sailing from there one day.
You are very anxious to exonerate the US. US ambassador Victoria Nuland had for years funded anti-Russian groups as the part of creating a pro-US govt. in Kiev. In 2008, when Merkel and Sarkozy opposed induction of Ukraine into NATO, fearing it would lead to war, the US twisted their arms. Nuland had remarked 'F..k the EU'. Nuland and McCain were in the Maidan square celebrating the 2014 coup. What were they doing there ? They are deciding who will rule Ukraine - to their benefit, and not for Ukranian benefit.
Since 2014, Ukraine had become a de facto NATO member. It had a NATO training base near Lvov. Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan (why ?)
The US has used similar tactics in Afghanistan, Iraq etc. (supporting and inciting one group against the other). Either it leads to civil war, or the intervention of another powerful country. But that country goes down the drain.
Hence, once the anti-Russian coup had taken place, and the American hand was clear (even though it is not clear to you), Russia had to act immediately and take Crimea to preserve the HQ of the the Black Sea fleet.
Since then, Ukraine did the further anti-Russian things you mentioned - which only made things worse for Ukraine. It made Russia to think of taking back all of Ukraine. Now you will find the west that supported you does not have the courage to come and fight Russia and you will be sacrificed.
Russia gave Ukraine independence, it was a generous act. All that Ukraine has was built by the Soviet Union. But Ukranians became back stabbers, and fell for the lure of American money, and thought they could gain by renting out their land to America to put missile and naval bases against Russia. But now you you are paying for back- stabbing Russia. Russia has put an end to Ukraine's and US's NATO plans. Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan to die for Americans, but the Americans are not going to come and die for you.
Ukraine as an independent nation is over, as you blew your chances by being seduced by America to take a strident stance against your neighbour. You don't even understand that, so how can you be a successful nation ?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Don't distort amd lie. 'Ukraine at the suggestion of the West, renouned nuclear weapons and heavy bombers. '
You are wrong. Ukraine had to renounce nuclear weapons, that was one of 3 conditions Russia put for Ukraine's independence. Unless it renounced nuclear weapons, they would not have got independence. It had nothing with any 'suggestion from the west'.
The other conditions were that Ukraine would be neutral and not join any military alliance against Russia. And thirdly they would lease Sevastopol port in the Crimea as it was the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet. Ukraine, under the wicked machinations of two of the signatories of Budapest, tried to join NATO which goes against the conditions of its independence. For unilaterally flouting the terms of its independence agreement with Russia, Russia took action to terminate Ukraine.
'This agreement effectively left Ukraine vulnerable against Russian aggression. '
That is a falsehood. Signing the Budapest Memorandum has not led to Ukraine's end as a state. Ukraine's end came because it reneged on the commitment to neutrality it made to Russia. It sought to join NATO allowing the US to threaten Russia. Russia had to take back Crimea as otherwise, the US Seventh Fleet would be sailing from there, and Russia would be cut out from the Black Sea.
Educate yourself before commenting on things you don't know. The west brought Ukraine's end, not due to Budapest, but due to flouting the terms of Ukraine's independence. That is the fault of the Ukranians and the west.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Rudolf Hillard 'Wars in Europe was never as destructive in Asia, Europe have laws and ethics, they priotized civilian lives, wars were stopped by civilian rallies and protests.'
Europeans invented gas chambers to gas 6 million. The civilian rallies in Germany supported beating up minorities.
The Nazi invasion of Germany cost the Soviet Union 20 million deaths (how much did the Mongols do ?)
The British and Americans firebombed Hamburg (40,000 killed) and Dresden (20,000). They started WW 2 saying they will not target civilians, but ended up saying firebombing of cities was necessary to end the war.
The US dropped two, not one, nuclear bombs on cities. The Americans defend it by saying it ended the war.
In Vietnam, the US used napalm.
In Iraq, the US used depleted uranium.
The US ran a torture camp in Guantanomo.
Not only has the European-US nations killed Asiatics, they decimated their own superior European tribes. The white population used to be 20% of the world population in the 1900s. It is a few % now; some authors attribute the wars between the 'civilised European nations' (whose thinking you embody) is one major reason for the decline of the whites.
Going by the numerical evidence cited above, would you not say the Europeans are less civilised than the Asiatics ?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
The analyst says the western consensus is it is too early to say whether the Ukrainian counter offensive is succeeding !
What he means is the west is unable to admit that Russia has defeated the collective west in both economic and military warfare !
At the start, the Ukranian offensive was billed as a sort of Operation Bagration where the Red Army stormed the German armies along a 1000 km front, cleared the minefields and cleared the path to Berlin.
The BBC's expert Sean Bell said the first 72 hours are critical, Ukraine must punch through a weak spot and then follow up with a blitzkrieg down to Melitipol. He said that Ukraine must not get bogged down in attritional warfare as that would be 'Advantage Russia'. For attritonal warfare, the Ukrainians do not have the manpower and the west cannot supply the shells at the rate the Ukranians use them.
By the BBC's own analysis, Ukraine could not achieve a breaktrhough in 72 hours, and after three weeks, it is pausing the offensive. At best, Ukraine can come back for some attritional warfare. Russia will see it off, and then go for hot pursuit and chase down the Bandera army.
The west and its surrogate have lost the war. The west talks all kinds of nonsense to cover up - they held a third Ukraine reconstruction conference ! They can't cope with the present, so they present dreams for the far away future. It is like Germany promised to build Ukraine a tank factory so it could have the supplies to fight Russia !
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@callsigndd9ls897 Good fellow, you have not read the Budapest Memorandum, or if you have, you don't understand it.
Article 2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
If Ukraine threatens Russia's security, Russia can act in self defence. The US and Ukraine conspired together to threaten Russia by seeking missile and naval bases. One of the guarantors conspiring with Ukraine against another guarantor violates the spirit of the Budapest Memorandum. Russia signed it in good faith not anticipating such a situation would occur - both Ukraine and the US would back stab Russia.
Article 6.The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.
In Dec 2021, Russia sent a letter asking the US to negotiate a security agreement with respect to Ukraine. The US declined. Hence, it violated the Budapest Memorandum.
So what are you talking about ? Russia had to take action. They are not going to allow the US to have bases to threaten Russia, and if Ukraine has to be dismantled or destroyed altogether to protect Russia's security, they are following the Budapest Memorandum.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
@redbear1935 The essence of survival if your small is diplomacy and neutrality. Learn from the Swiss, they have been that way for 500 years, and they are successful.
Whereas your type of country tries to seek support from another power, and then throws stones at others, thinking you are under a protective shield. Lithuania has not only angered Russia but also faraway China. You think you are the leader of 'the free world' because you got entrance into their club. Ukraine, Poland and similar also have the same delusions. You would not survive one day if the US lost interest in NATO or decided it cannot afford it. That will be your day of reckoning.
Using your intellect to decide what is best for survival is the best way to survive. Thinking you have the US and NATO, and you survived Mongols,Crusaders, Turks,Napoleon, Kutusov,Hitler, Stalin, therefore you can throw stones at Russia and say 'we are doing it because the EU told us' is exceedingly stupid.
Most organisms have a survival strategy. Lithuanian behaviour is the opposite. You risk getting destroyed for the EU and an imaginary 'free world'. The weakest countries seem to have a death wish.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Whether you agree with political theories of how nations act, Prof. Mearsheimer stands above all the rest because he predicted correctly the result of NATO expansion. Although one can go into niceties that 'expansion' is not the correct word, because it was a voluntary accretion of members, Mearsheimer is still correct that NATO is a military alliance whose objective was to check the USSR, and whose subjective is now against Russia. The voluntary accretion of members does not change the objective, and to the Russians, it is the objective that matters, and not whether the members joined voluntarily or with inducements.
When Warsaw Pact was dissolved, NATO should have been dissolved. Russia had shown goodwill in the 1990s when it let go, not only of the Warsaw Pact countries, but also republics of the USSR. Even if there was no written agreement that NATO would not be expanded eastwards, James Baker had said to the Russians that NATO would 'not move an inch to the east'. When NATO 'expanded' eastwards, Mearsheimer says Russia saw that as a breach of goodwill and gradually the sentiment hardened in Russia that the west had taken advantage to threaten Russia. Russia had repeatedly warned that NATO expansion was troubling them. As Mearsheimer says, it does not matter if the west sees NATO as a defensive alliance, and it is not an 'expansion' in terms of forcible takeover, but the Russian perception right from the beginning was that NATO is an offensive alliance against them, and it is the Russian perception that matters. If Russia's perception (with good reason) is that NATO is an offensive alliance against them, and they warned about NATO expansion to their frontier would be seen as a hostile act and a red line, and NATO went ahead, then war follows. So Mearsheimer is correct that NATO is to blame as it deliberately pursued a policy that thinking people had warned would lead to war.
There is only one criterion on judging whether someone's analysis is correct. There is the minority camp that said and warned NATO expansion will lead to war. There is other camp (the majority) in the west that said and still says it was not an expansion, and the purpose was defensive, and we cannot do wrong because we say so etc.
It is unarguable that Mearsheimer is among the minority who predicted correctly what will happen years ago. Therefore his analysis has enduring value, and what he proposes for the solution to end the conflict has to be considered, because it is based on understanding. All the ones who justified the expansion should now understand the cost to Ukraine and the west. If the west is unwilling to go and fight Russia in Ukraine, it should not have pushed for Ukraine's induction in NATO.
To all the supporters of Ukraine, who now see Ukraine is heading for a defeat (for which the blame has to be placed on the west's NATO expansion), Mearsheimer will cause burning as he will sound like someone telling them 'I told you so'. Hence, they invent various refutations to disprove him.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Concord003 Ukraine had the best chance if it had been in the EU but not NATO. That was acceptable to Russia. Ukraine has blown its chances by inciting Russophobia, following neo Nazis and their brand of Ukranian nationalism, and thinking it could indulge in these due to western protection. Now you find the limits of western protection : they don't want to die, they cannot fight against Russia and win.
Showing enimity to Russia to get western support was an immature foreign policy. The consequence is Ukraine has lost its independence. You only get a chance once in life and you blew it. Of course, the US is to blame for seducing Ukranians with money to promote Russophobia and seek NATO entrance. But ultimately Ukranians are to blame for lacking the thinking capacity.
'I still hope it's possible for Ukraine to win, but I have to be open to the possibility that we may lose.'
Ukraine and the west have been spreading great hopes about these HIMARs and the Ukranian counter offensive against Kherson with a million man army. If that does not happen, then consider it is game over. In that case, it is better to cede the land that is taken, and assure neutrality and stop all NATO contacts, in exchange for the Ukraine that survives. Go for the EU, Putin said he does not object. The other alternative is to fight on, but then face the possibility the Russian army will enter Kiev, just like the Red Army came to Berlin after 4 years of fighting. You should know that the Russians once they fight, do not give up. You were in the Red Army once.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I agree with you, it is wishful western delusion arising from a sense of humiliation. The US is the principal cause of Ukraine's misery. The west had expanded NATO 5 times, sneakily to Russia's border, although US foreign policy experts had warned in the 1990s it will create a war later. Victoria Nuland was sent in Obama's time to create a coup to put 'a democratic leader', that is a pro western leader to get Ukraine into EU and NATO - and eventually put US missiles next to Russia. I feel sorry for the Ukranian people as they have been misled by US puppets like Zelensky, and now have to face the consequences of US machinations. When Russia reacted, the US and west quietly withdrew. The west does not want to die, they want to appreciate brave Ukranians dying on their behalf, on the altar of sovereignty. The Ukranians did not understand that sovereignty does not mean inviting a far off power to put missiles to threaten a neighbour who is a superpower. The plight of Ukranians today is the west. The west should have signed an agreement with Russia that they will not put missiles in Ukraine in exchange for stopping the destruction of Ukraine with massive casualties. Ukraine can be sovereign in all other ways. Instead, the west is making things worse, thinking it can supply arms to the Ukranian resistance, which will bring the Russians to use more savage weapons, and even the nuclear option can be used.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@petroleumalley Well, Russia withdrew from Kherson in an orderly manner, the Ukranians were not in hot pursuit to kill them. Then they entrenched themselves on the other bank of the Dnieper, let the Ukro Nazis come into Kherson, and they started killing them.
Ukraine has flouted the terms of its independence by seeking to enter a military alliance targeting Russia. Hence, Ukraine's independence is null and void for Russia.
As for the Crimean war, at that time, the British were powerful and Russia got defeated by an alliance of the British, French and Turks. But after 1945, Britain and France became 'once upon a time powers' and the Soviet Union and the US became superpowers. Today, Britain makes do by being a vassal state of the US. The French try to work with Russia and the US, but it is not successful as they are ignored by both.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The Storm Shadows will not change the outcome of the war, it is already lost for Ukraine and the west, and all it does is it puts UK at a risk of attack.
When the Storm Shadows were used the first time in the 2023 Ukrainian counter offensive, there was much euphoria in the British media, they said the Kerch bridge will be taken down, the Russian troops will be stranded and Ukraine will take Crimea, thanks to the British. But the Ukrainians could not cross even the first ring of the Survokin line, and the counter offensive was a flop. Storm Shadows made no difference and it quietly disappeared. The Russians even captured part of a Storm Shadow and took it to Russia.
There is renewed euphoria and British bragging about their contribution, but it is not going to reverse a lost war. The danger is whether Russia will go nuclear yet. I hope not. It would be sensible to sit it out for 2 months, Russia will shoot most of it down, and Ukraine will run out of these missiles and Trump will end it. So no point reaching out for the nukes yet. However, Russia is not going to sit quietly. There will be a big strike on Ukraine. The second on the priority list will be British assets or Britain itself. Third the US.
The British are very foolish, vain people, imagining they are a superpower who can fight Russia. Germany has committed economic suicide for America. The British are ready to commit physical suicide to show loyalty to America. They are so proud of their special relationship !
Britain is the soft target for Russia, after Ukraine. I cannot believe how irresponsible Britain's leaders, media and public are. They are consumed by false pride, ego and yearning to be a power. They have convinced themselves that Russia is bluffing. Well, Russia is bluffing till it is not bluffing. And when Russia strikes British assets as Putin said it will do, it will be too late to realise Russia was not bluffing. And then Britain will find the US will look the other way to save its own skin.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The lady is subtly provocative - as a news anchor should be ! She is the best western anchor I have seen, always probing behind the western propaganda about Ukrainians winning and the Russians losing.
She starts by mentioning the Ukrainian ambassador sounded weary - meaning not confident this spring offensive will go well. The 'expert' sort of acknowledges.
When she asks whether the Russian casualties the US cites are credible (she does not think it is), the expert says it is the best estimate the west has. Then he adds that the Russians are taking 6 killed in Bakhmut for every Ukrainian. Where is this figure from ? Is it credible when the Russians fire 10 shells for every Ukranian one (by Ukranian and western admission) ?
He claims it was Ukraine's strategy to attrition Russia in Bakhmut so the Russians do not have people left against the Ukrainian counter offensive. There is no mention the Ukranians were heavily attritioned as well, in fact more so, and this weakens their counter offensive prospects.
The fact is the Russians have somehow taken Soledar and pushed the Ukranians out of Bakhmut, using shovels according to the great British intelligence. This is a sore point for the west.
The side that feels defeated always puts out wild propaganda. The Russians are hitting the Ukranians hard like the ammo dump in Pavlograd, so that the Ukrainian counter offensive is still born. There is no point of talking about how F 16 s will turn matters for Ukraine when there is no chance they will have them. It is like the Germans saying they will build a tank factory in Ukraine ! According to NATO, Ukraine has 98% of what is needed. They have to now show Return on Investment as some politicians colourfully put it.
The fact is Russia has the artillery shells, the missiles, and all the other machinery to continue, compared with Ukraine and the west. The Russians have beaten the west in the economic warfare as well, and further their actions have started the de-industrialisation of Europe and de-dollarisation.
It is embarrassing for the west that the world sees that 50 nations cannot match Russia in military or economic warfare. Could there be a bigger blow to western self esteem and feeling of superiority ? Mighty Russia has punctured their ego ! Hence, all the weak propaganda.
3
-
I wonder why the British in particular are so Russophobic that they float unreal scenarios.
'“Russian gains have not had strategic effect. They’re not really significant gains so its not something to worry about.”
Then why all this chest beating ? Why does Zelensky say unless you send me arms and money, I shall have to retreat ? Was he lying ?
If they are not really significant gains and so its not something to worry about, why send Ukraine more money and arms like it is an emergency ?
The Russian strategic gain is not land, it is that they have destroyed Ukraine's army and killed off its most experienced soldiers. They have broken Ukraine's morale and young men are unwilling to enlist. The Ukrainians have started to realise and think 'what is the point of me getting killed in a war at its end, when I am only a proxy warrior for the US who will abandon Ukraine at the end of the year ?'
In 2023, the Russians hit the power distribution, in 2024, they have gone after the power production. They could have done it in 2023, but Russia has been cautious and not hit Ukraine too hard, to allow Ukraine the possibility to change course.
]'Ukraine could "reverse" Russian gains in the Donbas area with new weapons, as they continue to to be successful in the Black Sea , says former special assistant to the president for Russia William Courtney].
From now on, Ukraine cannot reverse its losses. If the counter offensive of 2023 to regain Donbass and Crimea failed, why would it succeed in 2024, when Ukraine does not have the equipment, and most importantly it cannot raise trained manpower ?
Checking the Black Sea fleet is an achievement, but it is a consolation, it cannot stop the Russian juggernaut. In 2022, the fortunes see-sawed with Ukraine clawing back Kherson and Kharkhov oblasts. But it changed in 2023, and Ukraine cannot regain the initiative. Even Ukrainian officials say it.
Ukraine's position now is like Germany's position after Stalingrad. After Stalingrad, Germany never regained the capacity to attack, from then on it was trying to defend and stave off the Red Army's advance. Eventually the Red Army reached Berlin. The Ukro Nazis are on the backfoot after the failed counter offensive in 2023 and they are only fighting to stall the advance of the Russian army.
The British need to wise up to reality : Ukraine and the west lost the war strategically in 2023, and now, only the military endgame is playing out. British military intelligence lost all credibility when it issued a barrage of falsehoods like Russia ran out of missiles in 2022, that it had to scrounge microchips from washing machines, the Russians were left to fight with shovels in Bakhmut, Bakhmut was not strategic, it is only a Pyrrhic victory , Russians are poorly trained and have low morale etc..
The British come across as very undignified liars, who sabotaged negotiations to end the war, and who are cowardly and do not have the spine to send troops to Ukraine after telling Ukraine to fight on. And add to that Britain's support of Israel, and one sees a duplicitous country, aiding and abetting genocide in Palestine.
When Russia takes Ukraine, the British will be saying it is of no strategic importance, because NATO has expanded and has two new members and so Putin is actually defeated.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Blanka1100 Russia allowed Ukraine on the conditions it returned the nukes and abided by neutrality. Ukraine tried to renege unilaterally on the second, so it is being terminated.
'Russia's gdp is Spain's gdp'
It also depends what is in the GDP. Russia produces oil and gas, gold, uranium, it is the biggest producer of wheat, it can launch satellites and missiles, it makes aircraft, it makes aircraft engines. Can Spain make any of these ? So don't repeat infantile comparisons. Russia has withstood the sanctions of 50 countries, and it is de-industrialising Germany and Europe. Europe's economy shrank, Russia's grew.
Effectively, Russia has defeated NATO. Russia, not Europe or US will decide the future of Ukraine. Europe has no say. Get it ?
3
-
3
-
@chrissmith7669 You are trying to put on a brave face. The over confident Russian army is making progress. Industrial regions are taken, the coastal areas are taken, Ukraine's economy is strangled of revenue, and is reduced to EU aid. The bit not taken yet is subjected to air strikes, so no reconstruction is possible.
'From what we’ve seen of Russian incompetence so far, we would have nothing to fear if they did something provocative.'
So why are Sweden and Finland running for cover ? They fear a beating, even though Russia did not have them in mind !
Lithuania took some action to block transit of some goods to Kaliningrad. Russia issued a warning of consequences. Immediately, EU backed off and said the goods could go through, as long as they are not exported from Kaliningrad ! They invent an escape clause fearing another beating. Can the EU check what is exported from Kaliningrad ?
Hence, the fact is Russia can beat the hell out of NATO. It will not gratuitously attack NATO countries, but if NATO threatens Russia through Ukraine or Lithuania or someone else, Russia will deliver a beating and if the rest of NATO wants to join in, they will receive the Sarmat hypersonic missiles.
The fact is Europe is a collection of weak states dependent on America, and America will use them to advance its interests, but America has no interest in fighting a nuclear war with Russia to save Europe. That is the stark reality and if you are from one of these weak, once-upon-a-time European countries, you better understand and not get carried away with your vanity. The best security for you is to keep quiet.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The NATO summit will be a disaster - for itself and Ukraine ! Russia has demilitarised NATO. NATO has run out of shells, Patriot missiles, they do not have any tanks that work. Least of all, they do not have trained gutsy soldiers who can fight like the Russians (and Ukrainians). NATO is trained for soft war games, not real combined arms warfare. Russia is the leader in combined arms warfare.
The last NATO summit was in June 2023 in Vilnius. Zelensky went there begging for NATO entry. Biden declined. Zelensky then begged for at least a road map for NATO entry. Biden said there was no roadmap.
The US is not going to let Ukraine into NATO now as it will drag the US into a nuclear war through Article 5. The Americans do not want to have their cities incinerated by hypersonic missiles from Russia's Kazen class submarines lurking off the US coasts.
What can have changed now ? Everyone can see NATO is a paper tiger, it cannot fight a real bear. NATO has a lot of little barking chichuas like Estonia, Poland, Britain.....If the US cannot fight, how can these little barkers fight ?
It is best if Trump comes, and puts sense into the Ukrainians. It will be even better if he winds down NATO. It is a cumbersome bureaucracy like the EU parliament, run for US business.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
There is much exaggeration about Ukraine's counter offensive and capability. They took some area defended by the Donbass militias. When the Ukranians tried a counter offensive in Kherson, where Russian troops were stationed in numbers, they were badly mauled.
The use of the word 'rout' is premature. A war is not a battle. The west thought Ukraine had won because the Russians retreated from Kiev, or because they sunk a ship, or because of their sanctions. But Russia kept going and hammered Ukraine. The Ukranians have taken 2% of what Russia had taken and it does not change the overall reality. The UKrainians are not disclosing the casualties they incurred. Russia has Donbas, the GDP creating area of Ukraine; they control the shipping lanes, and wheat only moves due to their permission; they have made Ukraine landlocked and strangled its economy; they have shut down 20% of Ukraine's electricity; Ukraine has $ 1 trillion of damage, and that keeps mounting. Russia can settle it any day with a tactical nuclear strike, or even with a conventional non-stop bombardment, they can raze Kiev. In addition, Russia is strangling the economy of Ukraine's funder, Europe. Russia is going to de-industrialise Germany and Europe. The Ukraine of 1991 will not exist again, and the US will not have NATO bases in Ukraine. All the cards are with Russia - still !
3
-
3
-
@JamesC785 I was not talking about Budapest Memorandum. I was talking about Ukraine's independence declaration.
Even Budapest Memorandum says 'The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense'
Russia has acted in self defence in an unexpected turn of events whereby 2 of the 3 guarantors of Ukraine (US and UK) conspired with Ukraine to induct it into anti-Russian military alliance, to put missile and naval bases, to threaten Russia.
Thus, Ukraine and 2 of the 3 guarantors of Ukraine attempted to cheat. Hence, Ukraine's independence is cancelled.
In any future negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, Russia will not allow the US and UK to be guarantors. Maybe it will have to be France, Germany, Turkey and China.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@danfonze5135 An attack on one is an attack on all.
That the US could apply to Afghanistan because it is defenceless. It could take its collection of weak allies.
But fighting Russia ? The US will run away first. (It ran away first from Kabul, so you can imagine if confronted with nuclear war what it will do). Its spineless allies will prostrate themselves in front of Russia if the US left.
Kissinger had said the US would not fight a nuclear war with the USSR to save Germany or Europe. That will be the case now also : the US is not going to fight a nuclear war with Russia for Ukraine or Lithuania. That is self-evident in Biden's talk. When NATO was talking about a 'no fly zone', Putin warned NATO countries would face consequences they have not faced before. Biden quickly quelled the clamour for a 'no fly zone'.
Before you spout from hearsay like a layman 'An attack on one is an attack on all; I advise you to read the fine print.
According to the NATO website, Article 5 specifically lays out:
"The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.'
The action 'as deemed necessary' leaves it open to individual parties; the principal in NATO, the US, may decide it does not want to go to war. And the rest of NATO will back down.
The statement 'including the use of armed force' is not the same as saying an attack on a NATO member 'will incur the use of armed force on the aggressor'.
These things are worded by crafty Anglo Saxon lawyers and they leave an escape clause open for themselves - in this case, the US. The ones who don't understand English go with simplistic notions as 'An attack on one is an attack on all'. The US can demand that NATO allies go to Afghanistan and the 30 weak allies will oblige. The reverse is not always true - the 30 allies cannot ask the US to oblige them. Why should the US have all its cities obliterated for Ukraine or Lithuania ?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
This ambassador said Russia has performed miserably in Ukraine. Is that why western officials are now whispering that Ukraine is a lost cause and the counter offensive is a flop ? Now even in CNN, they are inviting military analysts who say this !
Poland is playing the role of third rate countries that think their importance is great if they serve US interests. Ukraine thought the same way and got a thrashing and the US did not have the courage and commitment to send troops. Instead in Vilnius, the US vetoed Ukraine's entry into NATO, thereby conceding a key Russian demand.
Poland's plan to invade western Ukraine was not stated by the Russians but US military officials (I think Gen. Petraeus) who talked about 'creating a coalition of the willing' to enter Ukraine. There is a video of a British MP Tobias Elwood talking about it. The coalition of the willing will be guided by the US and UK, Poland and the Baltics will go and fight and get killed. Germans of course will be annoyed if Poland takes up armed conflict to gain territory because Poland might one day want German territory. To counter the threat of Poland invading western Ukraine, Russia stationed nuclear weapons in Byelorussia, and moved the musicians there. If Poland commits mischief in western Ukraine for its US master, Russia will open a front in the direction of Warsaw.
Poland has been provoking Russia at US behest, and now 100 of those musicians appeared on the border, Poland starts howling. It is another corrupt country run by US money. The US ambassador to Poland is none other than Zbigneiv Brezhinksi's son. Zbigneiv Brezhinksi was a US foreign policy hawk during the Soviet days. The US aim is to see Poland does not shift views and go the Hungarian way and become a peacenik, that the US retains the arms shipment routes to Ukraine through Poland. Further, can be used to provide bodies to fight Russia.
Poland will of course be praised to the sky by the US and UK, and be told that it will have the most powerful army in Europe and so on, and it is certain to go to Polish heads.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Emil, while I agree with your analysis that the west got into a needless confrontation with Russia with NATO expansion, I am not sure Meloni and rise of people with fascist views and mindset augurs well for Italy, Europe and the west. While the talk about culture, religion, identity, nationhood etc. sounds reasonable to people, the question will be the methodolgy. You spotted the talk about genetics and how it leads to eugenics. Her talk about preserving her genes is way to say race pride. Italian fascists are not in a position to start invading neighbouring countries to make Italy great again. But they can attack people they define as 'other races' with other genes - violently. It may start as talk about preserving her genes, but it could lead to jackboots and militia to beat up people without the right genes, and they can pass that off to supporters as standing up to globalists. The whole of Europe is sliding into neo-Nazism and as Europe's economies crash, and their currencies lose value, and the standard of living declines, such demagogues like Meloni will arise and appear reasonable to many. The west has been claiming that it is superior to others due to democratic values and civil liberties, but there are people out to destroy that from within and they have support, so it is not Putin alone !
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@andrew30m A chess game has reversals, and readjustments, and the Russians are the best as it. Russia could not get into Kiev, as a multi pronged attack diffused the power, so they switched the theatre to the East and concentrated forces there. And now they have Ukraine by the scruff of the neck. They have the most valuable parts, the industrial land, and the coastal land. The blockade strangles Ukraine's economy and makes it an unviable state. Now Russia feels it has the upper hand, so it does not see the point of negotiating, it might as well go forward and take half of Ukraine. As Lavrov said, any negotiations will be on Russian terms, and that means Ukraine has to cede more land.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The Palestinians and the Arabs need to take Russian help. The US will back Israel and never take steps to end the apartheid state. The US supported apartheid in the South Africa, while the Soviet Union supported the ANC. The west labelled Mandela as a terrorist. In 1956, the Soviet Union helped Egypt when the colonial forces (France, Israel and Britain) invaded Egypt because Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal. They said it was breach of international rules based order. The Soviets forced these three countries to get out by threatening to use nuclear weapons. The US looked the other way, so France, Israel and Britain had to withdraw. If the Arabs had gone with the Soviet Union at that time, Israel was less than 10 years old, and the Soviet Union would have settled the Palestinian state problem then. Now, the Arabs need to to distance themselves from the US and have an alliance with Russia. They should see how the west unanimously supports Israel. Hence, when the chips are down, the west will always support Israel. Only Russia has publicly said implementation of a Two State Solution is essential for solving the conflict. The western thinking is that only by maintaining Israel's supremacy, the conflict can be managed.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@abhilashpradhan7671 Ukraine's conditions for independence were (1) return the nuclear weapons (2) neutrality, that is don't join any military alliance and (3) lease of Sevastopol to the Russian Navy. Russia had shown goodwill and had also given away historical Russian land with Russian speakers (Crimea, Donbass, Odessa etc.) under the assumption that Ukrainians were a brotherly people. Ukraine's Declaration of Independence had said it would be a neutral country. The US worked to place a govt. in Ukraine that would allow its missile and naval bases in Ukraine, which threatens Russia and aims to shut off Russia from the Black Sea. In 2014, after the US sponsored coup, the implanted Ukrainian govt. changed its constitution and put NATO entry as an Article. Thereby Ukraine reneged on the terms and understanding by which it got independence. There is something called geopolitics and nations have to master it to be skilful to survive. Things are not just determined by treaties and absolute rights but also goodwill and understanding. Sovereignty is not 100%, in Ukraine's case it was conditional from the start. Sovereignty does not entitle you to call a far-off superpower to put military bases to threaten a neighbouring superpower. In any case, when all critical decisions are taken for Ukraine by the US, like whether to accept the negotiated peace settlement in Turkey, Ukraine is not sovereign.
Your declaration that Russia is 100% at fault shows immaturity and indeed a low IQ. You talk as if the war started on a certain day in 2022 without any background or reason, and the US had not played a dirty hand as it has done in conflicts elsewhere. The war is a result of the cumulative action that was initiated by the US govt. in the late 1990s when it sought NATO expansion at the behest of its arms corporations like Lockheed.
The US could have avoided the war if it had given Russia the security guarantee it asked for in Dec. 2022. And after the war started, when Ukraine reached a negotiated settlement with Russia in Turkey, why did the US prevent Ukraine from accepting it, and instead asked it to fight on ? It means the US had a vested interest thinking it could defeat Russia. Now Russia has defeated the collective west, saying Russia is 100% at fault is irrelevant. Grow up.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@TrrrashBoat
Piers very slyly started off with bias when he introduced Hijab as controversial. Why did Piers do that ? Because he wanted to discredit the invitee even before the start. But Hijab caught him straight away and asked why he said that. Piers replied 'because you are controversial', to which Hijab shot back 'so are you, and so was the Israeli ambassador'. Hijab then forced Piers to back down on that.
When Piers cannot answer why he sought to tarnish the invitee before the start, what questions does Piers have that are worthwhile ?
Hijab had a point, when IDF cuts off electricity and water and food to a civilian population, that is a war crime. The Nazis did that to the Jews when a Jew in 1938 killed assassinated Nazi diplomat Ernst vom Rath. That was used as a justification for Kristallnacht, a collective punishment of Jews. Israel is the new Nazi state.
When Russia cut of Ukraine's electricity, you people shouted it is war crime. When Israel does it in Gaza, Hijab asked why is it not a war crime ? Piers could not answer. To make thick headed Irish Piers understand, Hijab said what would have happened if RAF razed Belfast for an IRA attack ?
Piers was weakly waffling about Israel having to do something in retaliation but it should be a proportionate response. The Palestinians attack Israel for imprisoning a civilian population and taking their land. There response is under proportionate. Piers should ask the Israeli ambassador why Israel is an apartheid state.
Look man, Hijab reduced Piers to stuttering. When asked why he was stuttering, Piers meekly replied that he was not stuttering !
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@SK-lt1so Russia has the power to drop a nuclear bomb on Kiev and force unconditional surrender the same as the US forced Japan. They have not done that.
Putin has said Russia has been lenient, but the Ukranians should not take advantage of that as weakness.
In the west's firebombing of Dresden and Hamburg, and nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 40,000 civilians were killed in each city. No one called it a war crime.
Hence, the first is 19 is nothing, don't exaggerate. The second is if the west encourages Ukranians to escalate, then heavier punishment will come, and then you will be convinced 19 is nothing.
You are shouting out of frustration. Two days ago, you were saying Ukraine is winning, and cheering, now the punishment has come, you are dejected and you feel maybe Ukraine is not winning as you imagined.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The Kursk operation was not secret to the UK and US, they were the planners for it. Now that Ukraine is trapped in Kursk unable to go forward or back off, and is advancing in Russia Donbass, the US and UK will now say they are not responsible, did not know about it !
This joker Bell is the one who said Russia was reduced to fighting in Bakhmut with shovels.
Gen. Patraeus, an enthusiast for the war said with the Kursk operation, the idea was to force Russia to negotiate. He said western strategy is to force Russia to ceasefire and negotiate and then get Ukraine or what remains of it into the EU and make it a free market economy ! But see the confusion of the western mind. For the 2023 counter offensive, Patraeus said the aim was to drive Russia out of Crimea. That failed, so he is talking about negotiating now, so that some bit of Ukraine can be saved and rearmed to fight. Russia is not dumb like westerners, it is not going to accept that.
Russia does no want to negotiate. When Russia agreed to negotiate with Zelenksy in Istanbul and reached an agreement, Boris Johnson and Biden ordered Zelensky to keep fighting. Ukraine at that time had the best bargaining prospects. Now Russia has the advantage (even Kursk has turned out to be an advantage as it keeps Ukraine's forces pinned), and is moving fast in the Donbass. None of the western schemes will work.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@ethereal2620 Alright, he disbelieved Barbarrosa started, but his party members rushed to him and asked him to organise the defence of the Soviet Union. As the German armies approached Moscow, his advisers asked him to evacuate and run the govt. from behind the Urals. Stalin was at the station with his belongings and officers, waiting for the evacuation train. When it arrived, Stalin changed his mind : he decided if he evacuated, it would demoralise the citizens. He stayed behind and organised the defence of Moscow. Stalin acted as a great leader should. He sent his sons to join the Red Army, one was captured, the Germans offered to negotiate for his release, Stalin refused. He knew how to deal with Hitler : Hitler had to commit suicide. View the footage of Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill at Tehran and Yalta conferences and from the body language one can see who was the most imposing. Stalin redrew the map of Europe and imposed his will at the Potsdam conference with Atlee and Truman; the latter had to agree.
Look at Biden and his son Hunter; or Trump using his political position to promote his family business. They are not leaders in the class of Stalin.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You don't have to wait for the end of the war, Sir Putin has already changed the western 'global order'. This is the global order which was constructed to keep the financial system under western control, makes rules for others, use sanctions and wars against those who would not go along (Iran, Iraq, Russia...), make military alliances to threaten others, make exceptions for oneself to invade Iraq and other countries using false flag threats etc.
This global order was maintained by the US by forcing the Arabs to sell oil only in dollars. It gave scope to US arms companies to wage wars and create conflicts, for business - this was behind NATO expansion.
Russia has single handedlly initiated the end of the US led western global order. The move to promote trade settlements in non-dollar currencies will have the greatest impact, and it will end end US dominance. Russia has always changed the world. China will join in as it has a clear motive and ability to overtake the US. The rest of the world is lining up behind Russia and China.
The west knows it. That is why they are bleating incessantly, but they just can't do anything. They cannot attack Russia like they did Iraq and Afghanistan, as the nuclear sword dangles on their heads. They thought they could win by economic warfare, but Russia gave a rude shock as they are a clear winner on that. The west is burning in rage. The world can see that.
The Europeans have to be decide whether they want to go with the world or be America's door mat and commit economic suicide.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It is a selective interpretation with western bias. The analysis talks about Russian invasion of 2014, but quietly skips the effect of the US inspired coup of 2014 with Nazi operators like Right Sector and Azov batallion, which led to Russia taking back Crimea because Sevastopol, the HQ of its Black Sea fleet was at risk if Ukraine joined NATO. The Russian invasion only came after the US backed coup.
Hence, it is presented without all the US machinations in Ukraine to overthrow govt.. Ukraine is corrupt - the US helped corrupt it with 'influence corruption'. The US armaments industry and agro business were after Ukraine, and the US govt. aided in overthrow of the govt. in 2014.
The maker of this video says that 'influence corruption' is less of a problem than the theft type of corruption. That is not correct. Ukraine has got invaded because its politicians succumbed to 'influence corruption' of the US. Victoria Nuland, John MacCain etc. were financing Russophobic groups selectively so they came to power. They thought Russia can be excluded from Ukraine and the US will corner all the cake - agro business, arms, commodities. That was influence corruption, and that instead of theft corruption, brought Ukraine such a severe beating from Russia that Ukraine cannot recover its territory let alone rebuild. The biased video maker quietly skips this aspect . Only Russia is at fault, and the west had no role in Ukraine's downfall.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@hailarwotanaz5848 You are making your own artificial criterion about 3 month encirclement to decide what is success and failure. If Russia wanted to settle it in one day, it could. It can drop a tactical nuclear weapon on Kiev, there would be nothing Ukraine can do to stop it, and the west would not have the guts as it does not want to get incinerated. Russia decided to use more costly methods, but they are getting there. They have taken the coastal areas, they will take the industrial area, and make Ukraine landlocked and strangle Ukraine economically. The west will try to send arms through the rump Ukraine, but Russia strikes at the railway centres and destroys much of the shipment. Somehow you find all this stinging to your false pride, so you make up some artificial points to say Russia is weak or unsuccessful. If the US felt it was strong for one moment, it would jump in and send troops to Ukraine, like it did to get Saddam out of Kuwait. But the US knows it will not last 3 months, it will be fried in an instant by those hypersonic missiles. Why don't you accept the reality ? If you mess with Russia, you will get mauled, whether it is in 3 months or instantly is decided by Russia. Get it ?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@piyushbawane2000 Christians and islamic civilised you, otherwise you would have remained dacoits. The British brought you education and good governance, and law and order. Without them, you have reverted to your former character - mob riots, rape, dacoity. Look at your Hindu king Modi - he committed a genocide to get elected.
As for your comment of 'looted us of the wealth that we created with system of hindusim sanathan dharma', I read a book by Kancha Illaiah who says high caste Hindus looted the low castes who tilled the land and created the wealth, but who could not sell their produce.
sanathan dharma means caste system. People left the Hindu fold and became Christians and Muslims, precisely because of sanathan dharma. Why don't you have common sense to realise that ?
As the video says, India cannot become developed because of the caste system. It is obvious. Why should the high caste minority hold the majority to ransom and keep them undeveloped ? For India to become developed, the only way is conversion.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@rao521 What is the purpose of your reply ? It is unconnected with the subject that Ihlan Omar raised : the persecution of India's minorities as a state policy by its current government. Can you deny that churches were attacked during Christmas, Muslims have been lynched over cows, and Muslim houses were bulldozed for protesting their persecution, while police join Hindu rioters (BBC video of Delhi riots during Trump's visit) ?
The US and western countries do not have elected representatives reporting to a Nazi organisation like the RSS, they report to their constitutions. There is no state sponsored attack on minorities in the west. People in the west do not go and lynch Hindus for example because they worship the cows or idols. So don't compare yourself to any western country, you are sliding to the worst of the third world, and you don't want to come out of it.
Don't try to deflect India's current abymsal governance by bringing in colonial history. No one is damaging India today other than Hindus. No point blaming minorities, or former western colonialists. Address the problem for India's current failure : Hindu fascism.
At one stage, India was presented as a rising democratic success, but not anymore. Hindu extremism, not Ihlan Omar, has undone India's former fair reputation.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Just analyse the convoluted argument of Eggert to cover up for western defeat. He says Ukraine is in this (losing) position because we did not want them to win ! And why ? Because we were afraid and uncertain what will happen in Russia if Putin is overthrown !
This is an escape from reality. When you refused Putin's request for a security guarantee, it was based on your conviction that Putin would be overthrown due to sanctions. But Russia defeated you in the economic warfare designed to overthrow Putin. And you tried everything to make Ukraine win in 2023, Stoltenberg said NATO gave 98% of what Ukraine asked for the counter offensive. But that too failed.
As for taking the war to Russia, that too was not possible - not because you were afraid Putin would be overthrown, but because he would nuke you. He carries out what he says.
The writing is on the wall. Ukraine is being defeated and the aid will not making any difference. If you think allowing Ukraine to strike Russia with western missiles will work, you will find first Russia will use a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine, and if any western country wanted to fight, they too would get it. That is what is meant buy 'we do not want Putin to fail'. Putin will not fail as he is resolute and he will use nuclear weapons (he has made that clear).
For the US govt., the only issue is that Zelensky hangs on till the election. After that, if Trump comes, he will stop support for Ukraine; and if Biden comes, he will hand the failed US project to the unfit Europeans to carry on.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
So Russians do not have proper uniforms, helmets, body armor, reasonable accommodation, training, guns that fire safely, ammunition that is not 50 years old, Medical kits, Medical treatment, sleeping bags, or pay.
But they have somehow returned Ukrainians to the 16th century, with no electricity and water. Bakhmut is now getting ready for the Mariopol treatment.
Ukraine will be returned to its agricultural roots.
2
-
6 months ago, Fareed was a typical western hawk against Russia, confidently exuding western supremacy about Russia's inevitable defeat. Now, he knows Russia has as good as won the economic war and is strangling, not only Ukraine, but Europe also, by squeezing its energy supply. He has also catalysed the end of the dollar as the sole currency for trade settlements, which in the long term will undermine US power.
Now that Fareed has realised that the west and the US have shot themselves in the foot, he is feebly trying a line to salvage the west !
He wants Biden to tell the rest of the world, that the US is only using the dollar as a weapon in an exceptional circumstance because there was a threat to the 'rules based international order'. He wants Biden to assure the dollar will not be used against the rest of the world. But the US has used dollar as a weapon against Iran, Venzuela, Afghanistan and stolen their money.
[The US has become so cynical and desperate in its greed to maintain supremacy, that Biden blew up Nordstream to make sure that Germany never connected with Russia for gas after the war is over. Even Europeans (at least those who can think) will have doubts about trusting the US on rules based international order !]
As for the 'rules based international order', it is a pompous and self righteous term used by the west (BoJo, Biden, Fareed....) and hated by the rest as it is used duplicitously. Putin asked recently what is this 'rules based international order', has anyone seen the rules, has the whole world been consulted ? The rules are created for the enemies, the west can have exceptions, and ignore the rules when it suits them. Thus, Blair and Bush fabricated a lie about WMDs, invaded Iraq, without consulting the UN or anyone else. No one called them war criminals, or had them tried. The same with Afghanistan. The west can insult anyone, pronounce judgement, seize others money (theft), demand regime change, invade.
Fareed needs to get real and not talk like a naive person and imagine the rest of the world is stupid. The rest of the world has suffered the west's rules based order, so they will not believe if Biden followed Fareed's advice and said this theft of Russian money is a one-off thing, taken only to preserve the 'rules based international order'.
The fact is Putin has single-handedly ended the western order. There is no going back to it. The rest of the world realises that too, and they support Putin. The fact is the west cannot invade Russia (like they could Iraq) to preserve the dollar. Russia dangles the nuclear sword on them. Nor can the west win the economic war, which they imagined they could.
Putin has a very clear understanding of geopolitics, and economics, and he has the will power to execute it. There is no leader like him in the collective west. In a way, Putin is another Stalin, that only Russia can produce - one changes the flow of world history.
Hence, Fareed good try, but the rest of the world mistrusts Americans from experience. Biden himself will not be able to say what you advise because even he knows he has no credibility.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Ukraine hit by uprecedented wave of air strikes targeting energy facilities - but they and their western handlers in this video are still dreaming of getting Crimea back.
Behind the scenes, one can see a subtle shift in the western stance. The war is now not charted by Putin but by a professional Russian general Surovkin. That is how it should be. In wars, you don't hold territory if it is not defensible, you give it up, and concentrate the attack in another region or by other means. In chess, sometimes you sacrifice a knight or bishop to win the game.
Surovkin has done that. The decision is to destroy the power infra structure. The intention is not to harm civilians per se, it is to reduce Ukraine's fighting ability. Despite western media saying Russia has run out of missiles, and Russian missiles are inaccurate, and that US missile systems are shooting them down 100%, somehow Ukraine's power grid is down.
The triumphalism over Kherson is fading, as the tactic changes and Ukraine is being hit from the air. Russia should have destroyed the power infrastructure at the beginning. They were too soft. But Surovkin is not soft, he said he will take tough decisions. Withdrawing from Kherson was one, and going after the power is the other.
The west is once again realising retaking of Kherson is not going to bring a Ukranian victory. The west will have to funnel money and equipment indefinitely as Russia is capable and ready to continue. The problem for the west is that Russia has won the economic war, and they are de-industrialising Europe, so funding Ukraine becomes a problem. Russia is undermining the western financial system that the west used to control the world.
The west is now using the Polish missile strike to clip Zelenksy's wings. Normally, they will not say anything that benefits Russia, but it is a signal to Ukraine that endless funding would not be possible. Despite their public stance that Ukraine is winning (Kherson is evidence), the US has started directing Ukraine to negotiate. Zelensky does not like it, but the west is using his stance over the Polish missile to undermine him. More such incidents will occur.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Clarke needs to apply his intelligence and figure out why the collective west is defeated and he should educate people, instead of building more false premises of 'How the US and UK’s aid package to Ukraine will destroy Putin'.
The west encouraged Ukraine to take on Russia based on the following false promises :
Russia was economically weak, and sanctions would cause a public uprising, Putin will be over thrown and the Americans would support the opposition and appoint a marionette like Zelensky and the Russian people would accept this (the Americans thought they could create a coup as they did in Ukraine in 2014 and implant a favourable govt.). None of this happened.
Biden was expecting currency collapse saying rouble will be rubble. Instead, Russia triggered off de-dollarisation, a movement that has caught on which poses the biggest threat to US power. It is unstoppable.
Russia is militarily weak, and western technology is superior. Whereas the reality is Russia makes all the weapons and they are battle hardy - hypersonic missiles (which the US cannot make), planes, submarines, ships, drones, shells, thermobaric weapons, nuclear weapons, they have satellite information and their own GPS, and they are expert at electronic warfare. Currently, they have the best combination of hardware and operational experience in combined warfare, which NATO does not have.
Another premise was Russian soldiers are trained poorly, and they have no motivation. The west has no understanding of the military tradition in Russia and its history. That country has been invaded by German, French, Poles and Lithuanians, by Swedes - and each time Russia has broken the backs of the invaders. Russia is a country where the people are patriotic and ready to make sacrifices for it - in a way which no western country will do.
Russia will run out of weapons. The reality is Russia has industrial production as it has not outsourced it. The US and west have outsourced their production and they have run out of weapons. In a war of attrition, Russia will win.
Finally, the rest of the world is either on Russia's side, or at least not willing to sanction Russia. The rest of the world has experienced American aggression, so they know.
I suggest that Clarke get to reality. The US and UK’s aid package to Ukraine will not save Ukraine.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The lady in blue says Iran is funding this and she is outraged. The other side can say the US and west is funding Israel to run an apartheid state and give it a carte blanche for it. Was she outraged about that ? The west has not forced Israel to abide by the Oslo accord, Israel has settled 500,000 in the West Bank to make it a fait accompli and you are asking Palestinians not to retaliate. You need to get real. From Palestinian experience, the Israeli civilians work for the army, the women work for IDF, their children will grow up and join IDF and shoot Palestinian children. So why would Palestinians care ? All this moralist argument by the likes of Piers about the horror of this incident comes after quietly backing and arming the side that is perpetrating apartheid. Nelson Mandela was also called the T word.
If the Jews carry out the ethnic cleansing they do in Palestine within a country in Europe, I assure you the Europeans will gas them - and Piers will lead it. The Jews did not do ethnic cleansing in Europe but still the Europeans gassed them. And these Europeans are lecturing on what is unacceptable. They say 'You have to denounce the attack before we can consider anything else, because it offends our refined and superior sensibility'.
The reason the west has lost credibility is due to backing Israel, Afghanistan invasion (9/11 was due to Palestine war), invading Iraq and inciting Ukraine to fight Russia. Russia ended the western world order by checking the US's NATO expansion, and the west's backing of Israel will be another losing case.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nozhki-busha Russia has taken 4 oblasts, Ukraine is now looking for electricity, water, heating and food, they are in no position to mount any major counter offensives to dislodge the Russians. At best, they can make pin pricks.
In a war, you look at the trend, not small battles. The war is fought on several fronts : military, food, energy and financial. On the food and energy, Russia has the upper hand. Even on the financial, Russia turned the tables, the euro and pound have devalued by 20%, and there is a shift to non-dollar trade settlements. In the military field, Russia has not won outright, yet it has the upper hand; there is no way Ukraine can win. The Ukraine of 1991 is gone for good.
Russia is de-industrialising Europe. BASF has announced downsizing in Europe and shift to China, due to intolerable energy prices. China is the world's largest energy importer, yet it can offer lower energy prices to manufacturers thanks to its links with Saudi and Russia. More will follow. BMW has announced it is going to close EV production in UK and shift to China.
Sir Putin has ended the western 'global order' for good. No other country - not even China - could have done this. Russia throughout its history has done world changing things.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
These western jokers are talking now about what the west should have done - put sanctions before the operation as Ukraine demanded. As if Russia would have been defeated by that ! The reason they were delayed was the west thought putting sanctions would instigate Russia to go ahead.
Look at the muddy western minds. The only thing that would have stopped Russia was if the US agreed to a security guarantee, not to induct Ukraine into NATO. If not, they said they will go ahead with military-technical operations. Sanctions before or after would not have changed the outcome.
But such wishful and pointless statements (like 'if only we had listened to Ukraine and put sanctions early') show Ukraine and the west are defeated now.
Ukraine has lost 20% of the land that used to contribute 90% of its GDP. It has lost 20% of its electricity supply. Its shipping lanes are blocked.
As for McDonald's, sports companies etc. leaving Russia - Russia is not going to go down because of that !
All this has shown that Russia is strong militarily - and economically. Russia's economic resilience is beyond the west's expectations. Russia has shown greater political astuteness than the west.
Russia is not isolating itself economy, it is open to China and other countries. Laura is trying very hard to put on a positive spin for Ukraine - they will be integrated in the western economy through IT, and Russia will be cut off from the world ! Give me a break - first, how much of Ukraine will be left ? Secondly, IT is service industry, how many Ukrainians can profit from it. If there is no energy, there can be no IT. Thirdly, the world is not the west, cutting Russia off from the west does not mean Russia will not work with China, India, Arabs, Africans, Turkey and the rest. This war has shown Russia on its own is more powerful than the EU + US, and in future Russia + China will end western dominance.
In short, western analysts as usual tries to present a rosier than rosy picture of Ukrainian prospects, while presenting the bleakest possible picture of Russia's economy. Of course, there is no admission of the havoc Russia is playing on western economies.
The west is subsumed by false pride and the stinging pain of defeat.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mylet2658 Ukraine's independence declaration stated it will not join a military alliance and it will be neutral. The was the condition that Russia agreed for independence. After the American aided coup of 2014, Ukraine changed its constitution and put NATO membership as an aim. Therefore Ukraine has reneged on an international agreement, and hence Russia has taken corrective steps to counter that, and bring Ukraine back to neutrality. They are enforcing international law. Putin had asked NATO to give a security guarantee that it would not place missiles in Ukraine targeting Russia. NATO refused. Why ? Then Putin said he will take technical-military action. So how has he lied ? He has given you a chance for peace, you declined, and he acted as he said he would. It is like the Azov Nazis in Mariopol who are trapped in the steel factory, and they kept civilians as human shields. The Russians have asked them to surrender. They have refused. So Russia has no option but to starve out or kill all of them.
It seems to me you want your cake and eat it : you want to go for reckless NATO expansion, pretend you are holy and innocent, and when the reaction comes and you get a beating, shout it is genocide.
American and NATO troops had a training centre in Lvov (which was bombed and foreign mercenaries were killed). What were they doing there when Ukraine is not in NATO ? What were these suspicious bio labs ? Victoria Nuland was very evasive.
As for business interests, read NYT articles from 1997 on why the Americans wanted NATO expansion
See New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
The US is an international trouble maker, Iraq and Afghanistan being recent examples. Ukraine is the same. Ukranians are the proxy (albeit willing ones) in the US fight against Russia. That is why US credibility is low in the non-western world.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You said this two years ago. You expected the Russian economy would collapse due to sanctions, the Russian masses would come out on the streets and overthrow Putin and you hoped you could replace him with a Zelensky type reporting to the US. You told us that Putin was living in fear, he had a hand tremor, and cancer. Zelensky even said Putin had died and a double was acting !
Your military experts told us Russia ran out of missiles, and was forced to use washing machine chips. But we saw the missiles kept coming, including those awesome hypersonics, and they destroyed the power grid and Patriot batteries. The Abrams, Challengers and Leopards turned out to be junk. NATO pumped up Ukraine for a counter offensive to recapture Crimea. Zelensky even said by Dec. 2022 he would retake Crimea because 'that is where it started and that is where it will end'.
But Russia defeated you. It shrugged off the sanctions, it saw off the 2023 counter offensive, it killed off the Ukrainian military and is making steady advances. You are shouting more falsehoods to console yourself. Get real. After 2023, Ukraine is unable to push forwards, it is only being pushed backwards on all sectors, without exception.
There is no way Ukraine can now reverse what it has lost. NATO does not have the arms, even the shells. And the Ukrainians are short of people. Russia will keep what is taken, the rest will be converted into a wasteland, and NATO will not be allowed to set up bases in Ukraine. Ukraine will be returned to a pastoral land as it was before it joined the Soviet Union. It will have no industries, no military, no electricity....
And all your principal war mongers are gone, Biden to the asylum, and Boris Johnson has disappeared to follow Trump. In contrast, Sir Putin is still there and dictating terms !
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@auggieeast Ukraine cannot join NATO just because Stoltenberg made a vague promise. Ukraine's border is not settled and Russia will not allow what is left of Ukraine to join NATO - because that is what they fought the war about.
'Russia, which is now running out of advanced munitions. '
Western media have been saying this for ages. But engage your brains and think independently - daily Ukraine receives a salvo of missiles, and drones, destroying its power infrastructure, and daily Zelensky pleads for help.
'All they have is nuclear blackmail...'
You do not have the guts to call their bluff - because you do not want to die. Russia will use a nuclear weapon on Ukraine if needed and nobody will dare do anything. Why would the US want to fight a nuclear war against Russia, when it does not want to send troops to Ukraine to fight a conventional war ?
If they don't have a single one of the oblasts, then why does Ukraine keep saying 'no negotiations unless Russia vacates all land' ? Again, engage your intellect.
'Then you have the Russian economy falling apart.... ''
Is that so ? It is wishful thinking. The Russian rouble was the best performing currency while euro and pound de-valued by 20%. I read Russia is deindustrialising Europe by creating a shortage of energy. But Russia has energy for its houses and industry.
'Ukraine has the support of the rich West, so they have the best equipment.....'
The west was rich due to cheap Russian gas, and will not be so rich when it has to pay 4x the price for gas. Then it will not be able to subsidise Ukraine. The west has been saying that Himars were a game changer, before that switchblade drones were a game changer, but Russia continues to grind down Ukraine.
As for Ukraine's morale, let us see after the power system is destroyed, and after the west starts putting pressure to negotiate. That pressure has already started with Biden and Scholz making hints about a diplomatic solution.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@paulking4490 The US's record where it put ground soldiers is defeat @ Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. The US does not have the stomach for casualties.
There is no point of 'if scenarios'....That is wishful thinking.
'Russia's only hope is nuclear weapons....' That is why it is called a superpower. I read one of those Sarmat missiles can finish off an area the size of Britain in a single strike. And they have hypersonic missiles which you are still trying to make. They reach you in a blink of an eye.
Even in conventional battle, the Russians will prevail because they are ready to fight and die for their motherland. You don't have their patriotism. NATO countries are chickens who cluck when frightened - like Finland and Sweden.
It was the Red Army, not the US army, that destroyed 80% of the German army and captured Berlin. The US army would not have been able to do it.
When was the last time NATO won a battle ? It ran away from Kabul in a most cowardly manner, with the US running to catch the plane, without informing its allies ! That was shameless. Seeing that, why do you think such an army can fight Russia in a conventional war ? Use evidence based reasoning, and not thoughts based on false pride.
Russia is fighting 30 European weaklings + 1 superpower and prevailing. Putin invited those who think that they can defeat Russia to come to the battlefield. The US declined.
When Nixon met Mao, the Chairman told Nixon : we know you can drop 100 nuclear weapons on us; we shall only drop one on you, and we know you cannot take that. That is an accurate assessment of the US character.
2
-
@truthseeker6116 Cut out your pretentious hysteria and moralising. The US and NATO did much bigger scale war and atrocities in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I did not see your type shouting about prosecuting your neocon war criminals, or taking Afghan and Iraqi refugees.
Putin has every right to demand dissolution of NATO. As PM of Xi of China asked, if Warsaw Pact was dissolved, why was NATO not dissolved ? Russia showed goodwill, but you exploited it in a one sided way, and you want to pretend innocence. James Baker after the reunification of Germany had said that NATO would not move one inch to the east. Later on the Americans said that there was no written agreement. When Yeltsin, the first President of Russia, protested the first wave of NATO expansion, he was told 'that assurance was given to the Soviet Union, you are Russia'. Yeltsin was furious at western duplicity, he said 'You wait, Soviet Union is gone, but Russia will be back'. Indeed, Russia is back, with its usual military strength, a resilient economy and a strong leader.
Ukraine is the proof that if you mess with Russia, eventually they will punch you on the face, and it will be painful. Once the Russians fight, they fight hard. They taught Nazi Germany and a lesson, and they will teach the Ukro Nazis and their supporters a lesson.
'There is no justification for Russia's actions. All this talk of de-Nazification and saving the Russian speakers is the biggest load of crap'.
Who told you ? In the 2014 coup, Ukro Nazi groups with Nazi emblems, like the Right Sector and Azov Batallion took part. Do you know about them ? Victoria Nuland and John McCain were in the crowd, what were they doing there taking sides in a Ukranian coup ? How would it be if Russian MPs appear at a Scottish independence rally and instigated mob violence ?
'Russia will pay a very heavy price for what they have done. And the sad thing about it is that the true number of murdered Ukranians is most probably much higher than the world realizes. I think when this war is over and Ukraine is liberated. The true scale of Russian atrocities is going to shock the world. '
Did the world hold Americans and their allies to account for the death and destruction in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghamistan ? So don't put on airs. Start with yourself before you preach. You want something for nothing. If you wanted to avert war, you could have given Russia the security guarantee over not expanding to Ukraine, even if you could not disband NATO. Otherwise, Russia warned you they will take technical-military action. Ukraine and NATO chose to decline the offer, so now you have to accept Ukraine of 1992 is gone, Russia will take the historic Russian lands of Crimea, Donbass, Odessa and Transnystria (which were gifted to Ukraine by the USSR). As for Ukrainian casualties, they chose the war option, they could have said they would not join NATO and allow US bases in Ukraine. They thought they could continue with their Russophobia because they had your protection.
Finally, Russia has proved that it is stronger than 30 weaklings + one superpower.
2
-
@VladLen Same, I liked the Soviet Union, I like Russia. Its literature, music, history, chess, gymanstics, the Red Army's defeat of Nazi Germany. Russia is vilified, but it has always had a knife held against its throat by the west - in the past the French, Germans, now the US and NATO. So it has not been able to settle down and have normality.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@khmer31 I am sorry that coming from a communist country does not make your analysis automatically sound. The argument here is not about the west's democratic republic socialist open quasi-free economy (your words) against totalitarian system like Russia or China. The issue is what business does the US have to come from across the Atlantic to put missiles in Ukraine facing Russia (that is the ultimate goal of getting Ukraine into NATO). Russia had warned against NATO expansion, and said it would take military action. It called NATO's bluff, and NATO was found to be cowardly and unable to stop Russia. Ukraine is just an unfortunate pawn. The Maidan Revolution and overthrow of the existing govt. with US aid was not exactly democratic and Ukranian neo Nazis were parading around with Nazi symbols. The US funded Russophibic groups to come to power. The US has played the same game of backing factions in Turkey, Pakistan, Vietnam, Afghanistan.
Ukraine cannot capture back the two independent republics or Crimea - those are gone for good, due to the irresponsibility of Ukranian politicians. Now they have lost more land along the Black Sea coast and the Russians will not give those back. Ukraine cannot win, it will become a waste land fighting an endless war - in which case it will become like Libya. Ukraine for Russia is not like Afghanistan for America. America could leave Afghanistan as it is far away. Ukraine is next to Russia, and therefore it is a matter of vital security for Russia if it falls into wrong hands. Hence, they will not leave like you imagine. Your analysis is shallow and wishful thinking. Russia can take Donbass, the land along the Black Sea Coast and then keep targeting other parts of Ukraine - occupation is not necessary, they can reduce other cities to rubble with missiles, and they can create a condition where Ukraine cannot rebuild.
Ukraine is seeking external guarantors. But the way the west has acted, US will not be allowed to be a guarantor by Russia as that is backdoor NATO entry. Ukranians have shot themselves in the foot by willing to use Russophobia and western aid, as a means of getting into EU and NATO. Russia will not allow it, they don't have to occupy the whole of Ukraine, they can just keep Ukraine disturbed and unsettled. Europe is second biggest loser after Ukraine as it has to take refugees, pay for them, the fuel price will make industry unsustainable, and Europe has become even more dependent on America and its machinations. Neutrality and keeping good relations with Russia would have been the best option for Ukraine. That would have also allowed ties with the west.
The root cause is reckless NATO expansion (caused by American desire to sell its arms to these new countries). If Ukraine had been inducted into NATO, the US would have put missiles there, and it would have required a nuclear war to dislodge them. Hence, Russia had to pre-empt it now. They have done that successfully. Ukraine has abandoned NATO entry, and the west now knows the limit of NATO expansion. The west also has to face the economic consequences. As for whether Putin or Zelensky will survive, I would worry about Zelensky. If he signs a negotiated settlement, his people are going to ask why he did not do that before Ukraine got destroyed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Amusing to hear this joker Nielsen asking 'Why did experts fail to predict Russia's invasion of Ukraine?'. He claims he got it right.
The reason is western experts did not heed Putin's warning on NATO expansion, and thought that Putin was bluffing. In any case, the west was supreme, Ukraine with NATO weapons and training would defeat Russia, sanctions would make the rouble rubble, the whole world would rally round the west, and there will be an uprising in Moscow.
The surprising thing is why Nielsen is posing such a question now. His previous videos were euphoric on how Ukrainians had nailed Russia in Kursk.
To raise such a question now is an admission the war is lost for the west, and the soul searching and blame game have started. The EU will say the US abandoned Ukraine; Trump will say it is Europe's problem and the war was due to Biden; the British will say the US and EU did not have the Churchillian resolve of the British. They hate to accept the reality : Russia is more powerful than the collective west, and NATO is a paper tiger.
Now Nielsen knows the west has lost. Russia is going to finish off Donbass and move forward to the Dnieper, and then it will chase out the Ukrainians from Kursk. The US will not give the irresponsible British permission to strike Russia with missiles, as Russia has promised it will attack Britain and the US does not want to fight a nuclear war to save anyone else.
Instead of asking ''Why did experts fail to predict Russia's invasion of Ukraine?', the question is why did your experts not listen to Russia and accept that NATO expansion was a threat to Russia, and Russia would take action ?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
6 months ago British jokers like Clarke were pompously telling us about how the Ukrainian counter offensive was going to do a breaching operation and head swiftly to the Sea of Azov and the Crimea. Some even said Ukrainians will be able to vacation in Crimea by December. When that dragged on, and the Ukrainian Leopards were destroyed, and Ukraine's handlers started realising the crafty Russians had anticipated their advertised offensive and built the Surovkin line, they scaled down the tune, and Clarke assured us that Ukraine was conducting probing operations all along the front, to find the weak spots, and this was making Russians fearful and depressing their morale. British intelligence even said Ukraine was not making progress due to the growth of tall weeds which obscured their view ! One can only have contempt for Britain's intelligence and military and political analysts. Why do they do it ?
Ukraine's soldiers (who the UK boasted were trained in UK) were killed off. In Bakhmut, Clarke said Russia was reduced to fighting with shovels because it was so short of equipment. It seems the Russians bayoneted the Ukranians and took Bakhmut. Then Clarke said Russia got Bakhmut at heavy cost and Ukraine attritioned the Russians, and Bakhmut had no strategic value. But the reality was the Ukranians lost a lot of their army in Bakhmut. In the counter offensive, they lost more. The Ukrainians were pressed into doing the offensive due to western time lines and demand to show return on investment, even though it was known that the Russians had built a three layer defence. After the offensive failed, the money and arms supply dried up due to doubts about Ukrainian capacity. It was a poor return on investment.
Then the Russians advanced and panic set in the west of Ukrainian collapse. Zelensky sounded the alarm and said he has no option but to retreat. So more money is being released 6 months late, to stave off the impending defeat. But when Ukraine fails again (which is expected as their position is now even weaker), then the US will abandon Ukraine after the elections. Liars like Clarke will not tell you that. Then you will find Ukraine will have to rely on almighty Britain and the useless Europeans !
It is time for the British and Times Radio to have a reality check. On the Avdeevka front, Russia has advanced and punctured Ukrainian defence lines. One Ukrainian elite mechanised brigade consisting of hardened Azov Nazis refused orders to defend a crucial town. The crucial Ochertynay town on a hill was lost due to collapsing morale. Another less trained brigade of new recruits was sent to defend a settlement, in place of an elite brigade which the Ukrainians did not want to lose. There was resentment by the new recruits that they were going to be slaughtered to save the elite. Hence in Berdychi the Ukrainian troops are trapped, and surrender talks are going on. That is the situation. There is no point Clarke claiming what the Ukrainians will be able to do in future due to arms from the US and UK. The Russians are not going to allow Ukraine to settle down.
There was a devastating airstrike yesterday, as usual Ukraine claimed it shot down 90% of missile, but it was pleading desperately afterwards for Patriots. But Lloyd Austin said yesterday the Patriots are not a 'silver bullet for Ukraine' - he was signalling the US will not give them away ! The US needs them for the war it wants with China. The US is pressurising Greece and Spain to give their Patriots away, and they are also reluctant. Greece has refused.
The British are the least relevant and least capable in this conflict. But as usual they do the most shouting and pretending. They seem to be trying desperately to show they are relevant. The British are imbued with a deep inferiority complex, they resent that they are not a great power anymore and they cannot digest that Russia who they regard as inferior from 2 centuries ago, is a superpower. They want to show off to the Europeans the British are holding up Ukraine, and they hitch themselves up to the Americans and talk as if the Americans (with British direction) have a plan. British politicians and Clarke talk like that. America's plan is only to go its own way after the election. They want to fight China.
Ukraine's situation now is like the Nazis in Germany after Stalingrad, as the Red Army pushed westwards.
Fabrication of 'positivism' out of frustration will not reverse impending defeat. The outcome is not in the hands of the British.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@sofiabrekhova1551 You have answered the question on why Ukraine sent 5000 TROOPS to invade Afghanistan by asking 'Do you think we have that much?'. Now, your defence minister is saying you are raising 1 million.
You invaded Afghanistan with NATO in order to curry favour with the US. So you should not be crying now when you misbehaved with US help and Russia punished you for seeking to US to threaten Russia.
Budapest Memorandum was signed by Russia, US, UK and Ukraine. Your safety was guaranteed providing you did not threaten the safety of the other 3 signatories. There is an exception clause in the Memorandum which allows use of force. Now Ukraine conspired with US and UK to join NATO to threaten Russia, the party that agreed to make you independent. NATO is a military alliance that exists for the sole purpose to threaten Russia. Hence, you and the US/UK jointly violated the Budapest Memorandum.
On why Victoria Nuland and John McCain were in the Maidan, you reply 'Omg, you’re right, handing out sweets is like nuclear bombs.'. Again, you are evasive. Foreign powers were meddling in Ukraine's elections and politics, and if US can do that, Russia can also respond. You chose to live dangerously, it could be indeed nuclear bombs, just see if Victoria Nuland will come to protect you.
As for overthrowing the President, using mobs, that cannot be right. It is like Trump trying to overthrow the elected winner.
Also, you did not explain all the Ukro Nazis in your society : Right Sector, Azov Batallion, Andrei Biletski, Bandera worship.....There should be zero tolerance for Nazis, and Russia is committed to de-Nazify Ukraine. Their HQ in Mariopol was seized and they are waiting trial.
Ukraine of 1992 is finished. You were given a chance for independence, but you proved incapable of ruling yourself, you let Americans manipulate your politics, and you thought you could make money with anti-Russianism. As a result, your country is gone. You will find at some stage America will leave as they cannot afford it, just as they left Afghanistan and Iraq, and they will Ukraine destroyed as those two countries. If not in Biden's term, the next US President may decide Ukraine is too costly to maintain. Only Russia will rebuild Ukraine.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@oight The UK seems to be the most militantly anti-Russian; more than even the Americans. They project themselves as a cut above the Europeans in combating Russia; Johnson decries the French and Germans as wimps who want to sell out the Ukranians. He goes out of his way to show off that he is with the Americans on Ukraine.
It seems that the UK is desperate to be with America. Especially now that they cannot get on with Europeans and have burnt their boats with Europe due to Brexit, they have to bend over backwards to be with America. Like in the Iraq war. The UK is paranoid about losing that 'special relationship' and will do anything harmful to it and others to maintain it. They framed many of the international organisations and their rules (together with America), and that gave them importance. Johnson is very afraid of the vanishing 'rules based international order' which Putin has engineered, as British importance will end.
Most Europeans have not realised America is now a selfish, opportunistic, predatory ally. This is not the America of the Marshall Plan and the Berlin airlift.
When I pose the question 'who blew up Nordstream pipeline ?' to English, Germans, Dutch, French and other Europeans, there is an awkward silence. They all know who did it, but they are afraid to point fingers. The Germans are positively scared at pointing fingers at the Americans. If you pose the same question to Arabs, Indians, Chinese, Turks, Africans etc. they would have no hesitation to say who did it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The blame game starts when defeat stares.
For the west, the Russian action was presented as a moral outrage, 'an unprovoked attack against a sovereign nation' (BoJo). No discussion and questioning of the US drive for NATO expansion, and the US action of cultivating and stoking anti-Russianism in Ukraine, and staging a coup in 2014 to position an implanted anti-Russian government.
The west believed its own propaganda : Russia was weak economically and militarily, the west would be able to strangle Russia with sanctions, and the western equipment was so much superior, and Russian equipment was so much inferior, that Ukraine will defeat Russia and Russia would surrender and accept western terms. These are convictions that westerners still hold.
Hence, indeed western expectations were high, and Ukraine promised what the west wanted to believe as it has an implanted govt., which knows the tune its master wants to hear.
2
-
In the peace negotiations in Turkey, both sides reached an agreement that they were willing to sign, then Boris Johnson was sent by Biden to scuttle. Ukraine walked away due to pressure from the Anglo Saxon powers - it is their war, they want it to continue.
At that time Putin said, 'next time, any peace settlement will be on Russian terms and the the terms will be stiffer'. Indeed, that is the situation now. The terms now are 'a Ukraine minus 4 oblasts and Crimea' and no NATO bases in what remains of Ukraine. '
Can Ukraine and the west reverse these terms ? If Ukraine rejects, it will be lead to loss of more oblasts, and if anything remains, it will be turned into a wasteland in which NATO cannot set foot.
If you look at western leaders, they are numskulls ; Boris Johnson proclaimed he will stop Putin to save 'the international rules based order', but he did not last; the leader of the free world is retarded mentally and may not survive; Macron first said he did not want to humiliate Putin, thinking Putin was going to lose, but after Russia helped African countries throw out France, he wants to send troops to Ukraine; Scholz is forced into an unwilling role, he is pressurised by the US to step up, but he will recall how the Red Army beat Germany into a pulp; and then you have Duda and other eastern European leaders talking as if they are superpowers. The European leaders talk in many voices, they do a lot of PR and theatrics, but have no substance.
In contrast, Sir Putin is logical, focussed and resolute. He sticks with what he has to do - protect Russia from US bases in Ukraine.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mec8690 That is right, but most western people cannot see Zelensky's catastrophic error, because he survived beyond expectations, so they have deified Zelensky. The people removed from the conflict like the Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Africans etc. can easily see Zelensky was misled or misled himself. But the west keeps pouring in emotional and other support, and that is only digging Ukraine's grave. At the end of the war, we are not going to have a situation like the end of Nazi Germany, with NATO troops in Moscow capturing Putin and bringing him to Nuremberg; yet, the west's outlandish rhetoric mimics and feeds Zelensky's unrealistic rhetoric. It is the west and Zelensky that need a ramp off. But since the west has decided we cannot see Putin win, they will support Ukraine to destroy itself to check Russia.
2
-
@milesinnz Your reply is feeble and based on wishful thinking.
'NATO does not set foot in Ukraine again" - when did NATO set foot before"
NATO had a training centre near Lvov. Russia struck it in the early days of the war. Western mercenaries had congregated and 40 were rendered lifeless in that missile strike. Russia is fighting to war to prevent NATO bases in Ukraine. At the end of the war, they will not allow NATO to set foot in Ukraine.
'Putin managed to get Finland and Sweden to want to join Nato'. So what - these are weak and irrelevant countries. Russia has proved 35 EU countries, UK and the US do not have the guts to enter Ukraine and fight Russia. All of you are afraid of being killed. Adding another two weaklings will not put courage into NATO. These countries only want to join NATO precisely because they are feeble.
'Now, Putin has managed to get Germany to build a tank manufacturing plant in Ukraine '.
That is a fanciful announcement, it does not mean it will happen. To build a factory takes time, Russia will destroy it with a missile. German workers will not dare go to Ukraine because they will be killed. Russia has already destroyed Ukraine's Soviet tank factory, its aircraft company. What will stop them for destroying the German tank factory ?
''Now, if there was a nuclear attack on Ukraine, Nato would move in - you can be assured that this is planed for. It would be the end of Russia.'
NATO is afraid to send a conventional army to go to Ukraine to fight Russia, they will not have the guts to fight Russia with a nuclear war. Russia has the capacity to incinerate all western cities in a blink of an eye. Before Ukraine is nuked, Russia will take the precaution of putting its nuclear missiles targeting the US and Europe on alert for strikes to eliminate all western cities if NATO dares to strike Russia. Nobody in the west wants to get killed for Ukraine.
'You need to be on the Ukraine front line, in your vintage Russian tank facing Abram/Leopard and Challenger tanks.. then you would be wetting yourself...'
What you can provide is too little, too late. You can provide < 50 tanks. The US said Abrams will arrive in 2024 or 2025. Russia has 14,000 tanks. By that time, Russia will end Ukraine. It is like your Himars. You said it will be a game changer. It was nothing of the sort. After the Himars, Russia destroyed the power grid, took Soledar and now Bakhmut is ready to fall.
Don't fool yourself. The war is lost for the west.
The saying about NATO is 'gros bouches, petits mains'. Big mouths, tiny fists. Your writing embodies that.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Anders is a joker. He says that Ukraine is doing very well in Kursk. But is it relevant ? Ukraine cannot advance in Kursk, it is pinned down, its rear in Sumy is attacked, and its soldiers and equipment in Kursk are being hunted down.
Anders goes out of his way to say the situation in Prokvorsk is not critical and the Russians have not won the war even if they take it ! All options covered.
The numskull is trying to hold back a fart and put on a brave face ! He says it is going to take a long time to take Provorsk (like Bakhmut). No, that is not correct. Ukraine has just 5 brigades in Provorsk. Provorsk is a key logistical transport hub on which supply lines for the Ukrainians depend all along the eastern front. When that falls, the effect is big.
Then he says even if Provorsk falls, so what, there will be a new front line ! That front line may not have time to form. There are no massive fortifications built further west.
Another of his feeble lines is 'Look it took Russia 6 months to advance 10 km, so it will take years for Russia to take a city'. It does not work like that. Initially, the defending side has the manpower and equipment, and the attacking side's penetration will be slow. But when the defending side's manpower and equipment is reduced to a low level, the resistance will crumble at one point - and the floodgates open. Novohrodvika was taken in 3 days intact and that was a key supply centre. Several other small towns were taken intact because there was little resistance. When some Ukrainian military officials say the Donbass frontline is crumbling, why is Anders so eager to lie on behalf of Ukrainians ?
Ukraine's last days will be like Nazi Germany's against the Red Army. There were many Nazi supporters who believed Germany could turn the tide, it had miracle weapons etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Note that Russia is not asking for peace talks. The instigator of the conflict, the US, wants to be the peacemaker now ! The US instigated the coup in Ukraine in 2014 which brought Nazi style Ukrainian nationalists to power, who sought NATO entry. The project failed, and the US wants to leave.
Whether there is peace or not after the peace talks is irrelevant. The fact is the US wants to give up on Ukraine. Peace talks will be on Russian terms. Ukraine has to be neutral, there will be no NATO bases in Ukraine AND Ukraine has to surrender Donbass. No European forces will be allowed in Ukraine as peacekeepers. Those are the entry terms for Russia.
If the US does not agree, Russia will continue and take by force the remaining part of Donbass, and advance to the Dnieper, and also go for Odessa. No one can stop it.
Time is on Russia's side. US support is going, the Europeans cannot step in and if they continue their suicidal polices, the current European leaders are going to swept away by 'nationalist' or Nazi governments that do not want to support the war. Russia just killed a Danish F16 instructor. No western govt. will be able to send forces to Ukraine as the Russians will kill them and there will be uproar in the western public.
Peace talks taking several years suits Russia. Russia is adept at the long chess game. Due to Trump, NATO weakens, tariffs mean the trans Atlantic alliance is over, and neo Nazi governments want Dexit and Frexit, so end of the EU. The west is falling apart.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You attack the Red Square parade, and then Kiev and Lvov will receive some Oreshnik strikes and maybe a nuclear strike. So don't get carried away. President Xi will be there, also Fico and other international guests. Russia has never struck at Ukraine and killed international leaders.
The commemoration is for the Red Army's super effort that defeated Nazism and liberated Europe. We know western Ukraine where you are is a hot bed of Ukro Nazis. Some of the Ukrainians collaborated with the Germans and carried out massacres of Jews and Poles. The Germans employed some Ukrainians as concentration camp guards.
[Of course most Ukrainians were not Nazis, many Ukrainians fought honourably in the Red Army, and we recall the Fourth Ukrainian Front of Red Army led by Marshall Konev].
However, after Ukraine became independent, Nazi style ethnic nationalists spewing hatred against Russians came to the fore. Ukraine was a bi-ethnic state and the Ukrainians wanted to have Ukrainian supremacy - that is always a recipe for disaster. Ukrainians did not have the capacity for self rule, it became a failed state due to Ukro Nazi nationalism.
Russia has sworn to destroy Ukro Nazis. The Red Army destroyed German Nazis and Russian army will destroy Ukro Nazis. The war is only going one way. You either surrender unconditionally or Russia will eventually force unconditional surrender. The Americans and Europeans are not capable of stopping Russia, and America has given up. Russia will take the Russian areas, the rest of Ukraine will be bombed into a waste land. At best, Ukraine will be partitioned, or Russia will take all. Due to your Kursk adventure, Russia is in Sumy. If you attack the Red Square parade, Ukraine's non-existence will be fast forwarded.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@DipakBose-bq1vv Often people of mixed parentage take pride in both cultures. But Boris looks down on Turkey (there is a video of him visiting Turkey where he talks about the superiority of western civilisation over Ottomans). He is eager to show off he is part of the great western civilisation. He wants to be more Anglo than the normal Anglos, by idolising the racist and colonialist Churchill. As Boris has not had the opportunity to be Churchill himself, he sees Zelensky as the Churchill of this age ! He does not know Churchill went to Moscow to seek Stalin's support, and it is the Red Army that defeated Nazi Germany.
Boris was the first one to say 'Putin must not be allowed to win, and break the 'international rules based order'. He did not say that when Britain invaded Iraq. Boris is keenly aware that a Russian victory spells the end of western domination (that is what is meant by 'international rules based order'), in which Britain had a role as assistant of the US to formulate the rules for others. He knows a Russian victory means Britain will have a diminished role in the future. That is why, in his farewell speech in Parliament, his last words were 'Stick with the US, stick with Ukraine'.
Oddly, his soulmate in the US is Trump - because Trump shares his notions of white superiority. But Trump is ready to sell out the Ukrainians !
While boasting about the superiority of western civilisation, Boris at the same time disparages and mocks the EU. He prefers to be America's errand boy. Boris epitomises the confused British character, post-empire.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
' We will be as per Article 5 under 'the nuclear umbrella' of NATO'.
You have never read Article 5, you are just parroting by hearsay.
Article 5 only says an attack on one will be taken as attack on all. However, Article 5 does not say there will be a unanimous reaction by all members. Its says members can help the attacked country by all means, including and up to war. However, it lays open the decision to each member - some may offer to send medical aid, some equipment but no troops, some may opt out etc.
Further NATO is the US. Kissinger said long ago that the US would not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany and Europe. The situation has not changed.
If Russia, used nuclear weapons on Finland, the ones who have nuclear weapons in NATO will naturally decide that they do not want to be incinerated like Finland.
Finland has been foolish. You are just dumb if you imagine the others will agree on self immolation for Finland. Why should they ? After they see a Sarmat missile incinerate Finland, the natural reaction would be 'I don't want that to happen to me'.
Russia clobbered Ukraine because it was planning to give its territory to the NATO and the US, to threaten Russia. Russia was not threatening Finland. Now, Finland by joining NATO, brings the possibility of a nuclear strike on itself. And there is no guarantee the ones with nuclear power will strike Russia, because they will save their skins first.
Try to engage your brain and think.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
And how is Kherson now ? Unlivable and nothing to celebrate now. Gen. Surivikin withdrew from Kherson, let the Ukranians come in, and then started massacring them from the other bank. Meanwhile the withdrawn Russian troops are battering Bakhmut. And Russia destroyed the power grid. The plan is to return Ukraine to its agricultural age, before the Soviet Union industrialised the Ukraine. No electricity, no airports, no trains, no ports, no munitions factories, no steel mills, end the capacity to wage war, just agriculture....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Just shut up, the war is lost. Russia is winning and it cannot be stopped. The US has slithered away. That nasty Jew Nuland who organised the coup that brought this war has scooted. The Europeans are incapable of fighting without US support.
Ukraine's position now is the same as the Nazis in Berlin as the Red Army advanced.
The US is pressurisng Ukraine to agree to a frozen conflict. That is why Zelensky is saying he will accept 2022 borders. That is a non-starter : why would Russia give away Mariopol, Bakhmut, Severdonetsk, Lcyhchansk, Avdeevka ? Ukraine walked away from Istanbul at the behest of Boris Johnson, and Putin had remarked, next time the price will be higher. As Putin said, why should Russia negotiate because the west has run out of weapons ? Russia will take more, eventually Kharkov and Odessa. Let the Czechs or whoever brings the weapons for Ukraine.
America will withdraw and the Europeans will be holding the refugees and bearing the financial responsibility for Ukraine. European economies are in no position to manufacture shells etc.
The British are nauseating war mongers, inciting and backing wars in Ukraine, Iraq, Palestine but eventually it eats up their own country. But it is in their blood - as you can see with this pompous presenter. This man wants Ukraine to shed more blood of its youth to save western face.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Russia started the incursion into Kharkhov, forcing the Ukranians to divert troops from the Donbass front to defend it. That thinned out the Donbass front and it helped Russians advance.
Now the Ukranians themselves opened a front - and thinned themselves. They did not divert troops from Donbass, but they kind of abandoned them instead of reinforcing them. They threw their reserves into Kursk. They got the Russians by surprise and sure it was an embarassment. But in the long run, they cannot hold on to Kursk when they are simply short of manpower. Over a period, the Russians will kill the Ukrainians in Kursk. And meanwhile, the Ukrainians lose in Donbass.
The Ukrainian and US objectives are not clear.
Zelensky first said it is to strengthen Ukraine's negotiating position. Russia was not inclined to negotiate, but now it is inconceivable. Then Zelensky said Ukraine wanted to create a buffer zone. Russian missiles cross all buffer zones. Then Zelensky said that it was a message to people of Russia that war was in their country - as if the population will be angry with Putin and it would cause an uprising against Putin because of it. Instead, Russians would be angrier at Ukraine and the west and they will agree with Putin. All it does is strengthen the hand of those who advocate a nuclear strike on Ukraine.
The Kursk gamble was taken under US instruction, and it is a publicity stunt. The plan was to capture the Kursk nuclear power plant to force Russia to negotiate, as they would not be able to fight at a nuclear power plant. But the Ukrainians could not get close, and now the Russians have fortified the Kursk nuclear power plant. The Ukrainians are left with sparsely populated areas of Kursk and they are hunted by the Russians.
Clarke is distancing himself from the narrative that Ukraine is winning for the time when the folly will be exposed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@solmak47 'they already shut off Black Sea to NATO due to Ukraine war to support Russia… '
They have done this according to the Montreux convention from 1936 which regulates the traffic between Black Sea and Mediterrenean. In wartime, if Turkey is not involved in the conflict, warships of the nations at war may not pass through the Straits, except when returning to their base.
Since NATO countries are aiding and abetting a warring party, Turkey does not let NATO warships enter during a period of war. Equally, Russia's Baltic fleet cannot enter to support its Black Sea Fleet. Hence, Turkey is following the rules.
Russia has access to the Black Sea due to its fleet in Sevasatopol. The US push to get Ukraine into NATO was to expel the Russian Black Sea fleet from Sevastapol. That is why Russia had to seize Crimea in 2014, to stave off NATO mischief to block Russia from the Black Sea
Yes, Turkey is doing well, as it is does not listen to US and EU. UK, Germany and France have to tow the US line. They are doormats of the US. They have to buy LNG at 4x the price due to order from the US. Germany does not even have the courage to name who blew up Nordstream pipeline. Generally, vassal states do not have a control of their destiny.
Turkey is not a vassal state. It can get energy from Russia or anywhere. In fact Putin met Erdogan to create a gas hub in Turkey. Turkey also dictates terms in NATO - again, because it is a sovereign state.
'Why send troops? Their basic weapons on the hands of Ukrainians are doing great job!'
That is a face saver. If NATO is strong, you could have stopped the war by defeating Russia quickly. No need for Ukrainains to be massacred. But then the Russians would massacre you instead - and you do not have the courage.
Ukranians are doing a great job ? They lost 20% of their country, they are losing Soledar and Bakhmut, they have more than 100,000 soldiers killed, no power or water, they have no access to the sea, their GDP is < 50% of before, the damage is $ 1 trillion, they have 7 million refugees, and the beating will continue. Great job ? You are sitting smugly and safely in Europe, like a coward, and declaring Ukraine is winning.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The sinking ship is NATO, and Wallace wanted to be its Sec Gen.. But the Americans who control NATO did not appreciate Wallace trying to upstage the US by sending tanks, missiles, etc. and claiming to be the forefront of the western effort, hence the US preferred the stodgy Stoltenberg ! So much for the 'special relationship' !
Wallace was one of the strongest pushers for the Ukraine war. At the beginning of the war, he had pompously declared on TV that Britain kicked the Tsar's backside in the Crimean war in 1856 and would do the same now. What happened ? Russia and Britain of 2023 are different from 1856. Russia is a superpower and Britain is not, even in an alliance.
Now Wallace knows Ukraine is a sinking ship , so he is not standing by what he endorsed so vehemently. He told the Ukranians 'NATO is not Amazon' and demanded they show gratitude.
Thinking NATO could beat Russia shows a shameful lack of intelligence and throwing Ukraine under the bus when the going got too hot, and blaming the Ukranians, shows poor character.
Russia is defeating the west and Wallace knows that, so he is cutting and run. Wallace should go to Ukraine and join their military.
They will name roads after him.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@richardivonen3564 Countries have come and gone, borders have changed in due course. Parts of Ukraine were with Poland, Hungary and Romania, besides Russia. In all good faith, Russia gave Ukraine independence in 1991, and even gave away the Russian areas like Crimea, Donbass, south and Odessa. But from 2014, due to the American instigated coup and implanted government, Ukraine started misbehaving, it jettisoned the neutrality it promised in its independence declaration, and sought to join a military alliance against Russia, and started discriminating against Russian speakers. Hence, Russia decided to take back the Russian areas. If Ukraine continues to misbehave, the rest will go as well. The writing is on the wall. There is nothing inviolable about countries. They exist, they disappear, depending on how well or badly they are governed. Ukraine has blown it by cosying up to America. America bribed and infiltrated Ukraine, and implanted a govt., but when the axe fell on Ukraine, they supported from outside.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This man's life centres round planning western conflicts against others. Against Soviet Union till 1990s; then Muslims; now Russia; in future, China.
NATO is in no position to plan "overwhelming force". Only 4 years ago, it ran away from Kabul, with the US scrambling to get aboard flights to escape first, without informing allies. It is unwilling to send troops to Ukraine, its protege, a de facto NATO member.
The US will not be able to match Russia + China combined. The Europeans + UK are irrelevant. Russia and China are setting the new world order, the US can only think of fighting, whereas the other two are seeking economic cooperation in Asia, Africa, Latin America, Muslim world. The rest of the world has suffered western invasions and financial blackmail, they are going to go with Russia and China, and BRICS.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The BBC fellow asks if NATO missed an opportunity by not getting Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire, and then get Ukraine into NATO ! This comic idea was suggested by a retired general, but it is presented as if it is brainwave.
As if the Russians would fall for that !
Russia fought a war to prevent NATO bases in Ukraine. They are not going to be fooled by NATO negotiated ceasefires, which would allow NATO to induct Ukraine later. They don't trust NATO because it expanded after giving them the assurance it would not.
Russia's negotiating position is (1) demilitarisation of Ukraine (means no NATO in Ukraine) and (2) de-Nazification (remove Bandera ideology supporters).
If those are not agreed, Russia will continue. In 2023, they have the upper hand. They know the Ukranians do not have the manpower, and west is not able to supply shells or equipment in quality or quantity, whereas Russia has both. The Russians will see off this counter offensive, attrition the Bandera army (with cluster bombs next), destroy the western equipment, and then go in hot pursuit for the Russian areas like Kharkov and Odessa.
If Ukraine does not agree to neutrality, Russia will just turn the remainder into a wasteland and prevent NATO from setting foot. No one will be able to stop them.
At some stage, the Americans will get tired and walk away, and the incapable Europeans will be clutching the refugees and giving aid.
2
-
2
-
The undertone of all the comments here is the great white countries here let in all the non-whites and therefore are ruined.
The reason for the decline of London and European countries is that there are no more colonies to extract wealth from and reinvest and continually in London. Britain applied 50% taxes on Indians, and after their overheads running India, there was surplus to invest in London. Britain took India's raw materials like cotton, converted it to textiles, and sold it back to India. The French extracted minerals from African countries and hardly paid them until recently. Likewise, the west extracted oil from the Arabs, paid them less then the price of water - till King Faisal raised oil prices and demanded a fair share. That led to great prosperity in the Gulf states with transfer of goods and services there.
The west has wasted whatever money it has to invade Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now it is engaged in war in Ukraine and Israel. That is a tremendous drain on losing causes. Why is the west doing this ? Out of a desire to maintain the western order which allowed it to loot others, using regime change to install puppet regimes that will hand over their resources at the prices the west wants.
Recognise that the economic structure of the world has changed, see BRICS. Work with them instead of engaging in wars to maintain a western order that cannot be maintained.
Another factor is the fertility rate in the west is lower than the replenishment rate. Among the 'natives', there is no family, men and women are career oriented, they regard children as a burden. Then there are two choices : keep a pristine white society but die off; or import immigrants to sustain the standard of living. West Europe and US opted for the latter.
So either die off or give up your concept of pristine western/white society or get used to multi ethnic society. Cut out the moaning about 'London not being what it was like in my childhood'. It has not changed because some elite wanted to import inferior non-white people, it has changed because you don't want families, and because your control of the world's resources is coming to an end.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
All this talk about Europe being able to generate an arms industry to confront Russia is vain, wishful thinking. Europe does not have the energy (Russia provided it), the cost of production is too high to make arms or anything else. Europe is importing 155 mm shells - from Pakistan, where factories are running on a 24 hour basis. European costs are too high, even 155 mm shells have to be outsourced. The chance of Europe making hypersonic missiles etc. with its shrinking economies and populations is negligible.
In the European continent, there used to be 4 powers : Russia, Britain, France and Germany. Now there is only Russia : a superpower no less. Britain, France and Germany are such spent forces that the Europeans look to Estonia for leadership !
The Europeans live next to Russia, they were benefiting from Russian energy, but decided to join America to threaten Russia. Russia defeated them, and America decided to leave without too much loss, leaving the Europeans on a limb. All the idiotic nations of Europe like the Baltics, Poland, Finland etc. who wanted to fight Russia are now cowering in fright. The Swedes and Finns were even boasting about how they strengthened NATO ! Now they have to face Russian might without the US.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
From this discussion, I gather :
The west had been cutting defence expenditure while thoughtlessly expanding NATO eastwards. It had imagined Russia after the Soviet Union was a spent force.
In this regard, it is worth recalling Boris Yeltsin's reaction when NATO expansion started violating the detente after the end of the Soviet Union. Yeltsin was furious, and he said 'you think the Soviet Union is finished, but you wait, Russia will come back'.
Indeed, Russia has come back as a military - and economic - power. Credit has to go to the iron willed Putin. Russia had prepared militarily (hypersonic missiles) and also economically (developing gas and oil) to confront NATO on its designs of encroaching on Russia. They have done it quietly, biding their time.
Now the west had found they are behind in military technology. The US's second attempt at hypersonic missiles failed yesterday. One American defence analyst ruefully observed the US got left behind as it was engrossed developing technology to fight Taliban who had nothing more than RPGs mounted in Toyota pick up trucks, while others unnoticed, built advanced technologies.
At the same time, Europe does not have energy security. It never did. Before, Europe could extract materials from its colonies. They were getting cheap energy from Russia and they did not realise you cannot get that and threaten Russia with NATO expansion at the same time.
Now that Russia has thrown a punch against NATO expansion, and the west knows fighting Russia is injurious and the west will lose, it was only left with economic warfare. But the west finds Russia is now prepared and capable of economic warfare. Freeze their money, they will freeze your gas supply. With Europe's economies on the line, the defence experts want to increase expenditure. But there is no money. That is why the Defence Minister says he is going to spend more money and the PM keeps quiet because the money is not there. The money for defence can only be created by slashing living standards, health and education.
The west needs to come of its high horses, and claims of the superiority of 'the European family', and realise the folly of its NATO expansion. It should give the security guarantee Russia asked for and end the war. Arming Ukraine due to false pride ('Putin must not be allowed to win') is falling into the pit and having no mechanism to come out. Ukraine cannot defeat Russia, so don't waste your time and money.
The west blew the gains of detente by trying to push Russia into a corner. Now Russia will give Europe the hardest of times unless the Europeans swallow their false pride and accept European security cannot be built at the expense of Russian security. The EU is playing a dicey game imagining American support will be there forever. Trump had no interest in Europe. He or his type may come back. Even American democracy is shaky. As the economies of Europe tank, neo Nazis who are lurking below the surface in European countries will be strutting about in Germany and France. Europeans are also foolish to imagine a couple of weaklings like Finland and Sweden will change the equation against Russia. Another fault in the EU is that small and irrelevant countries like Lithuania, Estonia, Poland etc. are allowed over majors like Germany and France to dictate policy towards Russia. The world wars were created by big powers rushing to defend obstinate small powers.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Your channel has been telling us daily since 2022 that the west is winning and Putin's days are numbered. But Biden, Blinken, Johnson and other warmongers are gone, but Putin is there.
When you ask rhetorically 'Does the West have what it takes to stop Putin for good?, it means you know in your heart you are defeated.
Russia has unity and is unflinching in its purpose - once it decides there is no other way but to fight, it will fight and fight hard to win. Nobody in the west has that steely determination.
The way the question is posed it sounds like Russia behaved arbitrarily due to a mad dictator. It is the US and the west that expanded NATO to the east. When the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, NATO should have been dissolved. But instead, NATO is used for sales of US weapons. Putin many times objected to NATO expansion as a security threat to Russia.
Instead of saying Putin should be curbed, you should introspect on why you expanded NATO after saying it would not move one inch to the east, why you did not offer and negotiate with Russia the security guarantee it asked in Dec. 2021 to avert the war, why Boris Johnson told Zelensky to scrap the peace agreement reached in Turkey. You wanted to surround and contain Russia, so Russia fought, now you find you have no prospect to win, you don't know what to do.
We do not see any western media or politicians introspecting on what they could have done to avert the war. And such people cannot find solutions.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I don't know why they bring Lithaunians and people from similar useless countries to discuss global affairs.
What is the point of saying after defeat that Ukraine would not be in this position if the western countries gave them shells, and delivered the military assistance on time ? It just means the west could not produce the shells to match Russia, and the collective west does not have the incredible arsenal that Russia has. How can the west give what it does not have ?
As for the question about Ukraine feeling let down by its 'partners', it was very foolish in the first place for the Ukrainians to go and fight a proxy war for a far-off superpower against a neighbouring superpower. One's capacity to win depends on one's arsenal and logistics. If you have nothing in your own arsenal, and your 'partners' also do not have enough in their arsenal, and your logistics stretch across the Atlantic, then it should be obvious you are going to lose. Ukrainians were dumb to agree to fight a proxy war for the US, for getting accepted into the western club.
This episode shows Ukrainians were not fit for self rule, it is best they are back under Russia. It was a mistake to make them independent.
Indeed, Putin has won. Whether he goes after Baltics, Poland etc. depends on whether these countries misbehave with Russia and try to act like Ukraine.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@parthbhatt2648 You are bluffing with someone who has visited India and had a look at your Scriptures, and studied also the writings of Ambedkar and also Brahmin Nazis like Golwalkar.
'one who knows and follows Vedas is Brahmin, by definition' - 'Similarly, a non-Brahmin fulfilling the above criteria can qualify to become a Brahmin. So basically anybody can become Brahmin if they want to regardless of their so-called caste or even their religion.'
You are trying to pull a fast one.
The Vedas and all Hindu texts (Mahabharata, Ramayana etc.) endorse caste. If you say you are a follower of the Vedas, you follow the caste system by definition. Ambedkar wrote a condemnation of a wicked story in the Ramayana where the god Rama slays Shambuga from the untouchable caste for doing penance and reading Vedas.
'by definition, a Brahmim is someone who has (or pursues) the knowledge of Brahmand, meaning the universe. So technically any scientist who knows Vedas can claim to be a Brahmin, and no one can stop them.'
In the story in the Ramayana, Shambuga could not become a Brahmin by studying the Vedas. So what are you talking about ?
The caste system was not codified by the British, it is very much a tenet, in fact the only tenet of Hinduism. The first history of India was written by the scholar Alberuni from Afghanistan, about 1025 AD, and he notes the Hindus do no believe in equality of people before God.
Ambedkar wrote that if Indians migrate one day outside India, caste will become a world problem. This Brahmin Ramasamy's statements denying racism in US is similar to a Brahmin like you denying the caste racism in India.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@IslamicOrigins You are admitting Michael Clarke's lack of capabilities, after claiming his genius and brilliant mind !
But afterwards you make feeble excuses like ''First, he is not mystic Meg. He is an analyst, not a prophet.'
Clarke is not an 'analyst', he is an establishment cheer leader of the counter offensive, who did not see the outcome, that it would put Ukraine on a course which would decapitate its army, and from which it would not recover. His type was predicting how the Bandera army would breach the Russian defences and dash to Melitopol and the Azov Sea. When that did not materialise, he started saying that the Ukrainians are doing probing attacks all along the front line to sniff out weak spots and then they would punch through.
This is a game of chess, you are supposed to see what will happen if you make this or that move, and see what will be an outcome. No mysticism or prophecies are involved.
'they could have initiated the counter offensive long before the Russians had planted millions of mines etc.
The Russians obviously anticipated your intentions, understood the way the west works, and took defensive steps quietly - exactly as one does in chess. The Ukranians and their cheer leaders were announcing the counter offensive and all the weapons. The withdrawal from Kherson that Surovikin ordered was projected as a Russian defeat. The Russians kept quiet and in effect sprung a surprise defensive move. Normally one springs a surprise offensive move. But this is Russian genius at chess on show. They could catch the opponent off guard with a defensive move. Clarke and company were boasting the front is not moving, the Russians are stuck.
There is another factor in chess - you have to make the right move at the right time. You obviously did not make the right move at the right time. Your response after being defeated is like saying if the Russians had not anticipated my move, I would have won.
'So, I think it is quite an unreasonable expectation that he ought to be able to tell the future.'
Clarke was always unreasonable. I have been following the ongoing analysis of independent analysts with military background like Scott Ritter, Col. McGregor, Larry Johnson, and several other independents, and their analysis before the wretched counter offensive predicted the failure and gave the exact reasons. If they can do it, why can't these jokers like Michael Clarke do it ? He is paid to propagate the establishment line.
The Russians are the best chess players, both tactically and strategically. They way the west plays shows they are incapable of doing the right things at the right time, they are incapable of seeing the outcome because they are driven by false pride, vanity and emotion, and not by calculations.
I put my money on the Russians to win this war.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You have been saying this from the first months of the war - Russian soldiers are ill trained, they have low motivation, they have shovels etc. You said Putin had a hand tremor, a mysterious illness.
Yet the same Russian soldiers routed the Ukro Nazis of the Azov Batallion in Mariopol, and then went on to take Severodonetsk, Bakhmut, Avdeevka. Soon they will take Chasov Yar.
It is the Ukranian army that got slaughtered in Mariopol, Bakhmut, and Avdeevika. They got wiped out trying to hold Bakhmut.
When Russia takes a town, you it is not of any worth. Yet, people in Finland and Sweden are frightened !
The Russians can fight a land war like no one else. I see an echo of the Red Army. For combined arms warfare, no one has the experience - drones, tanks, planes, missiles fired from land and sea, electronic jamming, cyber warfare.
You are still indulging in wishful thinking when Russia is on the cusp of victory ! Coming this far, the Russian soldier is looking for the entry into Berlin.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Zelensky is talking vainly as usual and the west is cheering. Ukraine won Eurovision, a purely sympathy win, and Zelensky talks about a liberated Mariopol in Ukranian control. But Maripol is gone for good ! Ukraine will not be able to get it back anymore than the Crimea. Many Ukrainian cities are demolished, Ukraine's exports via Black Sea ports are curbed, Russia can prevent reconstruction by re-bombing sporadically, there is no chance of NATO induction, Ukraine wants a guarantor for its integrity, no one has come forward, as Russia will decide who is acceptable. Ukraine can be kept burning like a low intensity charcoal fire for long, and if it gets out of hand, Russia can settle it with a tactical nuclear weapon.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Paladiesh Russia fights strategically and not for image. Putin does not interfere with a general's decision. The Russians was caught by surprise in Kursk, they thought about it and decided the first step is to stem further advance to the Kursk nuclear plant. Once that was achieved, they decided no need to divert troops from Donbass. They realised it is better to keep the Ukrainians' best divisions pinned in Kursk, unable to go forward or retreat. Meanwhile, it helped with Donbass. Now there is need to push the Ukrainians out of Kursk. They are doing that.
Earlier, see the Ukrainians were planning a counter offensive in 2023, Gen. Survokin ordered a pull back of Russian forces in Kherson across to the eastern bank of the river. It was a retreat, politically it looked bad, but Putin accepted the General's decision. Survokin then laid the defensive belt, waited and let the Ukrainians impale themselves on it. Strategically, the pull back from Kherson was needed and it paid off.
At the start, the Russian attempt at taking Kiev was under manned and the advance was spread out, so it failed. But Russia did not give up; they decide to put full forces in the Donbass. It is paying off. The west wants to freeze the conflict, Russia is not ready.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Kissinger correctly summed up India as the largest, unimportant country.
Indians have a sense of entitlement, because India has the largest population. Its 5th ranking in GDP is misleading and is only linked to the population; per capita GDP is now lower than Bangladesh. On any ranking of metrics of standard of living, Indian will be in the bottom 30.
Jaishankar's plea is that due to large population, India should be in the Security Council. That is a pathetic plea. No one is going to buy that.
India has enmity with all its neighbours - with Pakistan and China, not to mention Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. It has slid into enmity with Muslims and Christians.
India itself is a fractious tinderbox. The Hindus are an inexplicable collection of castes, and they seek unity by beating up minorities. That is how pathetic they are.
The economic miracle was made by Manmohan Singh, it has run its course, now India is mired in Hindu extremism and Nazi style nationalism.
Jaishankar himself has written a book on India's predicament. India is surrounded by enemies (of its own creation), it is not strong enough economically as China, it is not militarily powerful as Russia, China and the US, it is not strong enough to be a dictating pole even in its neighbour hood, it has to have a balancing act between Russia, China and the US to have a semi-independent stance.
India is casting about for relevance. Modi has given high caste Hindus and Hindus settled abroad a false belief that Hindus are now someone important in the world. But the low caste Hindus are not benefited, let alone non-Hindus. Unlike China, Russia or America, there is no Indian sense of nationhood. It is an inexplicable collections of castes and communities with rising intolerance, and leaders like Modi rely on that for power.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Earlier, the same western experts said that the first 72 hours are critical, and Ukraine must punch through the Russian lines and advance swiftly (blitz krieg) to Melitiopol and the Sea of Azov, and cut off the connexion with Crimea. This is how breaching operations are done. The expectation was the Russians would be disoriented and retreat, and Ukraine would be able to dictate peace terms. They said Ukraine must not get bogged down in an attritional war as that is to Russia's advantage.
Now after 1 month, the Bandera army lost a huge amount of manpower and the wonder game changing weapons of the west, without even reaching the first Russian line. So western 'experts' have revised the narrative, now they say Ukraine needs more time for the strategic breakthrough, and this is the inherent nature of the thing. The video says it is too early to say Ukraine has won or lost ! What a way of putting it. Ukrainains certainly have not won, and the evidence suggests they are losing.
The reality is Ukraine and the west have lost. Consider the facts.
Russia has taken 4 oblasts. They have taken time out and fortified their positions.
Ukraine is not able to breach the Russian lines because it does not have enough munitions; the soldier in the video says without them, Ukraine will lose.
Ukraine cannot make the munitions, as Russia has destroyed their factories. The west cannot make enough artillery shells, tank shells etc. Biden has admitted that, and given it as the reason for sending cluster bombs.
Ukraine does not have air cover to advance on the Russian position. It will be well past next year before any F 16s arrive and the Russians will have solutions for that also.
Western equipment has proven to be shoddy and ineffective in the battlefield. See the Bradleys, Leopards and French tank with tyres. The Patriots were hit and damaged. They have instructed the Challenger tanks to be kept away from the front lines !
The US wanted Ukraine in NATO since 2008 and in 2014 it arranged a coup in Ukraine to advance that. But in 2023, the US does not allow Ukraine into NATO ! The reason given is Ukraine has to do more to democratise and cut corruption. The US had no problem backing Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion in the 2014 coup, and Biden and his family had profitable dealings with Ukraine due to the corruption. The real reason the US does not want Ukraine in NATO in 2023 is that it will demand Article 5 and the US will have to send troops to Ukraine. In which case the Russians will kill the Americans, on a bigger scale than they faced even in Vietnam. You just have to look at the US intervention in Somalia. The Somalis shot down a Black Hawk with RPGs, and the Americans sent more Black Hawks to rescue the first, and two more were lost. 20 Americans were killed, and their bodies were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. The scenes were broadcast on US TV, and the Americans ran away from Somalia after that. So one can imagine if they entered Ukraine due to Article 5, the Russians will shoot American helicopters and tanks, they will not drag the bodies through Moscow, but they will publish videos of the tanks being destroyed with missiles (like the Leopards), and no US politician will survive.
Finally, Russia has withstood the sanctions and they have saddled the west with inflation and de-industrialisation and de-dollarisation. So Russia has won the economic war as well.
This defeat is difficult to admit for the west. But reality will catch up. The US will abandon Ukraine like Afghanistan and Iraq. And Europe cannot fight Russia.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ЭЮЯ-о3к Well written. The west also has an oligarchy (a nexus between billionaire capitalists, corporations and the elected politicians to support each other for mutual benefit). The capitalist has money; the politician, power. Money and power are interchangeable. The western media serve the western oligarchy through an electoral system. The common people have a vote, but the ones who are elected look after their interests to some extent the voters, but their dominant interest is to serve the billionaires and business houses, who fund the war. In this, the media, which is also run as corporate businesses serve to act as a vehicle for manufacturing consent. On the Ukraine war, throughout the European and US media, there is consensus : Russia made an unprovoked attack on Ukraine, and we are defending Ukraine's democracy.
There is no questioning and criticism of the US role in staging a coup (under Victoria Nuland); the desire for NATO expansion which was driven since 1997 by Lockheed and other US corporations; the promise to the Russians not to expand NATO eastwards in return for the re-unification of Germany, which was later dismissed as only verbal; the expansion of NATO despite Russian protests.
The Ukranians are not so innocent : Ukro Nazism is a chief component of Ukranian nationalism (the Right Sector, Azov Batallion, and glorification of Bandera). They have persecuted ethnic Russians. In the war, they have also committed atrocities.
In western media discussions, in the panel you have westerners and Ukranians - but no one to represent the Russian view. The western media project Ukranians as valiant fighters, and Russians as dumb. So the public hears only one view. Noam Chomsky calls it manufactured consent. But it is only fooling oneself.
Earlier, the same tactic was used to wage war against Muslims and Arabs. Samuel Huntingdon wrote his infamous Clash of Civilisations. Between 1945 to about, the Soviet Union was the enemy. Between 1990-2022, Muslims were declared as retarded and the prime enemy of the west and its values. From 2022, the retarded Russians are the prime enemy of the west and its sacred values. Already, China has been declared the future enemy.
2
-
2
-
@tinareeves9899 The difference is West Germany got US aid to rebuild. The Soviet Union was itself devastated by the Germans, it did not ask for any one's aid to rebuild. No country, least of all the US, was as devastated as the Soviet Union. Yet the Soviet Union rebuilt, and became a superpower. The Soviet Union had many firsts : it launched the first vehicle into orbit. France and Britain withered away as powers.
We have heard this story that the Russia has a GDP the size of Spain or Texas as you say. But the question is the what the GDP is made of : Russia has energy, water, it is the biggest supplier of wheat, it makes all industrial metals, it has the military technology, it can launch space vehicles - it is self sufficient. None of the countries of Europe are self sufficient with their GDP - that is why Russia has floored all of them by just cutting off the gas. Even the US is not self sufficient. Boeing imports titanium from Russia !
Russia has shown it is adept at economic warfare. It has taken steps to undermine the west's economies. The euro and pound are reduced by 20%. It has taken steps to de-dollarise, and that in the coming years will undermine US power. All the US's vassals will go down with it.
'It will be shunned by the rest of the world and it will wither.'
That is wishful thinking coming out of a sense of defeat. You obviously think the rest of the world is Europe and US. China and India are buying Russian oil using their currencies. Saudis and Emiratis are doing business with Russia. Emirates and the rest of the world's airlines are flying to Russia.
Russia has ended the western 'world order' - for good. The rest of the world has seen it and is happy. The Saudis and Emiratis, Indians, Chinese, Africans and Latin Americans are ignoring US and European wishes. The Senagalese President of the African Union visited Putin to get relief for wheat exports from Ukraine. The Europeans were annoyed as he ignored the EU and did not consult their world order plans ! Putin then allowed Ukraine to export some wheat, but he insisted it should go to Africa and not Europe.
Your comparisons of GDP are infantile. It is using a single parameter to describe a country. Who else could change the world order singe handedly other than Russia ?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Canada has done well to stand up for its citizens.
Western countries need to realise that Indians are far more dangerous than Russians and Chinese. India itself is not powerful like Russia and China. But India has been under the grip of 'Hindu nationalists' since Modi came to power a polite term used in the western media for Hindu fascists. The Hindu fascists seek to make a Hindu state and they have driven non-Hindus (Sikhs, Muslims and Christians) to the edge by killing them using Hindu mobs and the police. This is what they have done in India. Outside India, Indians are the largest immigrants. The ones who have migrated to the US, Canada etc. are the educated cream, and they have been successful and pose as the model minority. However, this success has allowed them to support Hindu fascism in India and the demand for the creation of an exlcusivist Hindu state, while posing as a model minority abroad. However, sooner or later the thugee behaviour of the Hindu fascism will come abroad. The Hindus in India and the west believe they can capture power in the west and boost their power. Rishi Sunak is their first cog and Sunak quite shamelessly for a UK PM boasted his Hindu credentials. Last year, there were riots in Leicester organised by a Hindu mob against Pakistanis, following the model they use in India.
Western countries need to forget India has a potential economic power. Unlike China, it does not produce much. The western countries are courting it seeking a share of a supposedly big market. However, India's economy is lopsided, it is owned by a few oligarchs. It has a large GDP only due to having the largest population. But per capita income is lower than Bangladesh and it ranks with the sub Saharan countries in the hunger index. Hence, the west is chasing a mirage about a strong Indian economy. It is wishful thinking. Indian economy is as illusional as a Bollywood glamour film. In military terms, India is weak. China took land and the Hindu nationalists could not do anything.
The west needs to support Trudeau and understand the danger of Hindu militancy abroad sponsored by India. India's domestic civil war conditions will be exported outside. The best way for the west to deal with India is to shed its illusions and realise it is no longer the country of Nehru and Gandhi, it is now a country run albeit through a democratic system (so far) by Hindu Nazis who have expressed admiration of Hitler. The best way for the west to deal with India is to deal like China did and put India in its place.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@yousofkhan765 If the west felt for one moment they could fight against Russia and win, they would have sent troops to Ukraine. Their inadequacy makes them burn and write statements like 'our arms and forces are mightier, we would defeat Russia in a conventional war, but the Russians cheat in war and threaten us with nuclear annhilation'.
Then, I ask them to cite an instance where NATO won a conventional war on the ground. The scramble from Kabul was only 2 years ago and that does not give me much confidence in NATO's fighting ability.
You can see their fighting spirit when a couple of mercenaries are caught. They get unnerved, there is public uproar, they want POW status and immediate release. In a direct war, NATO forces would also get killed on the same scale as Ukranians. In Afghanistan, NATO pulled along for 20 years, but here, NATO will not be able to take the casualties for a single day.
They are unable to accept if they fight, they will lose. Hence, their solution is to put Ukraine in front, and let them be destroyed, on the alter of western pride.
Since the west was with held from conventional war (in which they say they are superior to Russia), they opted for economic war. In that also, they have got a bloody nose unexpectedly. Factories are closing in Germany and Europeans will be freezing in winter. You see Canada has released the equipment for Nordstream 1.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The cartoon is correct. Indians talk too much, and boast they are becoming a superpower, and claim they are a world teacher. The Chinese on the other hand are 'doers'. Anyone who has been to Shanghai and Bombay can attest the cartoon is right. India's fastest train can run at 160 km/h; that is about the same as the steam engine Flying Scotsman achieved in the 1930s.
Indians are focused on Hindu supremacy, beating up minorities (Christians, Muslims and Sikhs). They cannot overcome their wretched caste system, and they have a peculiar and unnatural obsession with the cow and its urine. The cow has more rights than humans in India.
Look at their PM. He is uneducated and grew up in an organisation with Hitlerian views on establishing Hindu supremacy in the world. He gained power by organising a pogrom against Muslims in his native state (see the BBC programme); that is his sole appeal to Hindus. He is into grandstanding about the Hindu place in the world.
India will remain permanently in the category of developing country. Kissinger once said 'India is the largest unimportant country'. That assessment still holds. It is largest by population, but per capita GDP is lower than Bangladesh.
The fact that India has the largest number of migrants (legal and illegal) is proof that India is a shoddy country and it has gone down in recent years.
India is no comparison to China. China will make it to the status of world superpower with US and Russia. India will be a plodder, and it is most likely to self-destruct due to its capacity for violent infighting between Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians. Churchill had correctly read Indians when he said they do not have what it takes to form a country, and it is a matter of time before they fight between themselves and self destruct.
In the early days, India had western educated politicians like Nehru and Gandhi, and now you have the homespun Indian politician, who is an old fashioned Hindu chauvinist.
Indians are incapable of addressing their faults, they merely react by calling others 'racist'. Modi belongs to a group that modelled itself on Nazi Germany. Germany has abandoned Nazism, in India Hindu Nazism reigns.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kingsleykester8167 You are putting on a brave face. Russia is fighting not Ukraine alone, it is Ukraine + 31 countries. And Russia is prevailing, slowly but surely.
If Russia had given the same training to Iraqis, the US would have lost more. As it is, Iraq and Afghanistan brought down US power. The US ran away from Taliban with its tail behind its legs in an embarrassing display of cowardice.
The fact now is Ukraine has lost 20% of what it had at independence, its economy is strangled, and that is why the US is saying the arms are for giving Ukraine a stronger hand during negotiations. Whatever happens, Ukraine ain't getting the lost land back, and Uncle Sam cannot change that. And the only terms Russia will give Ukraine is accept neutrality and maintain distance from NATO, or else Russia will come after more. Russia knows US and NATO are too cowardly to set foot in Ukraine again. If Victoria Nuland comes to Kiev, she will get a missile.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TheBrudol My good fellow, a country has to defend against armed attacked (reactive), but sometimes also proactively to threatened armed attack. Thus, if Russia had not gone in proactively, the US Seventh Fleet would be sailing from Sevastopol in the Crimea instead of the Russian Black Sea fleet, and eventually US missiles would be placed in Ukraine, and Article 5 would be invoked.
There is not only the Budapest Memorandum but also other agreements that have to be taken into consideration. The conditions for Ukraine getting independence was to surrender nuclear weapons and accept it will be a neutral state that would not join a military alliance. Ukraine reneged on that after the US sponsored coup of 2014, as it changed the neutrality stance and put in its constitution the goal of NATO membership. This was a flagrant violation of the commitment given to Russia.
Hence, when several documents and actions by Ukraine are taken into account, Ukraine threatened Russia (the US threatened Russia using Ukraine as a tool). Hence, Russia was right to terminate Ukraine's independence as it flouted the terms and conditions by which Russia agreed to make Ukraine independent. Ukraine is a failed state, that became a harlot of the US. It should never have been made independent.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The joker says smart weapons, and technology is the west's asymmetric advantage. What are those : Challengers, Abrams, Patriots....? Then he adds 'we don't want to give them to Ukraine because it will fall into Russian hands'.
Thus, we have superior weapons, but Russians will destroy or worse capture them, so we shall hide our superior weapons !
The reality is Russia has destroyed all categories of western weapons and shown they are junk. They have captured some and exhibited them.
Russia fires hypersonic missles, none in the west including the US has made a hypersonic missile, all their tests have failed.
I don't believe Ukraine has made any missiles of its own, it is humbug and posturing. They do not have electricity, and metals, all that was in the east. The west would have given them some old missile technology to strike deep into Russia under a Ukrainian brand, so the west can pretend that NATO is not at war with Russia. But Russia will take care of any factories and destroy them.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@louisekelly7274 These are false comparisons about economy and GDP of Australia and Russia. What matters is also what is the GDP. Russia can make satellites, launch them, they can make planes, hypersonic missiles, drones, metals, titanium.....Australia cannot make any of that, so just shutup.
Russia is self sufficient - has water, land, biggest wheat producer, has energy, minerals, everything.
If you have a lot of disposable cash, send it to Ukraine, the US and Europe have run out.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@veraintuizione6497 Initially, America was a force for good in Europe with Marshall Aid and rebuilding of Germany. However, in the last 20 years the US has become a predatory ally. It has dragged Europe into war in Afghanistan, and against Russia, and ME. Lately, the US plays off Eastern Europe against Western Europe. Donald Rumsfeld said in the 1990s that that the US had New Europe (Poland etc.), and Old Europe (France, Germany, Italy etc.) was not relevant. The problem for Europe is there is no leadership. Germany is unable to open its mouth due to the ghosts of its past. France has an idea of an independent Europe but it is isolated. And the other key player in Europe, the UK, does not think it is European, it will always prefer to be the butler of the US.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
There is no risk of a NATO-Russia war. Without the US, NATO is empty. No US President will fight Russia directly - the US knows it will lead to US cities to be incinerated. Russia has the nuclear weapons and superb and proved delivery systems that can arrive at hypersonic speeds.
Long ago, Kissinger had said the US will not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany and Europe. That has not changed.
Anders knows the war is lost for the west, he blames it on Trump, and he fearmongers that Trump's line will lead to NATO-Russia war. He hopes with this fear mongering, Trump will change his mind and somehow continue to support Ukraine.
When the US will not fight Russia, NATO will not fight Russia despite tall talk by useless people like Rutte, Kajas, Poles, Swedes, Finns etc.
With this video, Anders is accepting the inevitable : Russia has prevailed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@davidglow3 'The real problem is the EU is so reluctant to denounce US threats in Panama, Canada, Mexico, Greenland,Ukraine, Palestine, Syria, Somalia....'
The real problem is the Europeans have aided the US in attacking Palestine, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Russia....
But this time, Russia was a big fish that could defeat the collective west. The US decided it cannot afford to fight Russia, but that exposed Europe to take the heat from Russia on its own.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
According to The Guardian, the Ukrainians have taken Robotinye and punctured the first line of defence. Typically, they interview some Ukranian soldier and report that as fact. The Ukranian soldier told the Guardian the Ukranians did manual demining at night and created a corridor for advance. There was a lot of self praise, and he said the Russians could not believe Ukraine could do it. All this is natural for a Ukrainian. He said now that a corridor has been demined, the advance was straightforward because the 2nd and 3rd Russians lines are poorly defended. We don't know, but that is the assertion of the Ukranian soldier reported by the Guardian as fact. Once the corridor is demined, the Guardian makes out that it is straightfoward for the Ukrainian armoured vehicles to advance without opposition. The expectation is the Russians will crumble and surrender.
This kind of hopeful reports of breaching the line and impending Ukranian advance has been going on in the western media, but I still see no lightning move towards the Sea of Azov. Expectation and hope does not seem to match the actuality.
On Sky News, I saw self-contradictory propaganda by Sean Bell. He was reporting on the Abrams tanks. He also said that Ukranians were clearing the minefields manually and advancing, and then the Abrams will be invaluable in leading the charge to the Sea of Azov. But he said 10 Abrams will arrive mid Sept. and another 21 at the end of the year. So at present Ukraine's efforts to breach the lines is purely by infantry, and the armoured tanks will appear later from behind to lead the charge ! Firstly, by the time those Abrams come on the scene, the Russians will massacre the Ukrainian infantry. Secondly, the Russians may destroy the Abrams from the air when they arrive.
2
-
2
-
@zacretzer 'Indeed you are 'starry eyed over a leader showing courage and honor in the face of danger', to the extent that you overlook his total lack of intelligence and geopolitical reality. He is an implant of the movement America created with the 2014 coup in Ukraine, which triggered Russian counter actions. Zelensky indulged in Russophobia, to get American approval, and played to get into NATO, so that the US would come and put missiles in Ukraine targeting Russia. Russia warned against this and asked him to be neutral. But Zelensky got carried away, he thought Russia was bluffing and would not attack, and he believed America would intervene to save Ukraine's skin. The last two were severe miscalculations. The result of his miscalculations is many cities are reduced to rubble, many killed, 4 million are refugees, the economy is paralysed, more land is lost, and more destruction is to follow. If America encourages him, the time may come where Russia has to reach for the tactical nuclear weapon.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Russia is trying to regain the initiative ? You mean to say Ukraine had the initiative or has the initiative ?
Let us have a reality check. Ukraine's Kursk offensive has slowed; and Russian counter operations in Kursk have started and the Ukrainians are being killed and the Abrams and other western junk is being burnt. That was bound to be the case. Meanwhile, Russia did not pull out any troops from Donbass to send to Kursk. They are moving fast and Prokvorsk is now in sight. Once that goes, Ukraine's main logistical and resistance centre crumbles, and the rest of Donbass goes. At the same time Russia is administering the shock and awe therapy to the rest of Ukraine, so there is no power and water.
If you thought Ukraine seized the initiative with its hare brained incursion into Kursk, where it got into an over-extended position, and left the Prokorvsk sector for the Russians to take, it shows how dumb western minds are, and how they clutch at any straw.
Kursk is not a permanent loss for Russia. Alexander Nevsky said those come into Russia with the sword perish under the sword. The Germans, French, Swedes, Poles etc. found that. The Ukrainians will find that their gain in Russia is temporary, but Ukraine's loss is irreversible. Russia cannot be dislodged now from the 5 oblasts.
The Russians are advancing slowly but methodically. The Ukrainians are desperate as they have shortage of arms and soldiers, and they follow the dumb schemes the US concocts.
2
-
2
-
The sort of nonsense Nielsen spouts is of the same variety as Russia shelled the nuclear installaton it owns in Zaphorizia, or that it used a missile to destroy a POW camp housing Azov Nazis. Were those also because they are losing the war and their mental equilibrium is affected ?
Nielsen's starting point is his assumption that Russia is losing the war and Ukraine and the west is winning. This is self consoling western propaganda. The fact is Russia has taken 20% of Ukraine, it is strangling Ukraine's economy, it has cut off Ukrainian exports from the Black Sea. Russia is even strangling the western economy, successfully. It is de-industrialising Europe.
The strong cards are in Russia's hands. Ukraine has made some advances here and there, but it is not sufficient to roll back Russia. Russia holds the nuclear sword and can use it.
If 'crazy Russia' self sabotaged the Nordstream pipeline, then they can go and do the same to the Baltic pipeline, and use the nuclear weapon in Ukraine. Can Nielsen tell us what the west can do if 'crazy Russia' does these two things ? Put more sanctions ? Go to the UN ? Shout about war crimes ?
The west feels defeated as Putin has punctured its 'international order', The west does not have the military power or the courage to fight Russia directly, and does not have the economic power it imagined it had. All such analyses based on pyschological conditions of the opponent are indicators of the wishful thinking of the defeated. We heard similar psycho analysis of Putin's state of mind in the first month, the western media said he had a hand tremor, he had cancer, and he did not sit with others as he was distrustful. Yet, the ex tempore speech that Putin gave recently on re-taking the four provinces was brilliant. No western leader can speak with the same knowledge of history and geopolitical understanding as Putin.
2
-
2
-
Agree, Russia has all the strong cards. Ukraine was foolish to allow Ukro Nazis and indulge in Russophobia, thinking it will bring NATO acceptance. Ukraine is losing its industrial heartland, it has lost the coastal areas, and Russia can strangle its economy. If Ukraine wants to survive with what remains, it has to go back to neutrality, give up on NATO, and the Nazi elements need to be taken out. Playing the anti-Russian card to get western support is not going to work. Otherwise, Ukraine is going to lose more. Of course, having backed Ukro Nazis, this is a humiliating loss for the west. But as the commentator says, it is best for the west to cut its losses now as it will become worse later.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
After saying 'we shall support Ukraine for however long it takes' and BoJo saying Putin must not be allowed to win, as it would be breach of the western 'rules based order' , it must feel like a devastating defeat for the western elites, who believed in their superiority. Putin has changed the world order, and shown a US led alliance cannot bully Russia, in the same way as Iraq and Afghanistan. New trade flows have started between Russia, China, India, Africa, ME and South America, and de-dollarisation has started.
The UK and Europe need to realise they are committing economic suicide for America. If they do that, China and others will replace them, and Europe will become irrelevant. It is best for UK and Europe to be independent of the US and have good relations with Russia and China, and the US.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Blablablae I have been to India, and I have met Indians, and I don't believe you.
'The only mistake of Modi government was to pay less heed towards the education sector which is the most crucial part for nation building. '
Some years back. Modi govt. was fighting students of university in Delhi, using police and beating them, and his politicians were asking them to be shot.
'In development aspect they have done great improvement with some amazing policies in work (people are not aware of those, that's why education & awareness is necessary). '
What are the amazing development polices ? If has done so much, why does he call for a riot and polarise Hindus around election time ? He should win elections with just development as in western countries.
'India will surely become superpower in coming decades and the current scenarios are the example of it.'
That is wishful thinking. India does not have what it takes to be a superpower. Lack of education is one reason. Modi's rise was based on lumpen mob violence against minorities.
There are only three superpowers, China, US and Russia. India cannot join them. Jaishankar has written a book admitting as much. India has to play a balancing act between China, US and Russia. It does not have a strong enough economy, its share of world manufacturing is only 2%, and service is 4%. It has the largest population in a limited land, with high literacy. India has the largest number of migrants using any method to get out of India.
The caste system is a uniquely debilitating factor; it is against universal education. The writer Khushwant Singh wrote that caste is the fondest belief of Hindus.
'but majority of population is the middle class one.' Modi himself is an uneducated tea seller whose greatest achievement was the Gujarat riot (see the BBC documentary; why was it banned in India ?). In a developed country, the person would be prosecuted for criminal offence and would be barred from contesting. But in India, the middle class voted for an uneducated criminal. How do you explain that ? Previously India had well educated leaders generally - Nehru, Singh, Chidambaram etc.
The only explanation for Modi's popularity is his projection of Hindu chauvinism. Middle class Indians love that, they are not ashamed of it, they don't mind voting for a Hindu criminal. Therefore India cannot become a developed country.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@theTeknoViking You consciously lied about NATO being a defensive organisation. And when I caught you out with what NATO was doing in Afghanistan (including Ukraine), you conveniently say two wrongs don't make a right. The westerners claim there is a sacrosanct international order, they expect others to follow, but they can flout when they want. And if this reminded, you will say it is whataboutism.
Finland feels threatened when Russia starts an illegal war with anther one of their neighbors, after the history between your countries. Finland did not have threats during the Soviet Union and even now. But you chose the 'I am threatened line' and therefore you will be threatened from now on with nuclear strikes - at the first sign of any NATO aggression against Russia. The Sarmat missiles will strike Finland in a blink of an eye and America will forget you as it does not want those missiles.
Ukraine's sovereignty was conditional on it being neutral. Don't try to renege and retrofit. That is a typical western attitude - claim to follow rules based order, but become devious and cheat. That will not work with Russia. If you sign an agreement, you honour it, otherwise the other side is free to take action. Russia would not have allowed Ukraine to be free unless it agreed to be neutral. Russia made a mistake in making them independent, but now course correction is on the way and Ukranians are being a taught a lesson.
'Also: The "powerful neighbor" that was going to take Kiev in three days, turned out to be.. not so powerful after all.'
Russia never stated it was going to take Kiev in 3 days. The western media made that out, and then they get satisfaction that Kiev did not fall, and from that they extrapolated that Ukraine is winning, Russia is losing. In war, movements are adjusted and re-adjusted. It was mistake of Russia to attack on all fronts at the same time. But they have corrected and are concentrating forces at one point, while striking at other centres when necessary. Russia's stated aim was never to win in 3 days, it was to make Ukraine neutral, and deNazify it. Zelensky has abandoned the dream to join NATO and NATO would not dare again to induct Ukraine into NATO. The Nazis of the Azov regiment have surrendered and they will face trial in Russia. Zelensky asked them to surrender. So Russia has achieved its principal targets. Russia now has twice the land as 2014, and Ukraine is not getting it back. They have taken the industrial and coastal areas and will make Ukraine landlocked. The landlocked rump will be dependent on EU aid. Zelensky asks for negotiations and a security guarantee. Who will provide this ? Finland ? Russia will not allow US or EU to provide Ukraine a security guarantee as that is bringing back NATO (the culprit of this war) through the backdoor. All the strong cards are with Russia. The rump Ukraine under Ukranian hands cannot be reconstructed unless Russia permits. Russia will not permit till Ukraine signs to neutrality and the west gives back Russia's money.
'Face it, Russia if anything is a country that would be better off split up into more pieces. Without a dictator, with the regional people having their own say, instead of being controlled from Moscow.'
An aide of Woodrow Wilson said the same in 1918. That is western thinking, that is why Russia developed the strike capability to destroy the west. We know western wickedness including that of the Finns. Nazism is alright you say, it does not bother you. But Russia does not see that way. The Soviet Union under Stalin destroyed Nazism; no one else had the steel. Most Europeans like the Finns were happy to collaborate. Anyone who dares to attack Russia will face consequences you have not faced before. You know that, right ?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@sms7782 There is only one notable case where people resolved a dispute through negotiations : this is the case Gandhi versus the British. That was unique. There was a civility on both sides.
However that is not present in Ukraine v Russia, EU and US v Russia. Only beating the other to submission is the mental thinking, that is part of their culture and mindset, so it will take a bloody course.
That being the case, I detect still in your writing an attempt at exculpatory defence of the EU, US and NATO. Your starting point is Putin's invasion ('Whatever the reasons are, it was never and will never be a smart move to subdue others ,force them against their will to follow you and kill their friends and family'). The Soviet Union crushed Nazi Germany, that is why Europe is free today. Would you say that was not a smart move to subdue others ,force them against their will to follow you and give up Nazism, and kill their friends and family ?
You have to explain why the west sought a one sided expansion of NATO when Russia objected.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
India's Hindu nationalists are on a dicey road. True, that Canada has been lax and allowed extremists Sikhs to bomb a plane and then did not follow up with action. However, the origin of Khalistan movement is from the attempt of the Hindu fascist RSS to snub out Sikh identity, by telling them the Sikhs are Hindus and Hindi (and not Punjabi) is their language. This led to the Khalistani movement. The riots and massacre of the Sikhs (which was under the Congress govt. watch) has not been forgotten. The RSS and even Congressis took part in the lynching of Sikhs. A section of the Sikhs are so alienated, they are opposed to India. The Hindu nationalist govt. of Modi has made it worse. Modi tried to pass farm laws favouring his Gujarati Hindu business oligarchs - at the expense of the farming community of Punjab, the Sikhs. The Sikhs (and other farmers) protested and the laws had to be repealed. Since then the Hindu govt. and the Hindu media started maligning the Sikhs. The Hindus have started attacking Muslims and Christians as well, so increasingly it looks like it was not the Sikhs that were the problem, but the Hindus.
India could have afforded to ignore the Khakistanis. But by carrying out an assasination, the Sikhs may now retaliate. India will continue harassing Sikhs in India, and the problem becomes worse. The role of Hindu fascists in pogroms against Sikhs, Christians and Muslims will become more apparent as this comes out into the open.
Western governments need to back Canada and review western attempts to co-opt India against China. India's economy under Modi is a mirage, and India does not have the military strength to counter China. The west is over estimating India's worth. Instead, western governments must wake up to the real threat. Indians, not the Chinese and Russians, pose the greatest danger to the west. Indians, unlike Chinese and Russians, migrate in large numbers to the west, and the new generation of Hindus are brainwashed with notions of Hindu supremacy. They are boasting that Sunak and Hindus have taken over the UK, and they are hopeful that the Hindu Ramasamy takes over in the US. The Hindus were a model minority once in western countries but that has changed. They have become the nasty minority backing Modi's pogroms against minorities in India, which then spills over into the west.
If you look at all the videos on HT and Indian media, there is a bragging tone of Hindu supremacy. They have the feeling Hindus are superpower and they dictate to others.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@hailarwotanaz5848 You need to learn to be objective. Russia has living space (large country, low population), water security, food security, energy security, materials security, and defence security. How many countries have all these ? Certainly none in Europe. China has some of these atrributes, but not energy self sufficiency. Russia does not need even to trade with others. They are a bit weak in consumer goods, but now there are other manufacturing nations like China, which does not listen to the US, and Russia can get consumer goods from them.
Your explanation is Russia is propping up the rouble artifically. There is nothing artificial, it is linked to gold and oil. The US has been printing currency since the 1970s.
The west put sanctions on Russia; but did not imagine Russia could put sanctions on them. You will see in winter. Russia has taken a key step to break the US and with it the west - promote non-dollar trade. China also is doing the same, India and others will do the same. Russia and China together has the power to end western manipulation.
'Europeans will find new sources of energy.' Care to explain how ?
You have not explained with the US did not put boots on the ground in Ukraine ? You believe Russia is weak, equipment is old, its economy is crumbling.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@claudiopereira9900 Thanks ! The Europeans have a history of colonialism and dominating others through technology and military power. It is about 70 years since the formal end of colonialism, but the European mindset has found new ways to continue the same - they do it under the holy cloak of 'rules based international order' (the term used by the pompous Boris Johnson).
If you recall, in 1956 Britain, France and Israel jointly invaded Egypt over nationalisation of the Suez canal. It was just 9 years after the first decolonisation of India, and only 11 years after end of WW 2. Britain and France were back to their colonial adventures. This is the France that surrendered to Germany and collaborated with Nazism, for which Stalin did not allow France to attend the Potsdam conference like a great power. At that time of Suez, the Soviet Union threatened to intervene and even nuke these countries. The US also did not support Britain and France. They forced their withdrawal. At that time also, Nasser's Egypt was vilified as a rogue regime disturbing the international order. But old habits die hard. 40 years later they were invading Iraq. In time, the US took over the neo-colonialist shaping of the world from Britain and France, and these countries are now its assistants - as you can see with Ukraine.
Josef Bourell the EU's foreign minister while lecturing some students, likened Europe to a well kept garden, which the jungle and jungle people are trying to invade. You can see in him the colonial mind set and Kipling's 'white man's burden'. Ursula von Leyen said Ukrainians are part of the European family (that is a superior breed from others in the human family, like Afghans and Syrians).
In neocolonial rant, EU says Europe is ‘garden’ superior to rest of world’s barbaric ‘jungle’
https://mronline.org/2022/10/19/in-neocolonial-rant-eu-says-europe-is-garden-superior-to-rest-of-worlds-barbaric-jungle/
Josep Borrell's European 'garden' is built on the plunder of the 'jungle'
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/eu-josep-borrell-europe-garden-built-on-plunder-jungle
The support for Ukraine arises from nothing more than 'they are Caucasians, they look like us, this should not happen to them'. They will cover it of course with pious humbug about shared European values.
It will take one more generation before Europeans accept they are nobody special and cannot feel entitled to making rules for others and having escape clauses for themselves. They will be forced to accept that when they become irrelevant.
Russia has ended their comfortable 'rules based international order' for good. What the west had was control of the financial system. Putin has undermined that - or rather the west undermined its main asset with sanctions. Putin will finish off their control of the financial system. BoJo's, Biden's, von Leyen's fury comes from the realisation that their domination is coming to an end.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The Ukranian counter offensive is defeated and the west is trying to save face.
The western buildup gave the impression Ukraine was going to launch something like the Red Army's Operation Bagration that stormed the Nazi armies across a 1000 km front line, and cleared the path for the drive to Berlin. BBC pundits expected that Ukraine would deliver a knockout punch in the first 72 hours and the Bandera army would pour in and press to Melitopol and take Crimea.
That Red Army's opening punch in Operation Bagration was devastating, their tanks could clear the mines, and the follow-up was swift and relentless. The Germans could not stop the Red Army's tsunami. The Ukranian Operation is nothing like it. They lost many soldiers, tanks and Bradleys, and could not even reach the first defence line after two weeks. The western face-saving talk was that unlike Russian made equipment, the Bradleys and Leopards were made so well the Ukrainian soldiers survived the hits, and that was an achievement because survival meant they could continue the fight !
Now that the Ukranian counter offensive is not exactly an Operation Bagration, the latest explanation Zelensky gives is that it is not a Hollywood movie ! Western pundits now pontificate Ukraine's counter offensive was not really about taking land, it is about attritioning Russia ! Earlier, they said Ukraine must avoid going for a war of attrition as that favours Russia, because Ukraine does not have the manpower, and the west cannot keep up with the demand for artillery shells, and so a knockout punch in 72 hours was essential, and if this was delivered, the Russians would crumble and run away.
The west did a similar retrofitted, inventive explanation for Bakhmut. Once Bakhmut's fall became inevitable, they declared it is not strategically important. And when asked why the Ukranians were trying to defend it, they said it was to attrition the Russian army. Like that, the counter offensive that was supposed to deliver a knock-out punch and capture land has turned out into a mission to attrition the Russians.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@gnehzeey All that Ukraine has was built by the USSR - the infra structure, power stations, the nuclear reactors, the educational institutions, the railways, the Antonov plane factory, T 72 tank factory. Although the media keeps telling Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe, the people look well dressed and fed, they fleeing with pets, their trains and buildings look good. The USSR rebuilt Ukraine after the devastation the Germans caused - without any Marshall aid. So how dare you say they had nothing ?
Ukraine's independence was conditional on agreeing not to join any military alliance against Russia. Putin said he had no objection to Ukraine joining the EU; that is an economic alliance, not a military alliance.
The Ukranians tried to cheat on the neutrality condition. They tried to join NATO, indulge in Russophobia and they thought they could do this because of NATO shield. They were warned by Russia not to play this dangerous game. Their society bred Ukro Nazis like the Right Sector and Azov batallion. Therefore Russia has revoked Ukraine's independence and take it back. Ukraine cannot be brought back, 20% is taken, and what remains is unviable.
Ukranias achieved something as part of the USSR. In fact, they had rulers - like Khrushchev, Chernenko. When they were given independence, in 30 years they chose policies that made them a failed state. So they would be better off taken back by Russia.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I can see glum faces in the west, they were predicting and hoping that Ukraine would disrupt the parade. Notice how smarmy Lyse Docuet sounds, she is wondering if Russian phone lines were ringing in fear about arranging security ! She is clearly disappointed that Ukrainian threats did not scare Xi and others from coming,
The Americans would have explained to Zelensky what Medvedev meant when he said Kiev would not see 10th May and what the enigmatic Putin meant by being glad that Ukraine did not need nuclear weapons !
Lyse Doucet feels that she had to surrender once more to Putin, and Ukraine could not do what she hoped. At the start of the SMO, she was reporting from Kiev, gushing about how the city felt so European (that is, Ukrainians are one of us). If she had ben sent to Kiev in 1970s Soviet times, she would have reported how grey and depressing Kiev was. The way she emphasized Ukrainians are European and so deserve sympathy was nauseating (that is, the Ukrainians are unlike Palestinians who deserve what they are getting, but these are Europeans, how can it happen to them, she was tearfully saying).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@harryv6147 The top 3 or 4 in Ukraine are Jewish - President Zelensky, PM Shymal, Defence Minister Reznikov are Jewish. Coincidence ?
Victoria Nuland is indeed the culprit in Ukraine's predicament. France and Germany (Merkel and Sarkozy) had opposed Ukraine's induction in NATO in 2008, fearing it would lead to war. But Nuland twisted their arms. She was caught on tape saying 'f..k the EU'. The US is cynically exploitative of the Europeans as well.
Nuland is no longer stationed in Kiev, but is back in the limelight in the Biden Administration. There is a video of her saying Nordstream will be ended.
Ukraine has a strange concoction. You have Jews in top positions, but Ukrainian nationalism centres round Ukro Nazi groups like Azov Batallion and Right Sector. I don't know how all those engage with Jews.
Three US agri companies (Cargill, Monstanto and DuPont) own 35% of the arable land in Ukraine. Then you have the US arms groups making a killing.
The US has had this style of operation and control in many developing countries in Latin America, Philippines, Egypt, Pakistan etc. They bribe local politicians, give their children access to US, and then develop a class to serve the US. This continues till there is a revolution like in Iran.
The US has done the same in Ukraine - bribe local politicians, overthrow of the elected government, and create the conditions for profiteering for American companies and politicians. But Russia got in the way.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@abodabalo It is not Ukraine’s free choice to apply for membership.
Under the conditions in which Ukraine became independent, it had to give up nukes and give an assurance to Russia that it would not join any military alliance against Russia. Ukraine's independence declaration said it would be neutral. Otherwise, Russia would not have given independence. Thus, Ukraine's sovereignty was never absolute in this regard. You are speaking like a simpleton. Either you are ignorant of the details above or you are wilfully duplicitous.
After the 2014 coup organised by the US, in which Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion took part, Ukraine unilaterally changed its constitution to say NATO entry was a goal. The Ukro Nazi groups spread Russophobia thinking they had infinite American protection. Zelensky said if Russian Ukranians want links with Russia, they should go to Russia - the classic line of fascists.
Even before Ukraine entered NATO, the US was training the Ukranian army in a centre near Lvov, to make them NATO-ready. Why ? Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan even though it was not in NATO yet. It was helping Americans kill Afghans who had done no harm to Ukraine. So now when Ukrainians get killed, in the non-west, many would say 'let them get a taste of what they did in Afghanistan'. Zelensky said Israel is the victim and the Palestinians are the aggressors. Hence, Zelensky has no credibility outside the west.
As Ukraine unilaterally reneged on its commitment on neutrality given to Russia at independence, and planned to enter into NATO and allow the US to threaten Russia, Russia has every right to annul Ukraine's independence and take it back so it does not bring in America to threaten Russia.
Ukraine has blown its chance to be an independent state due to American interference and machinations, and the Ukranians' penchant for Nazi style nationalism. The eastern part and the coastal regions are gone, and Russia will make the part that is left an unviable, failed state, where reconstruction is not possible. If the remainder of Ukraine wants to survive, it will have to go back to neutrality AND agree to lose more land. Russia will not agree to anything less now. Such is the price for following Zelensky, Ukro Nazis and America.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@redbear1935 Switzerland had two war mongering powers on its borders, France and Germany, but managed to survive even WW 2 without invasion by two principles (1) keep neutrality and not join any military alliance (2) avoid discrimination in a tri-ethnic country having German, French and Italian speakers, and keep all three languages in the govt...
Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland etc. have flouted these principles for survival for small countries. They want to join a military alliance which targets one powerful country and having done so, they go out of their way to be provocative to show off their independence. They mistreat and discriminate against Russian language speakers, inviting foreign intervention.
Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland etc. can learn from the Swiss. Russia gave independence, it is once in liefetime chance, these countries are squandering it. If these countries had intellect, they would try to have relations with EU and Russia, and have best of both worlds. But the US has used its money power and made them think 'be with us, and against Russia'. If they continue provoking Russia, eventually Russia will want to reclaim these.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The speech is a disappointing mixture of sour grapes and bravado. Boris says he has many achievements, but he cannot hide his bitterness about being pushed out, because 'it became a relay race, the rules were changed, never mind that now' !
He could not miss out Ukraine - even though it is a disaster ! He thinks his support may have changed the course of the war. It did. Ukraine is going to be truncated, and Europe is going to be de-industrialised. It is said that he was influential in blocking Ukraine from negotiating and he instigated Ukraine into the ill fated Kherson offensive.
Boris wanted to be Churchill himself, but he found one in Zelensky !
Europe's energy crisis is due not due to Putin, but due to US and NATO. Boris has been an enthusiast for the US.
Even as Boris departs, badmouthing Putin is the main obsession. Boris obviously feels puny, and he is enraged that Putin will be sniggering at him !
Putin gave the best assessment of Boris : he said if Boris took off his shirt (to be macho like Putin), it will be an ugly sight, and he should take exercise and drink and party less !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'England and France have great plans to win against Russia and the only thing they need are Polish soldiers - I hope that the Poles will not be fooled this time'
That is indeed the plan. British MP Tobias Ellwood had floated in 2023 an idea of a 'coalition of the willing'. Asked who would compose it, he said British, French, US - and Poles ! Poles would provide the bodies, the other three the minds.
The Poles will be fooled this time also, they are emotional people without reasoning capacity.
'Roosevelt and Churchill decided that Poland should be in the communist bloc behind the Iron Curtain.'
They had no choice, the Soviet Union and Stalin were too powerful, the Red Army had destroyed 80% of the German armies, and it had driven the Germans out of Poland. It was the Red Army that liberated Auschwitz. If it was left to Germany, there would be no Poland; and if they had relied on the British, they would have been waiting a long time. Roosevelt/Truman and Churchill/Atlee had no choice but to accept Stalin's demands. At least, the Soviets left a Poland, the one that exists today. Putin reminded the Poles that modern Poland is a gift of Stalin.
In an interesting twist, the Pole Konstantin Rokossovsky was one of the Red Army's famous generals who took part in Operation Bagration which stormed the German lines and started the drive to Berlin. After the war, Rokossovsky was made Defence Minister - of Poland ! Th founder of the KGB was the Pole Felix Dzherzhinsky.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'It wasn't the Western wish until 2022. '
You pretend the problem started in 2022 - because that is when you woke up. NATO expansion was the US's wish. After re-unification of Germany, James Baker had said to Gorbachov that NATO would not move one inch to the east. There were five waves of NATO expansion despite Russian protests, so the US cheated on Russia. Every problem has a history.
Europeans went along with the US, some willingly, but others had their arms twisted. Merkel and Sarkozy had opposed NATO expansion to Ukraine saying it will lead to war, but Bush twisted their arms.
'Then the West was way behind Russia. The West had no ammo then. '
The west has no ammo even now and is way behind Russia. That idiot Czech PM Pavel said he would arrange for 1 million shells for Ukraine, but that project has quietly died its death. Nobody is talking about it. 20 of the 33 Abrams tanks have been destroyed, one in Kursk. Same with Challengers, Leopards, Patriots etc. The west does not have more to give in the same scale.
The US has had 4 tests for hypersonic missiles and all failed. Russia has used them in Ukraine. The British Trident tests failed twice in a row. Last week a German-British (civilian space launch) in Scotland caught fire at lift off. So you are way behind Russia and that is going to be so.
No one has the combined arms warfare technology and experience as the Russians - everything from artillery shells, to hypersonic missiles, drones, air strikes with glide bombs, thermobaric weapons, submarines, electronic warfare, technology to knock out satellites.....Its equipment is designed to work with each other, it is all integrated, unlike NATO's. NATO takes months to hold meetings and take decisions.
And Russia has shown it can fight the west's economic warfare. You tried sanctions, cutting off Russia from Swift, and stealing their money. But Russia found ways to trade and it started the de-dollarisation project, which has picked up steam as others joined in. This more than anything else will cut US and western power.
' But at all times Russia has had an easy way out of this war. Even now they can still get out. When Putin realized he was fighting all the rich countries if the world, he should have dealt with the problem.'
You mean Russia should take the easy way out - for you ! Russia should give up because the west is rich and you are the most powerful. That is your conceited self image.
But Russia has found all your equipment is destroyable, and you are running out of sustaining capacity. Most important is Russia knows you do not have the courage to send troops and die for Ukraine. So why should it give up ?
The best scenario for Russia is Russia takes all of Ukraine. If that is not possible, the second best scenario is Russia takes the Russian parts of Ukraine including Odessa and Kiev, and turns the rest into a wasteland, so that NATO cannot have bases. There is nothing the west can do to get Ukraine back to 1992 borders, or have bases in Ukraine. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What is the international order ? It is the western order - one set of rules for he west, control of financial institutions and international organisations, and another set of rules for the rest. Invade Iraq because the US has declared Iraq had WMDs (the US and UK can have WMDs because they use them responsibly).
Russia has ended the western international order. It is for good. And the rest of the world thanks Russia for it. Even China could not have done that.
China and Russia should continue and dismantle the western order. The key to this is de-dollarisation ; it will cut America's power. Europe is a dependent, so they will also perish. Why should not China demand more say in the World Bank and IMF ? Why has IMF broken its rules and bent over backwards to give loans to Ukraine ?
The Europeans strike a very conceited view of their importance. They think they are entitled to set the rules for the world. It is an extension of the British 'white man's burden'.
von Leyen announced that Ukraine is part of the 'European family' - which she thinks is some superior status. This China analyst Perkhun talks about defending the 'European soul'. What is the European soul ? Colonialism, slave trade, neo-colonialism, Nazism, waging wars.
Let us say the EU will monitor China's behaviour and make trade conditional, and let us say China decides it will not abide, so EU cuts trade with China, where will it then direct its trade and exports ? It has sanctioned Russia, it reduces trade with China, and it is dependent on costly energy from the US. The Europeans should import costly energy from ally US and trade between themselves.
Europeans need to face the reality. Europe has no energy and materials. Europe's days of colonial bossing are over, so it cannot extract energy and minerals from Asia and Africa, for nothing. Europe's US-relationship will that be of a vassal - that is what the US demands always.
Europe needs to realise that its future lies with Russia and China and India and Asia. It needs to shake off its subservience to the US. The Europeans are committing economic suicide for US's desire for NATO expansion. NATO expansion is a desire of Lockheed and US arms companies. The US also is determined to prevent a large Eurasian trade network from which it will be left out. Its only hope is to keep Europe under its thumb; the US cannot keep Russia and China under its thumb.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FishandHunt Kyiv in 3 days was said by an American general, not by Putin or any Russian. Cite me an article that cites Putin said this. It was then twisted and ascribed to Putin, and since Kiev was not taken, it was taken as a Ukrainian and western victory.
Russia does not announce its plans in advance, in the same way as Ukraine and the west. They only announce when done. They did not announce they are fortifying the lines in the east to block the Ukrainian counter offensive. They just did it on the quiet, and that defeated the Ukrainian counter offensive which the west had been announcing since March 2023, and has forced the west to cut money and supplies to Ukraine. They announced the capture of Bakhmut when completed. Same with Mariopol.
It is the west that is speculating about getting Ukraine to negotiate, freezing the war, surrendering the eastern oblasts, in exchange for the remainder of Ukraine joining NATO. Russia has not said anything about negotiations or their military strategy for 2024. They losing side, the west, is looking for negotiations - because they now accept that Ukraine is not in a position to regain the 5 oblasts no matter what the west gives. Russia knows it has the advantage, and the western resolve is crumbling. 2024 is election year in the US, and if Trump comes, he will solve the issue in one day. UK and Europe are irrelevant, the Russians ignore them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Britain has a confused sense of importance. The British elite like Johnson, Rees-Mogg etc. looked down on Europe, and always thought they were part of a superior Anglo Saxon club. But that only meant be a vassal state of the US.
At the same time, Britain has been more hawkish against Russia than the French and Germans. It wanted to show off to Europe it was a stauncher supporter and beneficiary of Ukraine. Its media portrays Macron and Scholz as surrender monkeys; it blames Germany for energy dependence on Russia. The British talk as if British military support to Ukraine could turn the tide against mighty Russia's onslaught. The British elite have resented Russia because after 1945, the Soviet Union emerged as a superpower, and Britain lost its colonies and faded as a superpower. The Defence Minister Ben Wallace said Britain would kick Russia's backside as it did in the Crimean war of the 1850s. He does not realise that Russia today is formidable compared with Britain.
Meanwhile, Russia's counter economic war has led to shortage of energy and high prices in Britain, like the rest of Europe.
It is odd that the volume of Britain's trade has fallen due to Brexit, it has not been compensated by any trade deal with the US or others, yet Britain goes out of its way to spend money on Ukraine and show it is superior to Europe on that front.
Among western nations, Britain has suffered a double whammy due to Brexit and its imprudent and strident anti-Russianism. The 'special relationship' with the US is imaginary and does not go beyond intelligence sharing. Britain has shared every neo-colonial adventure with the US, but gained nothing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The question that needs to be asked is, "if Russia uses chemical/biological/nuclear weapons, how will the world be prepared to respond, or even should they respond?"
The answer is the west will not be able to respond other than shout about war crimes, ICC etc... Any direct response would subject the west also to nuclear attack. The rest of the world is not involved and does not care if Russia settles Ukraine with a tactical nuke.
In WW 2, the west has used fire bombing of German cities, and America used nukes twice against Japan. Civilians were the target. These people defend it on the grounds it brought the war to a close with German and Japanese surrender. The US used Agent Orange and napalm in Vietnam, and depleted uranium in Iraq.
Instead of arming Ukraine and driving Russia to reach out for nukes, the correct response is to prod both to the negotiation table. Turkey took the lead, but really the US should. For that to happen, the west has to swallow its false pride and hauteur and admit it erred on NATO expansion. The western mindset does not allow any faults in themselves, the fault is entirely Russian in their minds. However, one British general who was head of NATO has said the west has no choice but to negotiate with Putin as an Ukranian win is not possible, and the sooner the better, before a nuke is used.
1
-
1
-
@jackboot3946 A diplomatic solution was rejected because Blinken refused to address the key Russian demand : a written security guarantee from missiles placed in NATO countries, and planned ones in Ukraine if it joined NATO. Blinken offered to talk about other general security things ! Putin said Russia had been asking for 15 years, he cannot wait for another 10 years, and accept US and NATO's bluff and obfuscations, and talks about talks. US was unwilling, so Russia had no choice. If they waited another 10 years, Ukraine would have been inducted into NATO, Article 5 would operate and Russia would have to fight a nuclear war to dislodge the US threat from Ukraine. Either Ukraine and the US agrees to give the security guarantee (the diplomatic way), or it had to be settled by war.
The die is cast. The west needs to take responsibility for reckless NATO expansion. It has to swallow its false pride to cover its guilt and ask for negotiations. Otherwise, Ukraine will be torn little by little, and a nuclear settlement is also possible. It is now clear Ukraine cannot join NATO (Zelensky accepts it), and NATO also now knows Russia is not bluffing. So Ukraine and west might as well cut their losses now with negotiations.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@yanntsala414 It is implicit I meant former colonies. I wrote 'Before, they could get materials and energy cheaply from their colonies...'
Before means 'formerly'.
The west left rulers dependent on colonial power structures. Thus, till King Faisal raised the oil prices and demanded a fair share after the Arab-Israeli war, the west was enjoying oil at a price less than water. After Faisal raised the prices, there was a transfer of goods and services to Middle East, and some of them were able to build cities and infra structure. King Faisal was assasinated soon afterwards, and no doubt there was an American hand. However, what Faisal set in motion could not be undone.
The colonial power structures have remained to an extended time with the French colonies. France makes electricity with nuclear. The uranium comes from Niger - which has low electrification. France never bothered to see Niger had electricity, they just take the resources out.
Europe does not have much energy and materials. Nazi Germany did not have colonies, it invaded the Soviet Union and one reason was to capture the oil fields of Baku. They needed lebensenergie even more than lebensraum. That is the situation now also. Russia is the nearest supplier of energy for Europe, and it would have been a natural win-win situation for both - it was for the last 30 years. But America did not want that, as a Euroasian economy (Europe, Russia, China and India) would leave America in the cold. America is determined on NATO expansion so Russia is forced to fight Europe, which then keeps Europe in the American camp. Europe now is forced to buy American LNG - which costs 7x piped gas.
Even the former colonial powers of Europe, France and Britain, are nobody today. In Europe, Russia is the real superpower - it always had the military strength, and it has proved now it has the economic strength. Like King Faisal transformed the economic wealth distribution by raising the price of oil, Putin has set in motion steps that further undercut western dominance. This is in initiating the move away from the dollar, that is creating avenues for other nations to trade between themselves and sell or purchase oil and commodities, without using the dollar for settlements. Putin did not set out to undermine the dollar, he was forced to do it due to sanctions - like King Faisal raised the price of oil as a protest against western support of Israel. Use of other currencies reduces the demand and hence value of the dollar and with that the American war machine's capacity. The Europeans are satellites of America, including Britain, France and Germany, so as American power diminishes, the Europeans go down with it. Particularly so if they fight with Russia.
1
-
@yanntsala414 It is good to hear an insight directly from Africa. If you hear western reports and Zelensky, Russia is making the Africans suffer. Russia is using hunger as a tool, the west claims. They shout Russia is blackmailing the Africans, and the world.....
The Europeans went to sanction Russia by freezing their money, and Russia counter sanctioned them. Others know where the blame lies. The west went to threaten Russia with NATO expansion, when Russia asked for a security guarantee in writing, they were too proud to give.
They never cared a damn about Africa. The west looks down on Africa (remember Trump's comment). The Arabs and Muslim world also is not willing to go with the west - they have seen western duplicity in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The real reason the west is shouting now about the blockade is not because of concern for Africans, it is because of the deficit Ukraine is piling up which needs to be funded by the EU. The Ukranian govt.has lost its industrial areas and with it the revenues generated from that region. They are left with agricultural products like wheat. That is produced but blockaded. The Ukranian govt. needs $ 5-7 billion per month for bare essentials. With wheat also blocked, there is no revenue, and it means the EU has to give more aid to Ukraine - besides paying for the arms, and hosting the refugees. The EU boasted they could wean themselves off Russian gas by end of the year, but the reality is the EU itself is facing the pinch due to the gas blockade. In Germany, they are rationing the electricity - domestic is given priority over industrial. Industry is paying 10x as much as domestic. It is peak summer now, so you can imagine in winter.
The only thing the west has that is admirable is it looks after its citizens. However, when it comes to the rest of the world, they are ruthless and callous. They will invade and kill but still lecture about their superior values; that is why they are hated outside. You hear them talking about western values and its implied superiority. Ursula von Leyen said Ukraine is part of the 'European family' and so should be let into their club. She did not say 'human family'. It is clear in her mind the European family is special.
Their power is slipping and you are right, they don't realise it. They got away with beating up Afghanistan and Iraq. The west always knew Russia has the military power and Europe will get beaten up if they went for war with Russia. However, they thought they could go for economic warfare with Russia because they had control of the international financial system. What has taken them aback is that Russia had the capacity for economic warfare (unlike the Soviet Union). The value of energy and materials is real, and higher than currency. The west could not bring Iran or even Afghanistan down with sanctions, but these countries could not retaliate. But with Russia, the west finds Russia can take them down economically as well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ukraine's existence is already compromised, it is certain the Ukraine of 1991 will not exist. Trump has conceded that.
By walking away from the negotiations in Istanbul 1, Ukraine has lost more. In Istanbul 1, Ukraine had to return to neutrality, and it had to cede Crimea. Now, it has to return to neutrality, and it has to cede Crimea and 4 oblasts. And if Ukraine cannot accept that, then Sumy, Kharkhov, Odessa and more will also go. When Zelensky listened to BoJo and walked away from Istanbul 1, Sir Putin had warned that next time Ukraine wants negotiations, the Russian terms will be stiffer.
Ukraine can continue fighting till it is non-existent.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robertfrancis7767 Tank or no tank, Ukraine is in no position to defeat Russia, with its own or western equipment. Himars, Storm Shadows, Bradleys, Challengers, Leopards, Abrams, F16s, sanctions, seizing assets, blowing Nordstream have made no difference to the outcome. They may delay the outcome, but will not stave off defeat. That is the bottom line. Russia has punctured all western delusions. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dandan7391 So you don't know what prevail means ?
Russia's main purpose was not land, it was to end American plans to get Ukraine into NATO, and thereby get naval bases in Ukraine to shut Russia off from the Black Sea. Russia saw the plan and the danger in 2014 and promptly took Crimea. Ukraine waged war on Russians in Donbass with US training. Hence Russia has taken Donbass (the industrial GDP creating area of Ukraine) and also more of the coastal areas. Odessa must be taken also. Then Ukraine will become landlocked and shut from the Black Sea, just like Ukraine and the US planned to shut Russia out of the Black Sea.
Russia has already achieved these goals : the US will never get naval bases in Ukraine, as Russia is ready to fight a nuclear war to stop that; Ukraine has lost Donbass and is effectively landlocked already.
Russia is prevailing because Ukraine and the US cannot now roll back these changes. Ukraine in fact risks losing more land after Bakhmut falls.
Russia's main aim was not to take land per se. Land was collateral. It was done to reduce Ukraine's fighting power. Had Ukraine signed a neutrality treaty in Dec. 2022, it would have been intact today (minus Crimea). It lost Crimea due to the US sponsored coup of 2014. Now by choosing to fight, and try to reverse that, it has lost more. And now the western media themselves say the west is running out of weapons, it means Ukraine is unsustainable and is going to lose more.
The main task was to demilitarise Ukraine, cut its neo Nazis to size, and prevent NATO training bases in Ukraine. Russia is prevailing in these.
1
-
Piers needs to understand the occupied is under no obligation to condemn the killing of occupiers.
It is like the Nazis asking the Jews of the Warsaw Ghettos to condemn their uprising against the Nazis.
When was the last time you asked an Israeli invitee to condemn annexation of Palestinians lands before starting a programme ?
As the Palestinian Ambassador told Kay Burley of Sky that she only invites him to her programme for self-condemnation of Palestinians, and he would not be invited when Israelis kill his people, and no Israeli will be put under pressure to condemn it.
The UN chief made a remark that things do not happen in a vacuum, and now the Jews are furious and trying their usual character assassination and demanding his expulsion. They have become more and more obnoxious.
Frankly, many have had enough of Israel and its nasty Jews, and their apologists like you. In fact, I urge all people who are interviewed and subjected to a demand to apologise for 7 Oct. to refuse, and tell Piers, if they want an end to it, Israel has to be forced to end the occupation and agree to a Two State Solution.
The west created the Holocaust, and the west created the Palestinian problem. It is not fair to give Palestine to the Jews to placate them, and to assuage one's own guilt.
If Piers feels so much for the Jews, give part of Ireland, or England or Germany, so they can run their Jew-only state. Then you will see Piers and people like him will go and do to the Jews what the Palestinians did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chas721 On the contrary, unlike the west and Ukrainians, Russians do not talk, they do things. They could not take Kiev, so they adjust their operations and concentrate forces on the East and drive the front forward. They have taken the industrial belt, and the coastal areas, and they are strangling the Ukranian economy with the blockade. What Lavrov is saying is they have the upper hand, Russia now sees no need for a cease fire and negotiations, as they can advance and take more. Once they have finished Krematorsk and Slaviansk, they will push forward.
The 1994 Budapest Memorandum says the signatories (US, UK and Russia) will refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence. Russia's security was threatened by the unforeseen circumstance of Ukraine conspiring with the other two signatories (US and UK) to join NATO, a military alliance that is hostile to Russia. Thereby according to the Budapest Memorandum, Russia is entitled to take military action against Ukraine. Russia has said its aim is to de-Nazify and demilitarise Ukraine. If Ukraine does not conform to the requirements of the Budapest Memorandum as well as the terms of neutrality by which Russia gave it independence, then it will be destroyed and annexed by Russia. Ukrainians have proved to be back stabbers, and so are not fit for nationhood.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Can Europe stop Putin on its own?
He who threatens or attacks Russia gets defeated. History proves that.
The French were defeated in 1812 by Russia. The French now would not dare send troops for a direct engagement.
The Red Army beat Germany into a pulp in 1945, and made Germans a peaceful people.
The British boast a lot because they won a war in Crimea in 1856, but they would not dare fight a land war against Russia now. Look at Russia's arsenal - a single Sarmat missile will take out Britain. 100 years later, the Soviet Union forced Britain to climb down after the Suez crisis in 1956 when Britain went back to its colonial mischief and invaded Egypt.
In 2025, Russia has defeated the collective west in its wicked plan to put NATO bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia. Ukraine has to cede 20% land at least (and more if it does not agree to neutrality), Ukraine cannot be in NATO, and the US is not going to send peacekeepers, and Russia will not allow Europeans inside Ukraine. This is comprehensive victory enough, but Russia is going to achieve more - end NATO altogether so that the double faced Europeans do not threaten Russia ever !
Russia is a great country and the rest of the world salutes it for defeating the collective west. The collective west invaded and robbed Africa, Latin America, India, China, Arabs....They practised slave trade and apartheid, and they back Israel. Russia helped the South African people fighting to end apartheid. It helped many developing countries.
Europe and the west will not be able to return to the world order they ran for their benefit at the expense of others. That is the magnitude of Russia's achievement.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DSan-kl2yc Budapest Memorandum says armed force will not be used against Ukraine - unless it threatens the security of Russia. The last Article of the Budapest Memorandum says that in the case of a dispute, all parties will seek to meet and negotiate. In Dec. 2022, Putin sent a letter to Biden asking for negotiations and a treaty to guarantee to Russia's security (that is, the US will not use Ukraine to threaten Russia with NATO bases). The US refused. Ukraine kept quiet on returning to neutrality, as it believed with US help, it could defeat Russia. Thus, Ukraine, UK and US violated the Memorandum by refusing to negotiate.
Thereafter Ukraine got a beating, and has lost land and has been turned into a wasteland. Ukraine is not in a position to reverse it. The Ukraine of 2014, let alone 1991, is not returning.
A country's sovereignty is not absolute, it can depend on history and geopolitical context. Ukrainian independence was given under two understandings (1) that Ukraine would give up the nukes and (2) agree to be neutral and not join any anti-Russian military military alliance. Otherwise Ukraine would not have got independence.
Ukraine is unable to reverse the first condition (nukes), but it thought it could renege on the second (neutrality). Ukraine is foolish and does not have the skills to be an independent country. It is a failed state. That is the reality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stanfarshtei1291 NATO did not want to be seen refusing Ukraine entry to NATO - because it wants to maintain this holy pose it is a purely defensive organisation where people apply to join, like an exclusive club. NATO should have told Zelensky before the war started that it will not come and fight.
There is a video where Zelensky met NATO to ask for a 'yes/no' decision on NATO entry. He said they told him, that NATO entry will not be possible, but publicly they will say it was open to Ukraine !
However, NATO is nobody. It is America that decides and rest of NATO rubberstamps. America decides to go to Afghanistan, and makes all the Europeans to go. And when the US ran away from Kabul, the US decided on its own it was going to leave without informing the other NATO allies !
In 2008, when Ukraine's induction into NATO was brought up by Americans, France and Germany opposed fearing it would lead to war. At that time, the US govt's Victoria Nuland was caught on tape responding 'f..k the EU, this is American policy'. America twisted France and Germany's hands and made them agree to accept the plan for Ukraine.
The Europeans are stupids who have not realised that America uses NATO for its interest, in ways which may be harmful to Europeans. Americans know Europeans are (1) weak and divided and (2) they fear Russia and so will agree to American desires.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LisbonLion7 'so you're admitting there was no reason to worry about nato invading from Ukraine... because your hypersonic and tactical missiles would have kept you safe. '
This is weak logic to justify US-led NATO expansion. Firstly, Russia had not used hypersonic missiles in war, so a priori it did not know it will work in a war. Secondly, US can make hypersonic missiles eventually, and if Ukraine is in NATO, it would allow placing them there.
'not wanting Ukraine to prosper in the EU.' Sir Vladimir had said several times there was no objection to Ukraine joining the EU as it was an economic alliance, the objection is to NATO.
You should be asking why NATO was not disbanded after Warsaw Pact was disbanded. Why did the US push for NATO expansion ? It was due to the lobbying of Lockheed for business. You should be asking why Europeans are vassals of the US who went along. Russia had warned many times that NATO expansion would bring war.
Finally, the war came, and you find Russia has defeated NATO and the collective west. The instigator of the conflict, the US, wants to abandon Ukraine and NATO. The Europeans are left groping in the dark. And you are wilfully fabricating accusations against Russia to deny your own culpability. Therefore, you deserve all you get.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The rest of the world does not see it the way you do - it is in everyone's interest to see Putin lose.
The non-western world having suffered under America wants to see the US lose. Ask people in China, India, Middle East, Africa, Latin America. You are just a typical conceited westerner who thinks you are the world. Boris Johnson said at first, he wants to see Putin lose, otherwise the global international order will be undermined. Lately, he got more frank - he said if Putin is not defeated, it is the end of western hegemony. That is what is on your mind as well when you say it is in everyone's interest to see Putin lose. You want to proliferate western hegemony but you want to say it is for the benefit of the world.
The rest of the world wants de-dollarisation, end of US bases, regime change operations and coups. Putin has cut western power and triggered de-dollarisation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bonnie7898 Russia was never part of any invading NATO force in Afghanistan. It is not a subservient country like European nations that will go and fight for others the US.
'The western coalition helped the interim Iraqi government to rid themselves of Saddam Hussain...'
You are trying a fast one. A coalition of two is the world for you and your invasion is 'nation building'. Anyhow you did not go in to save Iraqis from Saddam - that is fitting aims after a failure. The Iraqis did not ask for your intervention. Several million died due to your intervention, many times greater than any harm they would have faced under Saddam. You lied, and said Iraq had WMDs that would hit London in 40 minutes. In reality, you went in because Saddam started selling oil in euros. That would have undermined the dollar. The eurozone did not join to fight against their interests. You have now a new lie - 'we went to save Iraqis from Saddam'. Why do you lie ? That is why western credibility is gone and the global South does not want to listen to the west.
China and Russia are now advocating and trading without dollars. They also have WMDs. Why don't you invade them to save their people from a dictator ? You don't have the guts.
'The west did not send weapons to SA like Russia did, but they imposed massive sanctions on the apartheid regime, which Mandela acknowledged were helpful in ending apartheid.'
The west aided and abetted apartheid because of their greed. They labelled Mandela with the T word. The Soviet Union supported the ANC. The west only put sanctions when they realised it was lost for their white fascists. The Africans have not forgotten the Soviet help, and they thanked Russia during the Russia-Africa summit.
'NATO doesn’t expand on purpose, It grows when countries feel vulnerable and apply to come under the defence umbrella. '
After Warsaw Pact was dissolved, NATO should have been disbanded. Russia was willing to cooperate. But the US had other designs. Use eastern Europe to try to break up Russia. It did not succeed as you find now. The US staged a coup in 2014 in Ukraine. The Jew Victoria Nuland and McCain were in the crowds in Maidan Square. What were they doing there in a coup in which Ukrainian fascist groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion took part ? You are just shameless supporters of Nazis.
'Ukraine didn’t formally apply until September 2022 after Russia invaded. '
In 2014, Ukraine changed its constitution (which originally said it would be a neutral country) and put a clause saying it would seek NATO membership. The condition for Ukraine's sovereignty was that it would return the nukes AND be a neutral state and not be part of any military alliance. Ukraine sought to renege on this, it has flouted the independence agreement with Russia, and wanted to join an anti-Russian military alliance, and hence Ukraine has been terminated as a country. You reap as you sow. There is nothing NATO can do about it.
'Ukraine is not currently eligible to join NATO and might not be for quite some time.'
Now, Ukraine will not have the borders it got at independence, so joining NATO is not possible. Russia made clear Ukraine will not be allowed to join and it is ready to fight a nuclear war with the west over it. No one in the west wants to die for Ukraine and fight a nuclear war.
Ukraine's counter offensive flopped. Ukraine does not have manpower, and the west does not have and cannot make the arms required. Russia has won. Meanwhile, another war has started by another of west's surrogates, and the Ukraine war is not in the news. Let the Russians finish Ukraine when your attention is diverted to another lost cause.
Russia has ended the western 'rules based international order'. It is not coming back, so you need to come to terms. Just like slavery and colonies are not coming back, the western run world order is over. The world thanks Russia. You can join the new world order.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@static2223 'what is important is the combined might of the NATO alliance of EU, Canada, US and UK is over 5,817,100 total personnel vs russias 1,330,900 total'
So with that advantage of over 2:1, why did not NATO send troops to Ukraine ?
The problem is NATO's combined personnel does not have the experience of fighting and winning a war. They are afraid to be killed, and those who are afraid of being killed cannot win wars. The second problem is NATO does not have a unified and decisive command structure whereas Russia has that.
Hence, NATO is a paper tiger, an expensive one. It needs to be disbanded as all it does is create tensions and provoke wars.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russia has been mostly conducting an air war, destroying Ukraine's fighting capacity from the air. They destroyed the power grid, then the air fields, then the Patriot and Iris batteries. Russia's FABs and Kinzhals are unstoppable. On the ground, they have opened a front in Kharkhov, pulled Ukrainains away from the eastern front, then advanced in Torrestk, Chasov Yar, Urozhaine has fallen.
As for 'incomprehensible' losses, this is routinely stated without evidence. It goes against reasoning. They themselves admit Russia fires 5-10 shells to every Ukrainian one. Plus they are hitting with FABS and Kinzhals and drones. So the Ukrainian army is being massacred - to demilitarise Ukraine is one of Russian aims.
Times Radio lies from sheer frustration. In 2022, they stated, the Russians have low morale, low capability etc. But then how did they take Mariopol, Bakhmut, Severdonetsk ?
1
-
1
-
@DSan-kl2yc Indeed, the US defence is industry is like the US healthcare, purely driven by profit. The US defence industry gouges the American taxpayer, through the US politicians and govt. and overcharges for its products because it is a monopoly or a cartel. The US govt. in turn tries to turn it into a net benefit for the US to offset the wealth taken from the tax payer. Of this 65 billion, they have said much will be used in the US and it will employ Americans. The way to do that is wage wars on other countries to extract their wealth, enforce the use of the dollar - like Iraq, Libya etc.. That may work if the attacked country is weak and is overtaken.
In the current case, they have taken on someone who is not weak, who makes weapons and has greater expertise in combined arms warfare and land wars, and someone who is even capable of initiating a global change in creating alternatives to trade in dollars. In the Ukraine war, the US may look at the profit-loss account and still believe it is in its favour. It displaced Russian gas from Europe and replaced it with US LNG which is 4x the price. It can argue that it got further NATO expansion by adding Sweden and Finland, so more arms purchases from these countries; and frightened countries like Poland etc. buying Patriots etc.
However, there are losses as well. Ukraine is the biggest loser. It did not make any money. It has at least $ 500-1000 billion worth of damages and it will not exist as a country. The second loser is Europe - it has to pay 4x for energy, and spend more on defence. Countries like Germany which have high labour cost cannot afford the energy and be competitive, and hence industries are relocating outside. The US may have gained in terms of its oil and gas industry getting a captive market in Europe and also contracts for Lockheed; but it has lost the non-western world's confidence in the dollar, so you will see a gradual shift to non-dollar transactions. Countries not in the west are fearful of the US seizing its assets. The US ability to finance massive debt and live beyond its means was based on demand for the dollar, which allowed them to print it as they thought demand will always be there whatever the debt. So the US is a strategic loser, but they do not realise it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@frogashow NATO is not so innocent as you pretend. It invaded Afghanistan and runs around as the US's errand boy. Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Iraq. so it should not complain.
Actually, NATO is a just a tool for American expansion and threats to others. The US sponsored anti-Russian Ukro Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion, and overthrew the elected govt. in Kiev in 2014, and implanted a govt. of their choice. This is the model they have used in Latin America, Pakistan - use money and military power to corrupt local governments and create a faction that supports them. The implanted govt. in Kiev wanted to join NATO, reneging on the commitment to neutrality given to Russia at the time of independence. The US desire was to have missile and more important naval bases in Ukraine. Russia took action in the nick of time to avoid US mischief. Putin had said in the interview, it is costly for Russia to take this action, but the cost will be greater later if the US got its way. If Ukraine got into NATO, Russia would have to fight a nuclear war to get remove US.
By intervening at the correct time, it is clear Ukraine cannot join NATO, nor the US have naval bases. Ukraine can keep shouting it is going to join NATO, but Ukraine will not exist in the form of 1991, its a failed state, its time is over. Russia has the upper hand militarily and it is the winning the economic war against the west.
Putin is a master strategist and what he has done is very profound. You do not have the intellect to figure it out. Single handedly, Putin has ended the so called western 'rules based order', and the dollar run international economy, where the rules are formulated by the west, which they impose on others and disregard when they want (like in the invasion of Iraq).
1
-
@jusmeetsingh1907 You are putting on a brave face for the west, Singh.
'The power infrastructure they destroy is being restored immediately.' Ukraine's grid operator has told Ukranians to expect 4-5 hours power cuts. As winter advances, unless they do the cuts, the whole thing will collapse.
'So instead of complaining about these attacks and exaggerating them for propaganda purposes, Zelensky and Ukrainian govt and West are quietly welcoming these drone attacks... '
What are you talking about, Ukraine is begging for anti missile systems, and the west is scratching its head. Otherwise, there will be more refugees.
'....and how they are helping Biden to do regime change in Russia.'
Hmm, is that so ? Look at Italy - Draghi is gone. UK - arch anti-Russian, BoJo gone; Truss is slated to go. After mid-term elections, Biden will be a lame duck; Republicans are questioning blank cheque for Ukraine. I bet you any money Putin will still be there after Truss, Biden and many western leaders are gone.
Putin has got not only the Ukrainian but the European economy by the scruff of the neck. He is de-industrialising Europe. In fact, what has done is profound : he has single handedly ended the western 'world order' for good. China, India, Turkey, Saudi, Iran and the rest of the world is ignoring/defying the west. He has catalysed non-dollar trade and that portends the eventual end of US dominance. The satellite states go down with it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The US visiting Kashmir indicates it will use a carrot and stick policy with India - just as it does with Pakistan.
India is stronger than Pakistan but it is still quite a weak state, and it is not at all a superpower. India has the largest population but that is not enough to be a superpower. It cannot join the ranks of US, Russia and China. But the Hindu nationalists feel entitled to be a superpower and they are throwing their weight abroad as in the Canadian assassination.
India has gross poverty, and lack of full education. India is held down by the Hindu caste system and Hindu sectarianism/ communalism. The first is impossible to reform. The second is now endemic with the rise of far right 'Hindu nationalism'. Hindu mobs and politicians routinely kill Sikhs, Muslims and lately Christians as well. Naturally, there will be reaction from the minorities. The Sikhs have reacted - violently against India due to Hindu persecution. The Muslims and Christians have not done that - at least so far. But the Hindus will keep persecuting Muslims and Christians (Modi's reign has shown that), till they also fight back.
While Jaishankar's speech denouncing westerners for laying the rules and interfering in the internal affairs of others is a valid criticism, there is an aspect that should force the west to look at India as a potential threat to the west. The problem is that if the ruling Hindus create domestic rifts, they will spill outside India because Indians form the largest migrant community (which itself is a reflection of the poor living conditions). The US and west should have an interest in curbing Hindu extremism due to the danger it poses to the west. If Hindus go on the rampage and attack Sikhs, Muslims and Christians, it creates a big refugee problem for he west, and it will create the kind of problems Canada is facing due to Indian migrants. In San Francisco, the Sikhs protested against the Indian consulate. The Hindus have attacked Sikhs in Australia. Militant Hindus created a riot against Pakistani-origin British in Leicester in England, after a cricket victory. The British papers reported that it was an import of Modi's Hindu nationalism.
In the face of militant Hindu nationalism, the US and the west can only use a carrot and stick policy with India. The leverage the US has is Indians seek to study and migrate to the US, so just reduce the visas, till India curbs attacks on minorities so that these conflicts don't spill to Canada, UK, US etc. If the west condones Hindu militancy in India, it will eventually bite them.
As for using India to curb China, the west should abandon this. China cannot be curbed, and India is simply not capable. India's weaker economy, lower military capacity, and its social structure (caste system and communalism), mitigate against substantial contribution. The west should cooperate with China, and not think India can stop China becoming a superpower.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There is no need to put Western 'hegemony' in inverted commas as if it is something Putin made up.
Boris Johnson is on video stating that we must not allow Putin to win in Ukraine, otherwise it will end western hegemony. Those are his exact words.
In other words, westerners know they have inflicted their hegemony on others, and they think it is a desirable. They cannot work or relate with the non-western world in any other way.
For the non-western world, ending western hegemony is an absolute must to free themselves from resource plunder (think of Niger and Mali who drove out the French), seizure and theft of their money (Afghanistan, Iran, Venezuela, Russia), sanctions against anyone who opposes the US (Iran, Russia, Cuba), invasion and assassination for regime change (Chile, Libya, Iraq), inciting wars to get a foothold (Ukraine), and double standards (invading Iraq and supporting apartheid in Israel).
We have to thank BRICS and the Russian leadership this year for bringing the subject of de-dollarisation and creating alternative financial systems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mkailov13 'Ukraine will never run out of supplies due to western support. '
The western tanks will take months and it is a hotch potch collection of under 100. Russia has 15,000 tanks. What is western support ? They said Himars will be game changers and Ukraine will get back Crimea. Now the west cannot even supply artillery. Now that NATO has been exposed as not having the teeth, Russia will move in for the kill.
'A country of 145 million determined people will not have manpower problems in modern wars. '
Indeed Russia is a country of 145 million determined people and will not have manpower problems compared with Ukraine which has 40 million people, half of them in exile, and a country whose production and economy is decimated. So you yourself say Russia the country of 145 million will prevail.
'The simple fact is that this war pits the economies of the United States and NATO countries against the economy of Russia. Gee, I wonder which one can sustain this longer. '
Well, Biden said the rouble will be rubble. The rouble is there, and the euro and pound lost 20% of their value. Russia has de-industrialised Europe. Russia has accelerated de-dollarisation of the world economy and that is a killer of the US economy. Russia has production, so does China, the US does not have much production. So there is no place to be smug.
Whatever stand you take has to be evidence-based. All your claims are unsupported, and in one case, you are supporting what I am saying ! The superpower with a population of 145 million will clobber a country with 40 million, which is reliant on aid from countries that are too cowardly to send troops.
What are you ? A typical dumb American ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ukraine was never a free country after the 2014 coup, the US decided its foreign policy, and everything done since then was at the expense of Ukraine. The US decides whether Ukraine should fight or give up. In 2022, when Ukraine negotiated with Russia in Turkey and reached a deal, Biden sent BoJo to scupper it. At that stage, the US and UK believed Ukraine could defeat Russia with their assistance.
After the failed counter offensive in 2023 and the setbacks in 2024, the US does not believe Ukraine can win, and the costs outweigh any benefit. So Ukraine will be ordered to do a deal. And Ukraine has no choice but to agree. Kellogg, Trump's appointee to end the war has already told Ukraine it has to negotiate, if it declines it will be on its own. Hence, Zelensky is now talking about negotiations with absurd caveats, although he was talking about a Victory Plan earlier. His victory plan is to cede land and win it back with diplomacy. He could have used diplomacy to avert the war in the first place, but the US would not allow him.
When the time comes and US changes direction, Zelensky will agree to what the US says....So why does DW ask whether the deal with Putin is at the Expense of Ukraine ? It will be - but Ukraine signed up for it when Ukraine fell in love with the US and NATO.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lfjwatt What you suggest is indeed the way out. The US should be the one making the way for negotiations. But it will not happen. Firstly, human behaviour is influenced by emotions and false pride - and the west is not different, in fact they have shown a shocking incapability for lack of reasoning. The west has dominated the world for 400 years, and it cannot accept that domination will not be forever,. The west has acquired a sense of entitlement. Russia is also a great power which feels the west conspired to break up the Soviet Union, and they feel the west is continuing with that, so they are ready to resist and they ready to escalate to nuclear. Secondly, the US arms industry drives US politics. For them, the war is a bonanza for making money. In the Gulf war, the US got the Gulf Arabs to foot the bill, and the US got a portion of the Iraqi oil. The Afghan war was a net loss for the US and NATO. In this war, Ukraine does not have the money to pay for the arms. But the US will supply the weapons. Who is paying ? Some of it is the US govt. which means the US tax payer. However, the US will make EU members of NATO to foot the bill. All NATO members have agreed to spend 2% of GDP. Europe does not have as many defence companies. US companies will be the biggest suppliers of the weapons. Hence, EU taxpayers money will provide the profits for US armaments companies. The EU will foot the bill for refugees. No one knows who will pay for reconstruction of Ukraine. They will be forgotten like Libya. The share price of US arms companies has increased 20-30% and Biden had a meeting with the top 8 recently to ramp up production. I assure you that they will not do so unless it is very profitable. Hence, the US will not lead any movement for a negotiated settlement. It is better for them to let the war run its course and make money. The risk however is if they supply lethal weapons, it is an escalation, and it will not be far off when Russia is forced to escalate; it will not be chemical, they will go for a tactical nuclear missile on Ukraine. This is great danger that the west is indulging in.
And if you doubt the reason for NATO expansion,
See New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lfjwatt Finland and Sweden were never threatened by Soviet Union or Russia post 1945. But they are caught up in a fear pyschosis created by western media. So they are likely to join. But their security will be compromised by joining - as Russia will have to target them. I do not think Sweden and Finland joining NATO is going to boost NATO. You just have an even more unwieldy structure. Further NATO is controlled by the US, and not the Europeans. In 2008 France and Germany opposed NATO entry plans for Ukraine fearing it will lead to war - but Victoria Nuland, who was sent during Obama's time to steer Ukranian politics to become pro western was caught on tape saying F..k the EU. You can see it in Youtube. Europeans are making a big mistake by relying on NATO, and dancing to US tune on Russia. Europe and not America lives next to Russia, so it is better to get on with Russia, than join America to threaten Russia (Ukraine forgot this elementary fact). The Americans may lose interest in future in NATO - if Trump comes back, that will be the case. Then the EU has to face Russia's wrath. That is why France wants to create a European army. But that would also be unwieldy and you will have two parallel institutions. Europe is in a mess by making enemy of Russia, and following American interests. The European continent has always had the bloodiest wars on earth, it is just in the last 70 years, there was peace and it gave the illusion it is a thing of the past. Now the same faultlines have opened up and the system of alliances is creating mistrust and war.
It is like over expansion of EU - it has made it unwieldy and divisions have opened. In the EU, eastern European countries joined, but the the bigger heavy weights like Britain left; and Le Pen has similar thinking. Germany is left to finance the EU, with rising gas prices that makes their industry uncompetitive. Hungary and Poland do not want to abide by EU rules.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lfjwatt You are right. I think that Sweden and Finland are being foolish wanting to join NATO when they did not face a security threat for so long. Even if they joined, I do not think Russia will attack them in the window period when their application is being considered.
Ukraine is different. It had a shared history with Russia inside the Soviet Union, there are Russian speakers there, all the things Ukraine has like the steel plants, nuclear power stations, Antonov plane factory etc. were built by the Soviet Union with large contributions from Russia. The Ukrainians speak Russian and use the Cyrlic alpahebet. The Red Army had a lot of Russians who laid down their lives to drive out Nazi Germany. Hence, it is galling when these people turn against Russia and think they can advance by getting into NATO, and bringing US to put missiles against Russia. Ukraine has neo Nazis. The Azov Batallion was formed by Andrei Bilteski, a white supremacist who believes Ukraine is fighting to save the white race.
Russia does not have the same shared history and affinity with Finns and Swedes, so I don't think they want to attack them to take their land. The Swedes and Finns have more political experience than the Ukranians, and their politicians cannot be purchased with US money to foster militant Russophobia. The US would not use the same tactic with Swedes and Finns as they know their politicians cannot be purchased.
1
-
1
-
@justinmsc5 'By your logic, even North Korea is a super power because USA won't invade them for the exact same reason.'
That is not my logic, it is your wishful logic. Someone in the western media wrote we have isolated Russia, it will be no more than a large N. Korea.
Well no. Russia is the world's largest supplier of commodities - not only oil and gas (like Saudi Arabia), but metals (nickel, palladium, gold, titanium....), grains. Boeing relies on Russian titanium even during the Soviet Union. They will not sanction that. Add to that military equipment Russia sells.
Russia will continue having ties with major countries that matter - China and India. Both are buying Russian oil and gas, and are setting up trade in their currencies bypassing the dollar and euro. They can visit Dubai, all countries in the Middle East, Africa, South America and most of Asia.
So don't imagine western world is the whole world. The axis of economic power is shifting to Asia. Putin said he is going to re-orient Russia's economy away from Europe to Asia. Europe is a bunch of weak states with underlying rivalries which will intensify when the economic pinch tightens. The US's share of world production of goods has declined steadily, it is below China's. The US had the advantage only because the dollar was the world's reserve currency - hitherto. The US was living by printing the dollar which was possible while oil was priced in dollars only. However, that was changing slowly with China's launch of the gold backed yuan and China, Iran, Venzuela and Russia are already using it for oil trade. It is going to accelerate due to US freezing assets. Both Russia and China have publicly stated they are de-dollarising. Russia is immediate as it has no choice, and China at leisure. If you block others from using your currency, eventually people set up other mechanisms. As the demand for the dollar decreases, its value decreases. People would not want to buy US govt. debt. Then the US will not be able to print money and live beyond its money or finance its war machine.
You need to stop being immature and hoping Russia will become N. Korea. What the US has done with NATO expansion benefited Lockheed, but Ukraine, Europe and the US are paying the price.
1
-
@marekbiakowski3472 Your wish to keep Russia poor and weak shows malevolence and a poor mindset. You should seek to have have trade and peaceful relations. You also have to take steps to stop threatening them by inviting Americans to put their missiles in Europe.
As for keeping NATO countries strong militarily, it is problematic. NATO is the US, the rest are a collection of bodies. Hence NATO is driven by what suits America, and not by what is best for Europe. US picks a fight with Afghanistan, and wants other NATO members to go and die on their behalf. And when the negotiations with Taliban came, it was between the US and Taliban, not NATO and Taliban ! And the date of the exit from Kabul was decided by the US without telling NATO !! Hence, the Europeans are useless members of NATO, they are servile door mats of America. Europeans do not have thinking capacity, or pride, they are content with serving America to get protection.
Consider the current fracas over Ukraine. The US led the policy of NATO expansion - for the benefit of US arms companies.
See New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
After the unification of Germany, James Baker had said to Russia NATO would not move an inch to the east. But it reneged and it says there was no written agreement. Russia protested but the US got away with 5 waves of NATO expansion. The US organised a coup in Ukraine to get a pro west oriented govt. and was pushing for NATO expansion. In 2008, France and Germany opposed inducting Ukraine rightly fearing it would cause war. But the US twisted their arms; the infamous Victoria Nuland who charted the coup was caught on tape saying 'F..k the EU, this is US policy'. It is clear the US does not work for the benefit of the EU, it works for its own benefit. It stamped on the views of two key NATO members, France and Germany.
Russia said Ukraine was a red line. It asked for a written guarantee that missiles targeting Russia would not be put in Ukraine. NATO refused to give it. Then Russia took military action as it declared it would do. Then when the action started, the US said it will not send ground troops, it cannot put a no fly zone.
The result of reckless NATO expansion has benefited US arms companies, but it has destroyed Ukraine, many are killed, 4 million are refugees, Europe is hit by high fuel prices, and Europe has become even more dependent on America and has to buy their weapons with a shrinking economy. Europe is the greatest loser, more than Russia or America.
Sanctions and freezing assets has created the movement for de-dollarisation of economies, which cuts the power of western financial institutions. That is a western own goal.
If US-led NATO arms the Ukranians with more weapons, the time is not far off when Russia will be forced to use a tactical nuke. Then also, you will see the US and NATO will not intervene - why would they, they don't want to get pyrolysed like the Ukranians. They will shout about war crimes but that is all.
Hence, your prescriptions for dealing with Russia are shallow; in fact, it is because of following those American driven prescriptions, that Europe is sunk.
1
-
@justinmsc5 Yo said 'The invasion is about gas industry, specifically stopping Ukraine from getting Western investment.
- Russia has treated all its allies poorly, with a strategy of keeping them all weak. That's why it loses its allies, not NATO expansionism. It causes it's former allies to seek NATO.'
Where is the evidence Ukraine has gas ? Western investment. In an interview of Putin, as war bells were ringing, a British journalist asked what was his complaint. He said NATO expansion to his borders. James Baker had said 'not an inch to the east'. He said NATO had cheated 5 times since. The west says NATO did not give a written commitment. Also, when Russia had complained about violation of an understanding if not written agreement, the Americans told them, that assurance was given to the Soviet Union, you are Russia. Putin told the journalist NATO expansion to Ukraine is not acceptable, it is on Russia's backyard. It is a threat and he has to defend the security of his people, whatever the cost. Russia has never complained about western investment in Ukraine or any other country. You made up that fallacious argument. When the army excercises started, Russia sent a written demand asking for a written security guarantee that US missiles would not be placed in Ukraine. The US refused and Blinken said they can discuss other issues. Russia never demanded cessation of western investments in Ukraine. Hence, your argument is just a fabrication, a typical western exculpatory evasion to say the west is blameless (it always is).
2) Russia is a world superpower, and the USA is afraid of its military forces.
- The only reason US doesn't fight Russia in Ukraine is due to nuclear weapons.
Conversely, the US only fights weaker powers who don't have nuclear weapons.
'Russian conventional military performance has been much worse than expected, especially compared to US invasions.'
Admittedly, the Russian army is not the Red Army. However, your statement as before does not consider all the facts. Russia is not fighting just Ukraine, it is fighting Ukraine + the US. The US/NATO has been equipping and training Ukranians, holding joint exercises etc. for years. The US fought in Iraq and Afghanistan when the other side did not have the weapons and years of training from Russia and China. Had Russia or China given Iraq and Afghanistan the latest weapons, the US would have had heavy casualties, and it would not have been able to enforce a no fly zone. You are not comparing like with like. Anyway, US had to leave both countries with no clear victory, so it has to be counted as a defeat, just like the Russians leaving Kiev. And the exit from Kabul was very cowardly and unbecoming. Not telling NATO allies, and grabbing the first flights in case the Taliban moved into the airport, was shameless and shocking - I hope you agree on this. In a man to man fight, the US would have a deficit in bravery; they will not be able to fight like Afghans. The US will fight when there is assymetry in technology and the other side is weak. But when it is equal, it will back off - whether it is Russia or N. Korea (as you yourself say).
1
-
@justinmsc5 'Russia provided Iraq with 8 billion dollars in military aid leading up to the US invasion. At the time, there were at least 193 military advisors (by Russian admission) training the soldiers of Iraq.'
Cite the source.
US smashed Iraq's military and killed Saddam but lost politically.
Russia could not capture Kiev and 3 days and kill Zelensky. They made some miscalculations. The biggest one being launching the attack on 3 fronts at the same time, with the triple aims of decapitating the Russophobic leadership in Kiev, consolidating and extending the eastern provinces, and capturing the coastal belt to link it up with Crimea. They should have concentrated. They should have concentrated all there forces on Kiev.
So they moved on to plan B. They will concentrate on the Donbass and the coastal strip. The coastal strip and Mariopol is more less in their hands. After that, they can always come back to Kiev.
Plan B means Ukraine is torn apart, bit by bit, a chunk at a time. Ukranians have shown they are not shrewd enough to run a viable state. They indulged in Russophobia and baited the Bear to earn the support of the US, and they thought, they could get complete protection. Then the Bear mauled them and the US could not save them as they imagined. But even now the Ukranians have not learnt - daily Zelensky badmouths Russia, so Russia stopped the negotiations and continues with the special military action.
It is now clear Ukraine cannot join NATO and even Zelensky realises that. The US also knows it would lead to nuclear war. The US and NATO will not be able to go back and manipulate Ukraine as before. Russia will not allow it. Ukraine wants guarantors. But Russia will not accept the US and its allies as guarantors as that would be letting NATO in through the back door. The west has misled and betrayed Ukraine.
1
-
@justinmsc5 'The invasion is about gas industry, specifically stopping Ukraine from getting Western investment.'
I am waiting for your proof that Ukraine has gas. Also, tell me when Putin protested western investment in Ukraine; you claim to research, so cite the video or article where I can hear Putin making this complaint. He has only protested the military training and plan to put missiles in Ukraine after inducting it into NATO.
You wrote - Russia has treated all its allies poorly, with a strategy of keeping them all weak. That's why it loses its allies, not NATO expansionism. It causes it's former allies to seek NATO.'
And how has America treated the countries in its backyard ? In Chile, it overthrew Allende, an elected PM and put the fascist Pinochet in place. The US has harassed Cuba. It funded wars in Nicaragua. No wonder when the WTC was smashed, Latin Americans celebrated; I read that some of them named their children Osama. Trump badmouthed Mexicans and wanted to build a wall. The US sanctioned Venezuela and has been trying to overthrow its President; but Biden shamelessly went and asked for oil from Venezuela recently.
Hence, don't put on airs and come and tell us Russia is not a superpower, or that it alienates its neighbours, when the US ran away from Kabul unlike a superpower, and has plenty of people in its neighbourhood who hate it. You are horribly conceited and vain.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@steveb890 You need to learn the spelling of numskull, you numskull !
', Russia, with Ukraine's assistance, is steadily demilitarising itself anyway...'
You said Russia is getting demilitarised. Who has run out of 150 mm artillery shells, tanks, F16s ? Russia or NATO ? Daily Zelensky complains about the west letting down Ukraine by not sending arms. Why is he complaining about you if Ukraine can fight on its own ?
Why did you not get permission to fire Storm Shadows ? Because Putin said the country that gives weapons to strike inside Russia will be hit. Everyone knows what Putin says, he does. Get it ?
'add into that economic collapse....
In 2022, Biden said rouble will be rubble - where is he now ?
'Russia’s military was way too overrated, now depending on N Korea '
So why don't you send NATO troops to Ukraine ? Russia has friends, what sort of friend are you to Ukraine ? You know the reason you will not send troops ? Cowardice. Those who are afraid to die cannot win wars. That is the difference between the Russians and you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nic7048 The western media was saying Putin was dying due to Parkinson's, cancer etc. They were also saying there will be a coup. Now, they recognise that was wishful thinking. So what you are saying is old wishes. As for Russia being poor by 2030, Europe is going to be poor immediately by this winter, and Ukraine'e economy is strangled, so what are you talking about ? Nobody in Russia will be freezing, its industry will have power - unlike Europe.
Russia has land, water, food (biggest wheat supplier), energy, metals, industry and strong armament industry (missiles + nukes). How many countries have all of these ? Hardly, any.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Jay-cp9kd The pipeline attack showed the US is behind the Ukraine conflict and it would do anything including stab its allies. The US is following the same pattern in Ukraine it employed in Latin America when it overthrew and installed govts. that would benefit US commercial and military interests (Allende and Pinochet).
Using money power, they get some political groups in corrupt countries, to align with them, and then they create regime change. Except here it was in Russia's backyard, so the US faces Russian resistance.
The US cites democracy opportunistically, but the only criterion is whether someone is pro-US or not. The US will blow up pipelines and depose European governments if they opposed the US. The Europeans don't realise this, they have gained so far by being subordinates, and so they are willing subordinates.
Unlike Europeans, the Russians will never be subordinates. That is the difference.
So the US will be against Russia, and the Europeans will go with the US even if it means economic suicide, as the Europeans don't have the capacity for independent thought.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bizking24 Ukraine unilaterally breached its independence declaration where it said it would be neutral and not be part of any military alliance. The only military alliance in the neighbourhood is NATO, and it is anti-Russian. Ukraine reneged on the neutrality commitment it gave to Russia for its independence, and it encouraged Russophobia, and Nazis like Azov Batallion and Right Sector, and it sought US protection for this. Hence, Russia took action to make Ukraine abide by international rules (its commitment to neutrality).
You tell me the Russian military is not on a par with Americans ? That is a typical vain, American belief. Have you forgotten how the US dragged NATO to Afghanistan for 20 years, then cut a deal with Taliban without NATO, and then organised its own chaotic and cowardly exit from Kabul without telling its NATO allies ? Americans are shameless.
You could not fight Afghans and Iraqis, or Vietnamese, and you think you can fight Russians ? Why do you think Biden said the US will not put a no-fly zone in Ukraine ? Why is he saying no troops for Ukraine ? And why is telling Ukraine no rockets that can attack Russia ? It signals the US does not have the guts to fight Russia. Your talk is the vain bravado of the American coward.
In WW 2, Gen. Montogomery asked Eisenhower whether the western armies could go and capture Berlin. Eisenhower ruled against it. Because the US army would be unwilling to take casualties. And secondly because he feared the Red Army will finish with the Nazis and attack the US army.
So your claim that the US army is superior goes against the evidence and is born out of an inferiority complex.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lawnman3638 You have not read the Budapest Memorandum. There is an exception clause. If Ukraine threatens the security of any of the signatories, military action can be taken against Ukraine. Ukraine conspired with the US and Britain to threaten Russia's security through NATO expansion (giving missile and naval bases to the US). Hence, Ukraine, US and UK conspired against Russia and they violated the Memorandum. Further, the last article of the Memorandum says in case of a dispute, all parties would confer to resolve it. When Russia wrote to the US and NATO in Dec. 2021, to resolve the security threat it perceived, the US declined. Ukraine also did not make an effort. Why ? Hence, Ukraine, UK and US violated the Memorandum, and Russia has the right to take action.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
They have also seized the money of nations : Russia, Afghanistan, Iran etc. The west's advantage had been control of the international financial and banking system. They have control of the World Bank and the IMF. However, the west has shot itself in the foot by weaponising the dollar and euro. They have undermined their banking system. Banking is based on trust. They had got away with seizing the money of Afghanistan and Iran - but they miscalculated with Russia. Russia has not only the military power (which the west knows and fears), but they did not foresee Russia has the economic clout and the understanding to counter the west in economic warfare. For now, Russia has accelerated the move to non-dollar based trade between countries, which had been building up since China launched the gold backed yuan in 2018. Oil was traded only in dollars due to an understanding the US reached with the Saudis in the 1970s, which gave huge advantage to the US allowing it to print dollars, and run their war machine. Now that era will come to an end, and with it comes the decline of the power of the US and its subordinates. Putin was not planning like the Chinese to break the monopoly of the US dollar in the oil trade, but he is forced to. He realises that undermining the dollar is the blow to strike at the US. Two powerful countries combine to chip away at the dollar. The west has shot itself in the foot with the seizing of Russia's money.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ArthurTanner-d7s The reason it lasted 3 years is because of US pumping in arms, and the Ukrainians having the manpower.
But after 3 years, the situation has changed. Ukraine's 2023 counter offensive was a flop, and Ukraine lost much of its army. Now the situation is : (1) Ukraine does not have the manpower, the US is asking Ukraine to lower conscription age to 18 (2) the US is getting ready to cut the money and arms, as it does not have much left and (3) Europe is unable to step up, they do not have the arms and money and (4) Russia has the arms, manpower and will power to continue.
Russia is fighting Ukraine + NATO, hence it has taken 3 years. The outcome of the war will be decided by who has the arms, manpower and willpower to continue. Russia has all three, Ukraine and NATO lack all three. Hence, Russia is prevailing and the US is getting ready to abandon its protege. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidwright5094 "Ukraine got independence on the understanding it will be neutral and not join any anti-Russian military alliance. It flouted that, so it will not exist.'
What is it you do not get ?
In simpler language, if you play with Russia and threaten it, the bear will claw you. Get it ? They explained the red line to Ukraine and its handlers, if you cross it, they will kick your head in.
When Cameron said British Storm Shadows will be fired into Russia, the Russians started drills for tactical nuclear weapons, and the British ambassador was called and told in no uncertain terms that British targets will he hit outside Ukraine. That could be a ship in the Red Sea or something else, I don't know. Then you will find the US will not come to your aid and fight a nuclear war for you. You will be left floundering on your own.
hen the Lord Cameron became sane and understood the meaning and pulled down his boastful tweet about hitting Russia with British weapons. The British media also started downplaying attacking the Kerch bridge saying it is not used for military transport anymore. Russia does not indulge in strategic ambiguity, it says what it will do, and it will do it. Get it now ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You jokers said that Putin's war was not sustainable in 2021. The rouble would be rubble. Russia was firing missiles at a rate that was not sustainable.
Nielsen needs to get real. The war is lost for the west. The west is asking for negotiations, ceasefires, frozen conflicts, peacekeepers - because it is losing and is stuck. Russia does not want them - because it is winning. Putin had said in a Tucker interview, 'we are not going to negotiate just because you ran out of weapons'.
Russia is not going to freeze the war and accept Ukraine can be in NATO in 10 or 20 years. That is non-negotiable. That was the cause for the war in the first place.
In 2025, Russia will take Donbass - if not by negotiations, by force. Once they get past the last fortifications in Donbass, there is nothing up to the Dneiper river. Once they get there, Odessa is within sight.
Nielsen has been peddling wishful thinking and lies, there is no point continuing with them now. Ukraine's situation is dire. Not only does it not have weapons, it has run out of trained men.
Nielsen, it is better to swallow your false pride, and relieve the Ukrainians of their misery. The only choice the Ukrainians will have is unconditional surrender - like Nazi Germany to the Red Army. It is difficult for the west to accept such a defeat, but there is no other way.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mountainguyed67 If the leading NATO member continues to disturb Arab countries, and promotes eviction and destruction of Palestinians, and some Arab lashes out against him, do the rest of the 30 weak allies have to run to defend him ? The US does it own foreign policy independently of NATO and it may not be in Europe's interest, but the rest has to run to defend the US. That is not defensive, it is aiding and abetting a trouble maker in the world, who has wrought havoc to Arabs, Latin Americans, Asians.
In any case, if that is your defence of Nato's defensive action in Afghanistan, can you explain why the US negotiated a handover to Taliban in Qatar, after fighting 20 years to oust them ? Was NATO involved in the decision ? And when the cowardly Americans ran away from Afghanistan, they did not tell the remaining 30 useless allies (who have no self respect in the first place), so they could grab the first flights out before the Taliban deadline.
The Ukraine war has further exposed NATO's cowardice. Zelensky (who NATO promoted) says NATO is cowardly !
NATO expanded eastwards recklessly. The US led it for the benefit of its arms industry, and the Europeans went along.
See New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
Actually, France and Germany opposed NATO expansion in 2008 fearing war, but the US twisted its arms. NATO is a tool for US domination, and the rest go along. Ukraine thought it could join the bandwagon but ended up in hospital with broken bones.
Europeans are vassals, albeit willing vassals, of America. I suggest Europeans wake up and become sovereign nations. First of all, learn to apply your mind. Instead of parroting received western propaganda (about defensive NATO), you need to learn independent thinking
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@privateprivacy5570 'Maybe some strategic thinkers in the US wanted a NATO expansion.'
The US drives NATO, the driving force is not eastern European countries themselves. If left on their own, they will find a balance between west and Russia. However, the US govt. has spent a lot of money to influence them. In the 1990s, Rumsfeld said, the US does no need the 'old Europe', the new Europe (eastern Europe) was the most relevant. The 2014 coup in Ukraine was staged by he US Jew Victoria Nuland and reportedly the US spent 5 billion to get engineer a favourable Ukrainian govt.. The US govt. is spending its taxpayers money on such ventures, but it figures US corporations (defence and energy) make up for it. Either you are naive or you are being dishonest.
'Before Russia invaded Ukraine there was no public discussion of Ukraine joining NATO or even the EU.'
The public's ignorance does not alter the facts explained above.
In the last paragraph, you concede what I am saying : the migrants are largely refugees created by a series of wars.
'Also: we DO tell our elites to not wage war. It's not that simple as you might know.'
Did you put Blair and Bush behind bars ? That would have had a salutary effect on your elites. Instead, you follow those who blame immigrants for the wicked war mongering of your elites and justify Nazi solutions. You have bent over backwards to oppose the linkage between wars and uncontrolled immigration. At the end of the day, you are part of the elite who you rage about.
The capitalist system is about elites who control and own the means of production, distribution and exchange globally, and who are ready to go to war to maintain their profits. You support that system. True or not ? Then don't complain about its side effects.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Your channel has been saying such things for 3 years - Putin has a hand tremor, he is dying of cancer, he fears assasination etc. Zelensky even said Putin had died and a double was acting ! Your channel indulges in 24 hours of fabrication to save face.
The reality remains Russia cannot be dislodged from Donbass, Niu York was recently taken, and the Russians are knocking on the gates of Povrovsk. Ukraine will not be able to hang on to Kursk, and as their forces are directed somewhere they cannot hold and are being killed there, it speeds up the fall of remaining Donbass. In fact, it was dumb to think by entering Kursk they could force Russia into negotiations. It has not forced Russia into negotiations and it has convinced Russia there can be no negotiations.
As the euphoria fades in the west, the western media are now cautiously muttering that Ukraine took a risky gamble as they can see Ukraine getting stuck in Kursk and facilitating Russia to finish off Donbass ! The whole Kursk project was a last ditch effort by the US, and now as the wheels come off, we shall see the US say they had nothing to do with it, and they will put the blame on Ukraine !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I would not worry too much about India's stance. Kissinger said a long while ago that 'India is the largest unimportant country'. That is still true.
The Quad alliance to contain China is fundamentally misplaced and ineffective. India is the weakest and most ineffective link. The US knows that India does not have much substance. At election time, India staged a fight with Pak and lost a plane and a pilot got captured. But amazingly, they celebrated it as a victory and it was an election winner. India lost land to China recently and meekly kept quiet. That speaks volumes about India. They cannot fight like Ukranians against a bigger power. But they can fight internally against its own citizens.
The Trump govt.'s stance with India was purely transactional. An Indian oil and gas company invested some money in Lousiana and Trump went along.
The Biden govt. knows India has taken an ugly turn with militant Hindu 'nationalism' which is nothing other than fascism. India is internally unstable due to Hindu persecution of minorities, both Muslims and Christians. The Sikhs are near the edge as well, Hindu 'nationalism' may turn against them. 'Hindu nationalism' is akin to 'white nationalism'.
Both the US and India do not want to walk away from each other as enemies, but at the same time there is nothing much each has to offer the other. About 15 years ago, the perception of India was that it is the next Asian tiger, even the next China. However, that perception has changed with India's economic decline in the last 10 years which is associated with the primacy of 'Hindu nationalism'. Western interest may still imagine that India is a big market for its goods, but its economy has declined due to mismanagement, so the people do not have purchasing power, hence there is no use for the west. India's current focus is to build an exclusively Hindu nation which it imagines will bring it respect, and the way they see to do it is to fight with minorities. That will only bring civil war, and refugees and break up.
The starry eyed projection of India is over now. It is better the US puts India on a 'to watch list of nations that might unravel in the next 25 years'. India's independent stance over Russia is commendable, but the west should not be too hung up about it - because India does not count for much, and will be a liability in the future.
1
-
@person1858 'Your policy makers who understand more than you do, seem to believe that India is going to do really well. I wonder what to make of this.'
You are wrong that US policy makers currently think India is going to do really well. In an earlier period 15 years ago, we heard India is the upcoming Asian tiger on the heels of China. People like Thomas Friedmann and Fareed Zakaria painted a glowing picture of India and bracketed India and China together. But in the last few years, the Indian economy has tanked, and with the rise of Hindu fundamentalism, some even question India's viability.
As a result people in the west are unsure about India and don't know what to make of it.
The US would like to have India as an ally against China based on some notions of being a fellow democracy. However, the Biden Administration has people who are aware that India has been engaged in state sponsored violence against minorities. US criticism of religious persecution infuriates the Hindu right wing who either say Hindus are victims of history, or are victims somewhere else, or retort it is India's internal matter, or say there is racism in the US.
There is little to choose between China and India when it comes to human rights. If it is economy, China is ahead and will be anyone's front choice, and India has fallen behind so much in the last 10 years that even Indians cannot trumpet their economy.
Further, India has a border conflict with China. China took land, and the 'Hindu nationalists' did not have the courage to fight. China will take more land in the future if India tries to fight China. The US cannot intervene to save India as it cannot fight China either.
Hence the India-US relationship and Quad are not very serious, both sides are incompatible and also have nothing to offer each other, but at the same time, both do not want to walk away either, because both see China as a common threat.
India as usual flattered to deceive. It had a promising future which never came, and now it is downsliding on the road of tribal conflict. India would like to be like Myanamar, and carry out pogroms against minorities. Of course, if you look at the Youtube clips of Indian made videos like HT, one sees a self congratulatory belief that Hindus are becoming a superpower and the world better take notice. It smacks of an inferiority complex.
Kissinger's contemptuous description that India is the largest non-important country still holds.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The root of the problem is Hindu Nazism, more politely called Hindu nationalism. This has led to persecution of Sikhs, Muslims and Christians and even Hindus who they classify as 'low castes'.
Canada, US, UK should reduce visas for Hindus with links to Hindu nationalism. A dossier should be made of all prominent Hindus who have indulged in hate speeches against minorities or incited Hindu mob violence against hapless minorities.
The west should drop the illusion that India is an emerging power in the democratic camp who will be useful to contain China. India's economy is a mirage and it does not have the military capability to fight China.
The strategy of the Hindu Nazis has been to infiltrate their supporters into western society to capture power. Rishi Sunak is an example, he is willing to shield them out of Hindu pride. In the US, they are fielding the super right wing Hindu Ramasamy.
The migration of Hindu Nazis to the west poses a threat to the stability of western societies. It is time the west woke up and smelt the coffee. Yesterday Hindus took out a religious procession in Leicester city without the police permission. The police stopped them and then Hindus manhandled the police and shouted about 'Hinduphobia'.
Last year, Hindu militants (students or new migrants from India) created a riot in Leicester against Pakistanis.
Similarly, Hindus have attacked Sikhs in Canada.
If the US, Canada, UK etc. don't hold them accountable for this assassination, they will get emboldened further and carry on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GlennRA3 Even if what you are saying is true, and China is the world's largest wheat importer, Russia is the biggest producer and therefore perfectly set up to supply China. It is doubly beneficial for China as it will get the wheat a little cheaper, and Russia will accept payment in yuan. The Russians are using the yuan to import Chinese cars and car parts. The European and US car manufactures left Russia leaving behind the Russian market. Competitors move in to fill the vacuum. I have read the Chinese are filling in the gap. Wheat supply will be like the energy arrangement between Russia and China. Hence, it is a win-win situation for China, and again drives trade in non-dollars and promotes the Chinese currency. Why would China chide Russia ?
On the other hand, Ukraine and Europe are the losers - just like in the energy battle. Ukraine has lost about $ 500 million in revenue. Europe has to buy wheat at high international prices, as with gas. It increases their food inflation. Ukraine now needs additional $ 500 million from the west to cover their spending budget. The west cannot admit failure of its economic war, so it denounces Russia and cries like crocodiles for Africa, and hopes China will provide relief, as it cannot ask Russia for help, having burnt its bridges.
Europe is the biggest victim of its economic warfare against Russia. False pride does not allow to admit this. Sanctions backfired.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JunkerOnDrums GDP as a single metric is highly misleading. It depends on what is in that GDP. Russia launches satellites, produces metals and alloys, it makes aircraft and engines, hypersonic missiles, it is the biggest supplier of nuclear fuels, it is the biggest food producer, it is a leading energy producer, it has gold, rare earths.....Its industry is in Russia. That is why it has been able to defeat the collective west in Ukraine. It is not living like the US, printing dollars and stacking up debt. Get it ?
Russia's population is similar to Japan's, it is just enormous.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Putin did not announce he wanted peace negotiations, that is a typical western twist, to imply he is in a weak position, and to hide the fact that Zelensky is in a very weak position. Putin only said he is open to negotiations, to indicate it is not the Russians who have closed doors.
Even after 1 months of war, peace negotiations took place in Turkey. Even a draft of an agreement was reached. Both were ready to settle through negotiations. However, Biden's emissary Boris Johnson was sent to scupper any peace deal. He ordered Zelensky to fight on, assuring with US help, Ukraine could beat Russia. It is a fact that US and UK blocked negotiations, they wanted a war solution : Ukraine would defeat Russia militarily. Putin is reminding it was Ukraine that chose to walk away from negotiations, and not Russia.
Putin at that time (around March 2022) said those who walk away from negotiations now will find that later, Russia's terms will be stiffer. Which is the situation now. Zelensky says negotiations can only take place when Russia is pushed out of Crimea, Russia signs surrender, and there is regime change in Russia. The person who is drowning wants to dictate terms !
Russia has said the starting point now would be (1) accept the reality : 4 oblasts and Crimea are part of Russia (2) agree to neutrality. The terms are stiffer now. If Zelensky had agreed for peace in March 2023, Ukraine would have to cede Crimea, but could have kept the 4 oblasts if he agreed to neutrality.
In the current situation, Russia has the upper hand, so there is no question Russia will propose peace negotiations. Russia has taken the 4 oblasts, they have fortified it, Ukraine is unable to get it back, it cannot even reach the first line of defence after 9 weeks. The Russians will wait for the Ukrainains to expend themselves, and then they will go for Kharkhov and Odessa. Having come this far, they will go after those Russian areas. It also cuts off the remainder of Ukraine from the Black Sea.
Indeed, as Putin said, the terms for any negotiations will be stiffer. Ukraine can continue fighting, but it will lose more, and the terms will become stiffer. And the US will walk away, and the Europeans are useless vassals and cannot do anything to reverse Ukraine's position.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Putin did not announce he wanted peace negotiations. He only said he is open to them, to indicate it is not the Russians who have closed doors.
In the current situation, Russia has the upper hand, so there is no question Russia will propose peace negotiations. Russia has taken the 4 oblasts, they have fortified it, Ukraine is unable to get it back, it cannot even reach the first line of defence after 9 weeks. The Russians will wait for the Ukrainains to expend themselves, and then they will go for Kharkhov and Odessa. Having come this far, they will go after those Russian areas. It also cuts off the remainder of Ukraine from the Black Sea.
Russia will not agree to negotiations because NATO circles have voiced the idea that they could cede Donbass and Crimea, freeze the conflict, and make the remainder of Ukraine a NATO member. Russia will not accept that idea for peace negotiations. The principal demand is not land, but no NATO bases in Ukraine. Hence, NATO ideas of freezing the conflict will not be accepted, and Russia will go after Odessa and Kharkhov, and if the west persists on NATO entry for Ukraine, they will continue till the Polish border.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timonsolus 'The USA only has bases in the UK because the British government INVITED the US military there - the UK military isn’t strong enough to defend UK territory all by itself, due to repeated defence budget cuts since 1991.'
That is a confession of dependence. The fact you invited does not mean you are not dependent; once you invite some one to protect you, subservience follows. Russia does not invite anyone to have bases; nor China; nor India. Nor will these countries send their troops to die for America. And for that matter, N. Korea and Iran, are independent.
On the other hand, the UK is no different from Saudi Arabia etc. in requiring American protection.
'The UK agrees with the USA over Ukraine, so no need for a contrary position.'
The UK agrees - because it is a subordinate of the US. The UK feels it can get ahead in life by agreeing to America. Ukraine also feels it can get ahead in life by conceding bases to the US. The US runs a protection racket for countries like UK, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Ukraine....
'Over Gaza, the UK isn’t sending bombs or artillery shells to Israel, unlike the USA.'
The UK has aided Israel, it has sent arms, it took part in shooting down Iranian drones, so don't be sly and pretend it is neutral.
In fact, the UK claims it has a special relationship with the US and feels proud of it, and it feels one up on the EU by being close to the master ! But the US has never said it has a special regard for UK. The US never gave the UK a trade deal after Brexit.
Youtuber Emil Cosman explained the US and its subordinates. The US is the plantation owner. Britain is the plantation owner's loyal butler and so he feels he has a status. The western Europeans like the Germans are the plantation workers. The Eastern Europeans like the Poles, Estonians are the bottom feeders. It is all different levels of subordinates.
Among all this lot, I would say the British are the most shameless when it comes to subordination, it does not matter if it it is Blair, Johnson, Starmer.....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@seanniemeyer5437 Yes, Napoleon wanted to blockade Britain but turned on Russia for breaching the Continental system he wanted to build (a sort of 19th century EU run by the French). Russia was always an independent minded power, it was never going to be under the tutelage of France or Britain or anyone else. That is how it was, that is how it is today. Today Russia is not going to live as a vassal of the US like Ukraine and the other European countries, hosting US military bases.
'However, without the support of the USSR, the Germans wouldn't have been able to occupy most of Western Europe or invade the soviet union.'
Your message is not clear. Was the USSR sending money and arms to Germany for it to occupy western Europe like the west is sending Ukraine today ?
'NATO has never attacked the soviet union or the russian Federation. '
That is because the Soviet Union/Russia is a nuclear power with formidable delivery systems on land and sea which can incinerate all western cities. If for one moment, the west thought it could win, it would have sent troops to Ukraine. But it was not like evicting Saddam from Kuwait, Putin made clear Russia was ready to fight a nuclear war if needed over Ukraine (you remember Putin's famous remark 'you will face consequences you have never faced before'. The west got the message.).
' Instead, the West provided financial aid to the russian federation after the collapse of the soviet union. '
The west arranged to filch the wealth of Russia through oligarchs that sprung up, most of them devious Russian Jews working with western Jews. That happened during the period of Boris Yeltsin, but Putin put an end to that. Russian money was used to rebuild Russia.
'The russians are in fear of the NATO boogy man. Rather than reality. '
That is a patronising view, with the self certification of your innocence. If Warsaw Pact was dissolved, NATO should have been as well. Instead, NATO which is US controlled and serves American interests (and not really Europe's interest) was expanded . James Baker had said to Gorbachov that NATO would not move an inch to the east (remark he made after reunification of Germany). When Boris Yeltsin complained about NATO expansion and reminded of the assurance given earlier, the Americans told him arrogantly that' that promise was made to the Soviet Union, you are Russia'. A furious Yeltsin has said 'you wait, Russia will be back'. Russia is back. The US-led west thought it could defeat Russia with economic blockade and arms to Ukraine. But what is the position now ? The US has realised it cannot defeat Russia. It has decided, 'if you cannot beat them, join them'. Hence, the US has decided to abandon Ukraine and the Europeans and negotiate over their heads with Russia.
'Both WW1 and WW2 were the result of russian pan slavanism and soviet expansionist ideology.'
What are you talking about, WW 2 was due to German Nazi racial supremacist ideology. Germany invaded the Soviet Union, the countries of eastern Europe like western Europe collaborated with the Nazis, the Red Army beat the hell out of Germany. The Red Army had to occupy eastern Europe to get to Germany. Naturally, the map of Europe was remade by Stalin as he was the paramount victor. Britain and the US had to acquiesce, they had no choice.
Kuraganov said Russia destroyed the European elites and their colonial and racialist mentality two times, and it is doing it again. Don't make up self serving history.
'As for the black Sea not being controlled by NATO, Turkey, Romania, and Bulgaria are NATO members. Russia doesn't own the black Sea only the North Eastern shore.'
You are wilfully missing the point. Russia was not planning to cut Turkey, Romania, and Bulgaria from the Black Sea. By getting Ukraine into NATO, the US was planning to cut Russia off from the Black Sea. Sevastopol in the Crimea was the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet. If the US could get Ukraine into NATO, the US 7th fleet would sail from Sevastopol and Odessa. Then Russia would not have access to the Black Sea. That was the US game plan. That is why Putin seized Crimea in 2014 immediately after the US sponsored coup. The US persevered with its game plan using the Ukro Nazis to fight Russia. The war is lost, the US realises this. Now it wants to work with Russia. Now the Ukrainians and Europeans are of little value to the US. The US is working on the policy 'if you cannot beat them, join them'.
You don't get it do you ? You are rattling out your beliefs of yesterday, based on a US-European defensive alliance of pure innocence. There are two mistakes in your immature thinking. Firstly, NATO was an unequal alliance : it was dominated by US interests, and Europeans were mere vassals. Secondly NATO was not passive or merely defensive. NATO invaded Afghanistan, it bombed Libya etc. It wanted to encircle Russia against Russian protests. Now you should know the reality. NATO is US first, Europeans have no decision making power in NATO. The only time Article 5 was invoked was to get Europeans to fight in Afghanistan for a US cause. The US has not sacrificed its lives for NATO in a European war.
Earlier, the US wanted Ukraine in NATO as the US thought it could get away with Russia, and you thought the same. But when it could not, the US abandoned the 'Ukraine in NATO' concept. The Europeans are hooked on defending Ukraine through NATO, but the US will not allow it !
The US now sees Europe and UK as irrelevant, then it does not need NATO. It can deal with Russia and China directly and come to understandings with them.
You need to wake up and smell the coffee as it is today.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This episode shows how weak NATO is, despite their vain bluster. NATO cannot take a decision quickly. NATO is subverted by US interests, which over ride Europe's.
The US is asking Germany, the leading European economic power, to over ride its livelihood for US ambitions against Russia. Sure the US has the support of the most useless countries in Europe(Lithuania, Poland etc.), but the principal countries have to be carried as well. The useless countries shout the most against Russia, but when the beating comes, they will be the most helpless.
There is no way NATO can fight and defeat Russia. NATO simply will not be able to take a decision. We have heard of western media boasting about Article 5 as something that will frighten Russia. To invoke Article 5 will take several meetings, and there will be disagreements. Article 5 does not compulsorily say all members have to fight; all it says is that members may react as they say fit, including and up to fighting. Germany does not want to fight. Estonia etc. want to fight but really there is not much they can do against mighty Russia. The UK is an island that blabbers a lot but will find it difficult to cross the sea; they cannot send ambulances within 2 hours in their island. Turkey will not fight for Europeans. Article 5 does not compel members to fight, and if the US opted not to fight (and Americans don't want to die), then the rest of NATO will not stand a chance against Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Morwenna1220 Ukraine's independence was conditional on giving up nukes, not joining any military alliance, and allowing Russia the continued use of Sevastopol in the Crimea as the HQ of its Black Sea fleet. Ukraine's independence declaration pledged that it would not join any military alliance against Russia. After the US sponsored coup of 2014, Ukraine unilaterally reneged on the agreement it made with Russia about neutrality in 1994, after it put joining NATO as an aim in its constitution. Hence, Ukraine has forfeited its right to exist as it threatens Russia's security by aiming to bring US missiles to target Russia. Russia had to take steps to dismantle this unviable country. Russia has taken strategic parts of Ukraine, and the remainder rump state will depend on EU aid. At some later stage, Russia can take that also. You are an ignorant who thinks Russia's invasion came without reason on 24 Feb 2022. The US has been an instigator of Ukranian Russophobia. Ukraine is not part of NATO, but near Lvov, there was a training centre operating for some years where NATO instructors were training Ukranian army - this is the country that agreed to neutrality to get independence. Even before joining NATO, Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan. Why ? They got into the business of killing Afghans in the hope NATO would fast track their induction in NATO. Seeing what Ukranians did in Afghanistan killing Afghans, Ukraine deserves what it is getting. Due to all the above, and the encouragement given to neo Nazis, Ukraine should be dismantled and Russia should take it back.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russia's fighting power is exhausted in Ukraine ? We have been hearing this wishful thinking since April 2022.
But here we are, Russia has taken Donbass, fortified it, destroyed Ukraine's power grid, and run the west out of artillery shells. On top of that, Russia has come out on top in the economic warfare. It is in the process of de-industrialising Germany and Europe and it has kicked off de-dollarisation which will cut into American power. People are on strike in France, Germany, UK due to inflation. The Polish farmers are blocking Ukrainian grain. The leader of the western world, the US is led by a doddering senile, and it is fighting to contain its debt.
The DT has been telling us that Russian soldiers had low morale, they lost many officers and generals, Putin had a mysterious hand tremor and was dying, Russians had to use washing machine chips for their missiles, that they had run out of missiles, and are reduced to fighting in Bakhmut with shovels.
But every few days we hear Russia fired a salvo of missiles including the hypersonic ones, and drones, and Soledar and Bakhmut are gone. It does not square with the western propaganda.
The fact is mighty Russia has defeated 40 nations including the US and the collective west is smarting !
1
-
1
-
Piers is an objectionable swine because he talks as if the conflict started on 7 Oct. 2023. It started in 1917 with the Balfour Declaration.
Piers starts always with demanding the Palestinian/Arab/Muslim apologise for 7 Oct. 2023. Why should they ? Did he ask any Israeli to apologise for land grabbing, ethnic cleansing, war crimes as a pre-condition before an interview ? Israelis have been doing it for years. Therefore, don't demand the Palestinian/Arab/Muslim to apologise. That is typical western duplicity.
Piers claims he is neutral, and he is giving Palestinian/Arab/Muslims a platform and they should be thankful, and he adds he objected to the Iraq war, yet his approach gives the impression he wants to cover for Jewish Nazism
A 17 year old Jewish student killed the Nazi German ambassador in Paris in the 1930s. The Germans responded to that with Kristallnacht... the collective punishment of Jews. Would Piers have asked the Jews at that time to condemn the killing of he Nazi German ambassador in Paris or would he have concentrated on Kristallnacht ?
When the Jews tried to break out of the Warsaw Ghetto, and the Nazis put them down, do we blame the Jews for attacks on the occupying Germans in Warsaw and demand the Jews apologise ?
If Piers wants to seek solutions, instead of providing cover for Jewish Nazism, then he should change his approach and have a panel of people proposing solutions. On the Israeli Jewish side, bring people who want peace like Daniel Barenboim, Illan Pappe etc. From the Palestinian side, bring people who accept a Two State solution. And if you want to include extremists, have one from both sides, a Jewish settler who believes God gave him a contract for the West Bank, and a Hamas militant.
And if Piers persists with his sanctimonious western line, this generation of Palestinian/Arab/Muslims know how to speak English better than him, and they will show him the stick. As Hijab, the Palestinian Ambassador and Bassem Yousef did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Piers is into his sentimentality shows, to get viewing numbers. I do not see him exploring the solutions. Bad mouthing the Palestinians and claiming it is a unique shock and horror, while Palestinians have experienced worse for 70 years, is deceitful and duplicitous. That is why the west has lost credibility. Outside the west, people sympathize with the Palestinians.
The duplicity in Piers style is as follows : demand every Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, or supporter (eg. Jeremy Corbyn) condemn the attack and do some penance. Don't raise root cause or what Israel has done - because this is not the right time. The right time never comes and Israel is never held accountable for land grabbing. All the western media have the same approach. Kay Burley, CNN, etc. They never call an Israeli when IDF grabs land or kills, and ask him aggressively 'condemn what you have done' before being allowed to speak.
The effect of Piers is to create conditions to exonerate Jews from their wickedness and continue the cycle of violence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It maybe higher than 1200. Israelis have motive to underplay - because they don't want to show the world the capability of their opponent.
Putin is objective. There can be no solution without implementation of the Two Sate Solution and the Oslo accords. Israel has cheated on them, because the west armed it - like the west cheated on the Minsk accord while arming Ukraine.
The west does not want to wake up and smell the coffee about Israel's apartheid state. Russia has no obligation to show allegiance to Israel. CNN talks as if Russia has to think like the west and it it does not, then it is immoral. Unlike the western countries, Russia is a truly independent country, and not control of the Jews. It does not submit to Jewish blackmail.
The Arabs should realise that depending on the US has been disastrous for them. The US is the protector of Israel and its apartheid state, so how can it be a protector of the Arabs ? Saudi Arabia propped up the US dollar for 50 years by selling oil only in dollars, but the US backed the Jews at crunch times. It is time for Arabs to be independent of the west. Russia is the best ally if you deal with them fairly and sincerely. With Russia, you can get the best military technology in the world.
Arabs should remember that in 1956, Israel, Britain and France invaded Egypt because Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal. It was the Soviet Union that stepped in and told them to get out - otherwise, it would use nuclear weapons. The US looked the other way as it did not want to fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union for these three. The three colonialists vacated. If it had not been for the Soviet Union, these three countries would have killed Nasser (like Saddam and Gaddafi) and installed a compliant leader. If the rest of the Arabs had gone with the Soviet Union then, it would have settled the Palestinian state problem in the 1950s itself, when Israel was less than 10 years old. Even now, the Arabs should move out of the US orbit and build defence ties with Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dubbelhenke854 And your friend is Israel, and supporters of colonial wars, and those who staged a coup in Ukraine. So what is your credibility ?
You will find in the emerging global trade order, Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Arabs, Africans and Latin Americans will be connected, and you will be left dangling with your plantation owner, the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In all performance indicators of standard of living, well being of citizens, and quality of life, India comes in the bottom 30 out of 150, whether it is literacy, healthcare, sanitation, living space, corruption, rape and women's security, and security of minorities. That is why Indians try to emigrate to other countries by hook or crook. The same is not the case with China.
Total GDP s not an indicator of the well being of the population of a country, as it is skewed by the influence of the population size. The per capita income is the correct metric and in that India is lower than Bangladesh. The poverty in India is sub Saharan Africa.
India's burgeoning population of uneducated youth is a burden. The govt. will use them for lynchings and rape.
China is way ahead of India and India cannot catch up due to its divisive social system (caste system) and its penchant for sectarian violence against minorities. That divisiveness is intrinsic to the Hindu mentality and Modi and his party are built around that. In the Hindu mind, development is for the upper castes; nothing should go to untouchables and non-Hindu minorities. Hence, India is not like other countries, because the Hindus have no concept of seeking the well being of all citizens.
There is no way India can match Europe in standard of living and human rights.
The Pew survey is only about Indian perceptions about themselves and others, and perceptions of others about Indians. There is little value studying perceptions. More relevant is what India is and what it thinks it is and how it relates to reality. Those cab be measured more objectively - and then you will find India is a little hell hole. The proof is every Indian, including its Hindu nationalists, seeks to work or live in some Christian or Muslim country, and if possible get their citizenship.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
To all those Brits who imagine they can stand up to Russia, let me remind you yesterday Biden refused to give Starmer permission to use missiles against Russia. Starmer lamely reminded Biden about the 'special relationship' and pleaded for permission, but Biden declined.
If the US has decided it cannot fight Russia due to the damage Russia will inflict on the US, Britain should forget thinking it can change the outcome in Ukraine. After the elections, whether Trump or Harris, the US will move on from Ukraine. The Germans and French have given up, the east Europeans just bark but are useless. If Britain tries to take on Russia, Russia will clobber Britain and no one will come to its aid.
Hence, cut out all the WW 2 stories about Britain standing up heroically against appeasement of Russia. Britain should think what is has gained by appeasing the US. Britain is nobody's hero, and if Russia clobbers you, then you won't even get the sympathy Ukraine gets.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Rolf-farmedfacts-supervisor Come on man, Europe is a hopeless and spineless dependent of the US. You would not survive one day without the US. The command structure of NATO is entirely US. Without a US decision, you cannot take action.
As for European production of arms, your Norwegian idiot Stoltenberg has said with the rate of consumption of artillery shells by the Ukranians (forced on them by the Russians), Europe would only be able to supply 1/4 of Ukraine's demand.
Norway,Sweden, Germany,Poland,Slovakia,Estland,France,Austria and Belgium, Finland, UK....together cannot match mighty Russia. That is why you run to America and consent to be its slave. That is why the rest of the world holds you in contempt.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Long ago analysts had said the fall of Bakhmut (now Artymovsk) would open the gateway for taking Kramatorsk and Sloviansk.
But when Bakhmut finally fell, the Ukranians did not acknowledge it, and the western media declared it was of no strategic importance and it was Pyrrhic victory.
Sometime after, the Bandera army started its counter offensive under US pressure to show results. NATO said the Bandera army had 98% of what is needed. But the counter offensive was a damp squib. The Russians had built extensive 3 layered defensive network, and the Bandera army did not get anywhere near the first line, but they got killed and their superior Bradleys and Leopard tanks were torched. Western pundits had said Ukraine had to breach the Russian lines in 72 hours, and conduct a blitzkrieg, otherwise they will be drawn into an attritional war which favours Russia. It is 3 weeks, and the Ukranians could not breach.
Having waited out the Bandera army's offensive, the Russians decided it is time to go after Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. Kramatorsk is being softened up with airstrikes. I expect Kramatorsk to heat up, and the Bandera army has to abandon its offensive and go there to prevent its fall.
Meanwhile Zelensky is roaming around demanding NATO to bend rules and guarantee NATO membership after he wins the war ! The problem is Ukraine will not exist to join NATO or to be reconstructed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@auggieeast You have wishful thinking arising from the sense of mortification. It is because the west and NATO have been thwarted by Russia.
How will Ukraine end up in NATO when Russia has taken part of it, and the rest of it is a war zone ?
Russia will not allow NATO bases in Ukraine, at pain of a nuclear war if necessary. None of the European countries would have the guts to fight Russia. All of them are weaklings, and rely on the US for bravado. The US is not going to commit nuclear suicide for you.
'You can't leave a security no man's land between NATO and Russia. '
Why not ? What is your assertion based on ?
Ukraine of 1991 is gone for good, it is has squandered its independence due to western machinations. Ukraine is a failed country, it will not exist as a country, it will be a wasteland between Russia and NATO.
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, he fell down, and all the King's men and horses could not restore him and put him on the wall again. The same with Ukraine : it was put on a wall in a precarious position by the US, it fell down, and the US and its weak allies cannot put Ukraine back, and perch it on the wall again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@auggieeast 'Ukraine is winning' is the narrative of the defeated who cannot face reality.
Ukraine has lost land, it is not going to get back the borders of 2014, let alone 1991. Putin has said recognition of the 4 oblasts as part of Russia is a minimum condition to stop the war.
Ukraine appears to have lost 100,000 troops (Ursula von Leyen). Ukraine claimed 13,000, but no one believes them, not even the west.
Ukraine has suffered $ 1 trillion worth of damage up to now - and it will keep mounting. The west can hold useless Ukraine Rebuilding conferences to enthuse the dimwitted Europeans, but the fact is Ukraine cannot be rebuilt without Russian permission.
Ukraine's industrial production was in the east and that has gone.
Ukraine's power grid is destroyed.
Its shipping lanes are closed. Some wheat is exported from Odessa - but with Russian permission.
Ukraine does not have money to run its government. It asks for daily expenses from the west. The west cannot indefinitely give alms.
Ukraine has a severe demographic problem. The men are dead, and its women and children have migrated to the west and they will not go back - so it has lost a generation.
Instead, Russia is winning for the following reasons.
Russia can keep going with the war. The west is showing signs it does not have the ammo to continue supplying Ukraine. Russia has inflicted so much economic damage on Europe that European media says Europe is being de-industrialised. Russia has effectively ended the western global order.
That is why Biden and Scholz are now talking about negotiations and diplomacy. And Ursula von Leyen is disclosing Ukraine's war dead. Russia is not asking for negotiations, the west is asking for it.
How is Ukraine winning then ? It is just western propaganda and wishful thinking. You have got Ukraine destroyed with your reckless NATO expansion, and you have encouraged Ukraine to wage a proxy war which they cannot win, to assuage your false pride over Russia thwarting your designs. You feel defeated, and the more you say Ukraine is winning, without considering the facts above, the more desperate and humiliated you sound.
Russia has shown it can hit hard militarily and destroy its enemies even when there are 40 against them (Russia has everything in its arsenal from drones to hypersonic missiles with nuclear war heads). Russia could even take on the west in economic warfare (currency, banking etc.) and win.
Western weakness was highlighted by Finnish PM Sanna Marin. She said that no European country was strong enough to take on Russia - not UK, France or Germany (forget the rest). Europe needed US support. But dependency on the US brings its own perils - like the US using Europe to fight its wars to aid its arms industry.
Russia is an awesome country. No other country - not even China - could have taken on the collective west and won. That is why you feel humiliated. The US needs to realise fighting Russia will not be like fighting Iraq or Afghanistan.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mindbodyinstitute2652 'If NATO had to win and committed to doing so Russia stands zero chance'.
You are giving theoretical estimates of NATO strengths and claiming superiority over Russia in every which way : population, economic size, technology, combined military assets.
However, one has to go by battlefield performance. The fact is Russia has destroyed all vaunted western weapons : HIMARS, Leopards, Challengers, Abrams, Storm Shadows, Patriots. The west does not have 155 mm shells. Russia blunted the NATO led Ukrainian 2023 counter offensive, and has attacked and taken most of Donbass. The Russian soldier is hardy and determined, and they are patriotic.
The fact is the US now wants a ceasefire and negotiations. Why not continue if you have superior arms and economy ? The US has said Ukraine must accept it cannot regain 2014 borders let alone 1991; Ukraine cannot be in NATO and the US will not supply peace keeping troops. Europe is in a bind on the peace keeping formula. Russia will not agree to EU troops. Russia has therefore won.
NATO (despite its strength on paper) is incapable of winning a war. We saw that in Afghanistan. Against Russia, it has no chance - as the outcome in Ukraine proves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What a reasonable and well spoken Nazi lady.
Go ahead with DEXIT. Trump, Starmer - and Putin - will endorse it.
The idea that the small countries of Europe will be competing against each other making the same things at competitive prices runs against the notion of economies of scale. Airbus involves collective European effort.
Not only for gas, but even for nuclear, Russia will be needed.
The problem with this lady is what was not asked about her record of inflammatory statements against Muslims. It goes well beyond wanting border control. She has made statements and incited hate like a Nazi. Does she advocate gas chambers ? Scratch a German and you will find a Nazi. The interviewer did not scratch her deeply enough.
She should have been asked about Germany's unqualified support for Israel.
The reason Germany and Europe are flooded with refugees is the wars the Europeans have joined in with the Americans - Afghanistan, Libya, Palestine, Ukraine....
Europe is not going to be a player in the world. The Europeans will be clinging to their notions of white supremacy, but Nazism is not a solution. The Europeans are too divided, they are a pawn of the US. The future will be BRICS, Russia, China, India, US. The Europeans will come under the rest of the world.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@truthseeker6116 'Nato did not promise anything to the Soviet Union.'
Yes, now the western excuse is when James Baker said that NATO would not expand 'an inch to the east', it was only verbal, it was not written. That approach is against the spirit of detente that Gorbachov started.
Hence Putin said in Dec. 2022, 'I want a security treaty in writing'. The US declined, so he said Russia will start a technical-military operation. He gave warning, and followed his word. The difference between the west and Russia is Russia keeps its word.
'Russia has been defeated, watch the next couple of months Russia will collapse both militarily and economically'
The fact is Russia has already won - Ukraine will not be joining NATO, the US will not get missile and naval bases, Russia has strangled the Ukrainian economy by blockading its coast, it has taken 20% of Ukraine that gives 90% of the GDP, the rest of Ukraine will be landlocked and Russia will not allow reconstruction till Ukraine negotiates.
'Russia will collapse both militarily and economically'. You said that after month one. Rouble will be rubble. But rouble is the strongest currency. The euro and pound have gone down 20%. So don't repeat the brainwashed and wishful thinking of politicians, like an unintelligent oaf. It is Europe that is going to reel in the winter. Russians will be warm. You will return to a primitive life style burning coal and wood if you can find it. Aluminium factories are closed in Germany. You face unsupportable living costs, and I read people are coming out on strikes.
1
-
@truthseeker6116 If I am a Russian bot, why are you replying ? You do not even have the intelligence to refute a Russian bot.
I agree that the Russians did not get it down in writing not to expand NATO. That loophole allowed the west to be duplicitous. If Warsaw Pact was disbanded, NATO should have been disbanded as well. You want your cake and eat it. That is not going to work.
Russia has always protested the expansion of NATO. The first President Yeltsin objected; he was told the west gave a commitment to the Soviet Union, you are Russia. Yeltsin was furious, he said 'The Soviet Union is gone, but you watch, Russia will be back'.
Indeed Russia is back. It has rebuilt its economy, it built hypersonic missiles on the quiet while the US was engaged in war on small Muslim countries. It has checked US plans for bases in the Ukraine, it has withstood sanctions, and it is strangling not only Ukraine's economy, it is squeezing Europe's economy, and most importantly, it is accelerating the use of non-dollar currencies for trade.
Russia is back indeed with a bang, it has shown it does not flinch in the face of 30 jackals + 1 superpower. There is no one one in Europe, singly or collectively, as strong as Russia. When Lithuania hiding behind US sanctions tried a blockade of Kaliningrad, Russia threatened to annul Lithuania's independence. Within 2 weeks, the EU and NATO quietly rescued Lithuania from a beating. Now, you know the power of Russia ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bigg2988 Well, the Ukranians and all the EU thought it was bluff when Russia said it will take military technical action if NATO did not guarantee Russia's security and keep Ukraine neutral. But you know the reality : Putin declares what he will do, and he does it. Once the Russians decide to fight, they fight very hard and do not back down.
If your false pride and arrogance did not get in the way, you would have agreed to give the security guarantee, and Ukraine will be free today, and not beaten to pulp.
Who told you about "missiles that can destroy the area of Britain, etc." have been called as bluff ? I am referring to the Sarmat missiles. Would you like to invite Russia and ask them to test it for you ? If it is bluff, why did NATO not put a 'no fly zone' ? Why is Biden saying his howitzers will not have the range to hit Russia ?
Even after Ukraine is beaten to pulp, and the EU economy is ravaged with more to come, you think it is bluff ? People are coming out on the streets in Europe to protest rising prices. Are they also bluffing ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sir Putin did say there are only 4 nations that are truly sovereign : Russia, US, China and India.
The rest can only be partially sovereign and they serve others' interests to survive.
The European countries are now vassal states of the US, although they are euphemistically called 'allies' and 'partners'. They have US protection, in lieu of which they have to surrender an independent foreign policy.
Thus, if the US orders the vassal nations to go and fight in Afghanistan or contribute to invading Iraq, they have to. In contrast, the US cannot think of asking China, Russia and India to send troops for their wars as they can with their allies, aka vassals.
When Austrian TV interviewed the Indian foreign minister and asked him if Russia was India's ally, the foreign minister was taken aback, he replied 'we do not consider relations in those terms'. That reply is unthinkable for a European. India associates with whoever and does not act as part of a collective like NATO to serve someone else's agenda. That would be incomprehensible to an European mind. The whole system of alliances creates enmity and war and Europe has always had this problem.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In 2022, the same western jokers were saying Russia had untrained manpower that did not want to fight, that they had run out of missiles and electronic components, that the rouble will be rubble due to their sanctions, and the Russians were taking horrendous casualties unlike the Ukranians....
yet, here we are, Trump knows it is lost of the west, he wants to cut and run as he has no hangup, it was not a war he created.
As for the value of British intelligence that the man claims, they are the ones who have been making the assertions above. British intelligence said that Russian soldiers were reduced to fight in Bakhmut with shovels.
Hence, the comment on Russian casualties that is a standard add-on said when having to admit Ukraine is losing a city, has to be disbelieved. The west is trapped in its lies - the US wanted NATO expansion, the EU went along, they thought they could defeat Russia through sanctions and proxy warfare, but it has failed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NaturesGarlands Either you have not read the Budapest Memorandum, or you did not understand it, or you are a typical western liar.
The signatorties of the Memorandum were the United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They reaffirmed their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence.
So there is an exception clause. Now Ukraine reneged on its commitment to neutrality and avoidance of joining any military alliance. It slyly conspired with two of the signatories, to join an alliance that was anti-Russian, threatening Russian security. The purpose of Ukraine's induction was to put US missile and naval bases. Russia had repeatedly warned against NATO expansion and induction of Ukraine. Hence, for its self defence, Russia took the military-technical action after its request for a security guarantee was declined by the US. It is entirely within the terms and spirit of the Budapest Memorandum.
'Putin thought he was making NATO smaller, but what did Putin get? NATO has grown through Finland and Sweden. '
Two more weaklings in NATO do not make NATO stronger. Ukraine was a de facto NATO member; it even sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan. But when Russia gave Ukraine a beating, Ukraine asked for a no fly zone. No one in NATO had the guts - for Russia would give them a beating as well. That showed how weak NATO is. NATO held a meeting in Spain and decided that China is also an enemy ! It needs 30 to gather to take a decision. The saying about NATO is gros bouche, petits mains. Bog mouth, tiny fists.
'Almost all the world condemned Putin's invasion except 4 nations'. You think the west is most of the world. You are delusional.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Poland has been talking like it is a superpower. But 100 Wagner come to the border and the Poles are quaking !
Certain NATO countries have been talking about using Poland to enter western Ukraine, when the Ukranian counter offensive is defeated and the Russians advance. For example, Tobias Elwood has stated it publicly. Due to this Russia, took defensive steps (1) placed nuclear weapons in Belarus and gave a warning if NATO steps a foot inside Belarus, it will be treated as an attack on Russia which would invite a nuclear strike on Poland and other NATO countries and (2) keep Poland busy so if it tries to enter western Ukraine, it will face a flank attack.
Poland has been living dangerously and imprudently like Ukraine. As for Article 5, it only says an attack would lead to consultations by members how to respond. Nowhere does it say all of them will declare war.
As for the Russians, they are brilliant, they keep all the Europeans guessing what is their intention ! Unlike the Ukranians and the west who have been trumpeting their counter offensive for months.
Putin says things in a manner that is very cool and collected, which no western leader can match. He does not shrilly call his opponents terrorist, war criminals, madman etc.. He told the Poles that Poland is a gift of Stalin, have our friends in Warsaw forgotten ?! It was stated with the utmost decorum. At the start of the war, he told the US when they were mulling over a no fly zone, that they will face consequences they have not faced before.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sk.43821 Europe is a collection of weak states, that would beat the hell out of each other. That is their history. However, now there is only one power in Europe, that is Russia. Russia makes the European states quake as it can beat the hell out of them. France got a taste of that in 1812, German Nazis got it in 1945. The Ukro Nazis are being whipped now.
Partnering with the US means you have to be subordinates and go and die for them in Afghanistan or where ever America demands. And the US can cut and run from Kabul, without consulting its 'partners'. Europeans are shameless doormats. You saw how the US encouraged Ukraine and its Ukro Nazis to throw stones at Russia promising NATO protection, but when Russia gave a beating, the US did not send troops, it have the Ukranians some stones from a safe distance. Were Russia to attack Lithuania next (they are behaving in a way that invites a thrashing), you will see the US will look the other way and forget about Article 5. Kissinger said if the Soviet Union were to attack Germany or Europe, the US would not fight a nuclear war to save Europe. That is the same situation. So you can be a doormat for the US and feel very proud, but if you mess with Russia, you will face consequences you have not faced in your life. You must know it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As if Finland is a consequential country..... There are many more important countries than Finland who have sided with Russia.
The west is looking for crumbs of comfort, praising useless and unknown countries like Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, Poland etc.... This is because the reality is Ukraine's goose is cooked, and the war is lost for the west. Russia has got Ukraine by the scruff of the neck, it has taken 20% of the land that produces 90% of Ukraine's GDP, and it has strangled Ukraine economically with the blockade. Come this winter, the Russians will derail western economies.
The west and its comedian have shown excellence in show biz and winning the media war with its own public. That is why it talks about Finland's visa restrictions as if it is going to change the course in Ukraine. The west has shown singular geopolitical ineptness and lemming-like suicidal group think. Reversing course is difficult due to the loss of face and false pride.
The west and NATO are tall in rhetoric, but weak in substance. They imagine they are the world. They self-certify NATO as the greatest and most powerful military alliance in the world. But NATO was defeated in Afghanistan, and it does not have the guts to send troops to Ukraine.
Russia does not talk much, it does. Russia does not announce in advance where they plan to strike next, they keep the enemy guessing what their intentions are. The west will announce things in advance, and say 'we are preparing a round of sanctions to cut of Russian gas supply by December'. The west froze (stole) Russian euro and dollar deposits, and made it impossible for Russia to do transactions in these currencies. Russia has never said it is embargoing gas, it merely told these countries to pay in roubles - because euros and dollars have become worthless for them. Yet, the westerners say it is 'Putin's embargo and blackmail'. It is apparent that the Russians are far cleverer than the Europeans and they are geopolitically astute.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As if the Europeans care about food for people in other parts of the world. Russia is going to strangle the Ukranian economy. Putin has proposed the solution : Europeans have to drop the sanctions, otherwise Russia will maintain the blockade. Can't have it both ways.
Basically, the devious lady brings the real reason for the concern : the Africans are not on the side of the EU, they are on the side of Russia. The west wants everyone to join them against Russia.
The Europeans realise if Ukraine's economy is strangled, Ukraine will be dependent permanently on EU aid - and the EU cannot afford to maintain them. They talk about reconstructing Ukraine - but without Russia, it will not be possible.
As for weaponising energy and food, what about the west weaponsing the dollar and euros and the banking system ? The duplicity of the west is the reason the rest of the world is with Russia.
Russia has all the strong cards. There is nothing Ukraine, the EU, NATO or anyone can do to free the blockade. On the one hand, the arrogant Europeans want to say EU and NATO are winning, but this discussion shows the Europeans are in fact helpless. They are looking for 'solutions' - where they dictate to Russia. They are not going to get anywhere with that. The Europeans imagine there can be solution for Ukraine without Russia. They need their heads examined.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'shared values with US, sheer level of trust...'
Hmm, only 3 weeks ago, the US cut and run from Kabul, and forgot to tell UK and Australia. The US reserved all the early flights out of Kabul ! The UK and Australia complained bitterly then. Now, the two doormats are eager ....to be doormats again. It is not a good deal Mr. Farage. Alienating the French by stopping an ongoing contract is very low. Only a few weeks ago, you had Andrew Neil on your programme say that the US had undermined NATO by unilateral pull out from Kabul, exposing the UK and the EU to Russia. He said the UK and France have to build a military alliance to check Russia.
This Anglosphere nonsense did not get Britain anything. Britain lost money in Iraq and Afghanistan, got a refugee crisis, and it has squeezed health and education. In any case, AUUKUS cannot stop China. When AUUKUS could not stop Taliban after 20 years, what can it do in China ? Afghans were fighting with small missiles fired from Toyota Hiluxes. China and Russia can land nuclear missiles on the Anglosphere and both have knocked out satellites. A few sea patrols by AUUKUS does not change that equation.
China launched a gold backed currency, the yuan, and oil is now traded by Russia, Venezuela, Iran and China in it, bypassing the dollar system. China will undermine the dollar's hegemony that was enforced by military force over Arab oil producers. That is the fear, not China taking Taiwan. China is going to undermine the dollar's hegemony and Putin also sees it is necessary. There is nothing you can do to stop others trading in yuan instead of dollars.
You yourself mock Biden as unfit, then why do you want to run after Biden led US alliances ? If the Anglosphere makes three simultaneous enemies (China, Russia and Islamic countries) and fights them at the same time, they will take the Anglosphere down. Britain should not be suckered into this. Britain should seek an alternative path with the EU, avoiding conflict.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mework1871 'Muslims coming into EU impose their rules. Like r^pe is ok, sexual assault is ok, woman to blame. '
You are making that up and airing your prejudices. If they come there, the law is applied to them. Rape is nowhere OK.
'We are coming to a tournament, we were invited. If you didn't want outsiders, don't invite outsiders.'
You were not disinvited. You don't like the laws, so boycott and stay at home. Attending a football tournament does not give you the right to drink or smoke weed if that is the law and considered harmful in another country.
As I said, those who feel strongly can boycott or return. I watched the matches, the stadia were full, no one is complaining. They will be no English style football hooligans. You have to leave that at home.
'Although, without oil, and western technology, you still would be in the middle ages.'
Conceited arrogant fellow, your technology was built on robbing others and slave labour. The colonial era is over. End of western world order has also come. Sir Putin has ended it for good.
In summary get used to the terms and conditions : Qatar is not allowing you to parade gay pride (indulge in your gay activities without troubling others), it is not allowing drunkeness, and it is not going to agree to a LNG price cap just because you demanded.
1
-
1
-
@mework1871 Western and non-western companies are going and flogging electric vehicles in the Middle East. The Middle East is learning R and D, it is a matter of time. They have companies like Aramco and SABIC which have international R and D base. At one time, Japan had no R and D, but now it makes better products than the west.
Electric cars need Li batteries. Afghanistan has the largest stock of untapped Li. Chile is the leading supplier. There is none in Europe. So you will be dependent on others even for electric cars. You got a beating from Russia. For now, you have to beg Saudi and Qatar for gas and oil, and they told you there is no free lunch for you. So you are raging.
No body wants to kill gays, at the same time the rest of the world doesn't wish to flaunt gay as the normal, like you wish to project. You are a perverse society and with your gay logic, you will disappear on your own as you do not want to reproduce, and neither your women nor men want children. According to UN demographic statistics, the west is being depopulated. The west will be replaced by people from Middle East and elsewhere, although that is freaking you out. In other words, all the people you look down on will replace you and that is an unstoppable thing due to your mentality. That is the arrow of time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
What Obama has said obviously is true, that is why the Indians are so enraged. India is known for cow lynching, and rape, and burning minorities. When Trump visited, there was a riot in Delhi and the Hindu police threw stones at the Muslims. The BBC documentary Gujarat Files showed Modi is basically an organiser of riots and murders. That is the basis of his power.
Indeed, any country where one group persecutes another will fall apart. It leads to civil war. So far the Muslims outside Kashmir have put up with the persecution and not decided to fight. But that might change.
Churchill doubted that India was a real country. The independence generation like Nehru and Gandhi had exposure to democracy and western standards. Now we have the homespun Hindu like Modi, and he is from a group that admired Hitler. Hitlerism caused Germany's death, and Hindu Hitlerism will be India's downfall.
The US is clutching at straws like India because it has got cornered by Russia and China acting together. The US has Europe under its belt but it is not enough to counter Russia + China. So they are seeking India. But India does not really fit the bill. It is not really strong militarily or economywise. India is in BRICS with Russia and China and wants a multi polar world, and expansion of non-dollar trade. At the same time, India is in Quad, an alliance to contain China. China took Indian land, but India is too weak to fight or open its mouth. The rest of Quad did not even open their mouth, let alone come to aid India.
The US is being opportunistic in ignoring Modi's record and this undermines its claim to defending human rights. It is this rank opportunism and double speak of the US that has led to Africans, the Arabs and Latin Americans to not back the US over Russia.
India also better watch it. The US only has client states like Pakistan and European nations. It wants to sell arms, and it expects India to send troops to fight its wars. The Indian army used to do that for the British.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wwlb4970 Ukraine was part of Russia. Russians and Ukrainians did not have a very differentiated identity, they were intermarried and Ukranians were leaders of the Soviet Union, like Krushchev, Brezhnev, Chernenko. When given independence, the Ukrainians could not manage, they descended into neo Nazi Russophobic nationalism, encouraged by the US. Once the US infiltrates, that country is destroyed. It is characteristic of Anglo Saxons to seize on differences and instigate conflicts everywhere. War for profit is their culture. They have done that to break up the Ottoman empire (pit Arabs against Turks), in India pit various communities against each other to partition it, just to name a few. They have done the same in Ukraine. Except Russia is a superpower, it will fight and smash anyone that threatens it. That is the bottom line. Get it ? Ukraine is not in a position to fight Russia, with or without western support. The Ukraine of 1992 is not coming back, just get over it, don't waste your money on lost causes. The west is declining, it has enough problems, de-industrialisation, dying populations due to low fertility, anxiety about immigration, the western financial grip on the world is slipping as Russia and China drive de-dollarisation. I would not waste my time fighting lost causes. A new world order had emerged due to Russia and China, and the rest of the world will go with it. The west can fit into that or it fizzle out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegreatdane3627 Putin never said he will take Kiev in 3 days or 2 weeks. Gen. Milley said that. And you quote that and if you repeat the lie, it becomes truth for you.
The Russians never cite any finish date, or announce any plans. They have stated their general objective : (1) no NATO bases in Ukraine (2) demilitarisation of Ukraine and (3) de-Nazification of Bandera followers. The capture of the Russian areas of Ukraine was added as the war progressed.
Objective (1) is achieved. There will be no more NATO training camps in Ukraine, and no naval bases for the US. The US will have to fight a nuclear war for it, and it does not have the stomach for it.
Objective (2) is partially achieved; Odessa needs to be taken to complete this.
(3) and (4) are ongoing.
The 'western analysts' make up targets and dates. For example, they said Russia will launch strikes on the first anniversary because they like symbolism. There was no such operation. Another strike on the power grid came 3 weeks later. Russians strike as and when appropriate.
War is a dynamic thing. When Russia was stuck on Kiev, they withdrew and came back from the backside to take Donbass. They were endangered in Kherson, so they withdrew to the east bank without loss. Ukraine in contrast tried to hold on to Bakhmut unintelligently and got massacred.
Western analysts said Russia was planning an offensive in March (Russia never said anything). When it did not happen, so then started saying the Russians do not have the capability.
Western analysts said Russia ran out of ammo and was fighting with shovels with prison releases. They must have bayoneted the Ukranians in Bakhmut with shovels.
Ukraine and the west have announced a spring offensive, they have announced Leopard tanks, so Russia has prepared for them. Bring them on, mighty Russia will slaughter the Bandera army till they have nothing to fight with !
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bolton is an American supremacist. Trump is a white supremacist, and less of an American supremacist.
NATO should be disbanded. NATO has been a tool of US expansionism. Europe has not benefited from NATO : the US it to drag Europe into its wars against Muslim nations and Russia, and when Russia retaliates, the US does not want to fight, it slinks off. Europe carries the fall out, the refugees from the ME and Ukraine.
Trump said that America will not be for Europe if it was attacked. Nothing surprising. That was always the US stand. Kissinger said America would not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany.
The Europeans need to shake off their delusions that they have shared values with Americans, and they can join America and Israel to fight Muslim countries, and Russia and China, all at the same time. America is for itself, and Trump does not hide it. The Europeans need to learn independent thinking and not be reliant on America, and not join in wars they cannot win against Muslims, Russia and China. The British need to learn to be a team partner with the EU, and not be American's Trojan horse in Europe. The British also need to realise empire and world power are gone, and being America's shoe shine boy is demeaning.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Talking about 'military superiority' for Ukraine before crossing the first Russian defence line after 4 weeks, is a pathetic, wishful thinking that DW is peddling. The same was claimed after delivery of Himars, after delivery of Leopards and Challengers, after the cluster bombs....
Abrams is the next great western hope. But they will go up in flames the moment they come into the open. Ukraine does not have the capacity for combined arms warfare, its supply line extends essentially to the US, its manpower has been massacred. So how can it have military superiority ?
Russia will not lose Crimea. Ukraine will have to breach the three defence lines, enter Crimea and hold it. That is impossible. They have not crossed the first line although they have been saying for a month they have taken Robtyne. There was no follow up and it has disappeared off the news. Russia has told Blinken that a tactical nuclear weapon will be used on Kiev if it captures Crimea. Since Ukraine is unable to breach the Russian defence lines, that will not be needed.
DW needs to be realistic. There have been too many false dawns that it propagated like the rest of the western media. The war is lost for the west. Russia is more powerful than the collective west, it withstood the economic and military warfare of the west. That is hard for the west to accept as it believes in its superiority. The west now has nothing left in the war chest. It cannot produce enough of the armaments needed and it does not have limitless money; and it does not want to send troops. Ukraine will resist but will lose.
The western media now talk about negotiating a frozen conflict but the Russians are not interested. The time for negotiations ended when Ukraine was pressurised by Biden's emissary, BoJo. Russia will be able to block Ukraine for another month till the muddy season sets in, kill more of the Bandera army in that period, and then it will rebuild. Russia will go on the offensive in 2024, take Odessa and will eventually destroy Zelensky and his odd cabal of Jews and Ukro Nazis. Like the Red Army finished Hitler and his German Nazis, the Russians know that can be the only solution now. Meanwhile, Russia knows 2024 is election year and the support is fading in the country that instigated the war. That country has voices asking to ditch Ukraine. The rest of NATO won't have a say when Ukraine is ditched; they will change their tune and blame Ukraine for not following NATO rules on breaching operations, and for corruption. The Poles have already changed. Slovakia is about to. DW will endorse the capitulation when it comes and host experts who will blame Ukraine entirely for American folly and wickedness.
1
-
The west is desperate for finding an off-ramp, it cannot find one, so it has to live with the delusions peddled by Times Radio. Times Radio has been saying since month 3 that Russian troops are poorly trained and low in morale; Russia had run out of semi conductor chips and was using washing machine chips; it did not have air dominance; in Bakhmut, Russians were forced to fight with shovels. In 2022, Ukraine did a stout defence, and even instilled some forced withdrawals. But after the failed Ukrainian counter offensive of 2023 for which Stoltenberg proudly said Ukraine got 98% of its needs, it has been all one way - Ukraine is unable to reclaim anything, and it is losing more. Russia has killed off Ukraine's professional army, and has run the west out of shells.
Look at the nonsense the west indulges in. It held 3 Ukraine reconstruction conferences - as if Russia will allow the west to step in and rebuild. Any rebuilding will be by Russia and Russia alone. Russia knows the mischief the west will create if allowed into Ukraine.
Earlier German and western companies said they will set up factories to make tanks and armaments in Ukraine. Russia may allow it to be built and then they will destroy it with an air shovel before production can start !
The west is holding a peace conference in June '24 in Switzerland. Russia is not invited ! Biden, the main creator of the war, will not attend - even he sees it is futile. His election campaign is his priority.
Zelensky's 10 point peace plan for the conference says Russia should vacate Crimea, pay reparations, and Putin should go etc. In other words, Russia should capitulate to Ukraine ! Times Radio also has delusions like Zelensky. Russia has said any peace negotiations after Turkey will be based on military realities.
Western leaders know the military realities, that Russia cannot be dislodged, that the west does not have the arms and Ukraine does no have the manpower. Ukraine is on its last legs and it is on a ventilator and needs oxygen support. But the western media cannot admit it, because it will be defeat.
Biden's plan is to try to keep Ukraine alive before the elections. If Trump comes, he will cut support for Ukraine and NATO. And if Biden comes, he will abandon Ukraine and delegate responsibility to the Europeans. And the Europeans are like Times Radio, all mouth and no trousers.
Only 4 years ago, NATO armies ran away from Kabul with their tails behind their legs. How can such an army fight Russia ? It is humiliatingly obvious.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sababugs1125 I suggest that you are writing contradictory nonsense out of false pride.
First you say the majority of these factories that shut down were hardly competitive. So let them close. Russia has done EU a service then.
Your next line says 'Also it's only a matter of time before new sources ensure those factories work again.' So you think they will reopen and become competitive again. There is no energy as cheap as piped Russian gas. Europe is trying to replace it with LNG. LNG costs 5x piped gas. So how will those factories which you declared as non-competitive reopen with higher energy costs ?
The factories don't have legs and aren't going to go anywhere. Yes, they will stay - as abandoned hulks. Experience has shown in the 1970s when aluminium factories were shut in Japan due to high energy costs, they were never re-opened again. The companies rack up big costs and debts and that kills them for good.
Hence, Europe will close steel, aluminium, carbon fibres, cement and all energy intensive products and import them from more competitive places - which will be the places you hate such as China, India, and even Russia (backdoor channels will be arranged). But Europe will have to produce something to import these. What will be those ? Europe is not strong in IT and software. There is no Silicon Valley.
No, my fellow, Putin is going to de-industrialise Europe and you do not have the intellect to understand it because of your emotions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@barryporteous4904 The majority of Jews are mendacious, a few are very good, but they are exceptions. Look at the scheming Jews in the Ukrainian war : architect of 2014 coup in Ukraine was the Jewess Victoria Nuland, she was wife of neocon Jew Robert Kagan (architect of Iraq war); Zelensky the Jew; his mentor the oligarch Jew Igor Kolomovsky (caught for financial fraud in the US, ran away to Israel), PM of Ukraine is the Jew Shyamal; Zaluzhny, the ex defence minister, is another Jew stashed away as Ukraine's UK ambassador, to be brought in after the election; Blinken the Jew, Grant Schapps the Jew, the present US negotiator is another Jew. Rosenberg is another smarmy anti-Russian Jew. They are disproportionate in numbers. The moral junk infecting Europe and the US, that backs Israel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
India shields Hindu terrorists from Gujarat riots. The man at the top is a criminal. So what is HT lecturing others about ?
The origin of Sikh separatism is Hindu militancy that claimed Sikhs were Hindus and Hindi (and not Punjabi) is their language. Hindu misgovernance is the root of the problem. Hindus in India have been killing Sikhs, Muslims and Christians. The latest Hindu mob violence was against Christians in Manipur.
Western countries have to support Canada. Even if the man was a separatist, Canada cannot allow India's extra judicial killings (which it practises in India) to be carried out abroad. Western countries need to wake up and realise that Indians, specifically Hindus (or BJP supporting Hindus) pose the greatest threat to their societies. Yes, it is Indians who are the threat, not Russians and Chinese - the latter do not migrate in large numbers and they do not bring with them the disputes in their countries. Since the rise of 'Hindu nationalism' in India, many Hindus settled abroad have vibed with it. The BJP and RSS (Hindu fascist group) even have a design to push in new Hindu immigrants into the west, to capture power and influence to support their fascist policies against minorities in India. They were gloating about Sunak capturing power for Hindus in UK and showing off his Hindu affiliations. They are expectant that the Hindu Ramasamy will win the US elections.
Western countries have three illusions (1) Indians are a model minority (2) India is a rising economic power due to 5th largest GDP and (3) it can aid in containing China.
Indians might have been a model minority some years back, but the rise of a fascistic Hindu nationalism in India has changed the mindset and behaviour of even Hindus settled in the west - right up to Sunak. India's economy is a mirage. 5th largest GDP is solely because of the largest population. India's per capita income is lower than Bangladesh and on the global hunger index, it is with sub-Saharan Africa. The west might think it can set up manufacturing in India. However, India has a protective economy that does not allow fair competition. It has a few businessmen like Adani and Ambani, who are corrupt and have an oligarchic relationship with Modi. The govt. shields their businesses against competition and in return they finance Modi's election. The experience of foreign companies like Vodafone and Cairns energy forced them to leave India. Apple is losing money after setting up a manufacturing unit in India. They find India does not have enough skilled manpower. India's military power is also non-existent. Two years ago, China seized Indian land and Modi had to keep quiet. India knows it will be beaten in a war with China. Even when it had a skirmish with Pakistan (suspiciously staged for Modi's election), Pakistan shot down an Indian plane and captured its pilot. India cannot contain China economywise as it does not have the low cost manufacturing base, and it has an uneducated and unqualified population. Militarywise, it cannot fight China. India manufactures hardly any hardware, it depends on Russia.
It is time for the west to realise that India does not have the potential, and Indian migration (specifically Hindus) poses the greatest threat to western society. The visa and migration policies should be reformulated. Canada will take the lead, but the US, UK, EU and Australia have to follow. The Gulf states employ many Indians, but they need to watch for mischief created by Hindy nationalists. They had to deport some Hindus when they started sending hate messages against Arabs on Whats App.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The great power psychology of the British was revealed in what Boris Johnson said. At the beginning of the war, he said 'Putin cannot be allowed to win, as it will destroy the 'international rules based order''. The British believe they had an important role in creating the 'international rules based order'. But as Putin responded, 'who devised this order, and why was Russia and others not consulted ?'
In any case, the British flouted any concept of 'international rules based order' when it invaded Egypt during the Suez crisis in 1956, and when it created a a false flag threat of Iraqi WMDs striking Britain in 40 minutes, and used that to invade Iraq.
Boris Johnson's mindset was revealed further in a more recent interview where he said that if Putin wins, it will end western hegemony. Those were his words. He thinks western hegemony is an entitlement for Britain and the west. He is shameless.
However, he has a curious mindset. He despises the Europeans, he mocks them, he drove Brexit to free Britain from Europe which he equated to Ukraine fighting to free itself from Russia ! At the same time, I have seen Boris in interviews suck up to America shamelessly. He is a pliant vassal of the US, believing Britain has a 'special relationship'. Hence his belief in maintaining western hegemony actually means maintaining Anglo Saxon hegemony, where he thinks Britain will automatically get an important position as a junior partner of the US.
Britain is a fine nation in many respects and it has many achievements, but Boris Johnson and the British political class represent the worst aspects of the British. Keir Starmer is no different; he has the same antipathy to Russia, he sucked up to America reminding Biden about the 'special relationship' which required America to authorise Storm Shadow use in Russia.
Duplicity, scheming against others, war mongering, and at the same time, pious posturing are the worst characteristics of the British, which makes them hated.....The British in India stole its wealth, they taxed the Indians mercilessly and used its wealth to build Britain, but they always pretended they were working for the benefit of the natives. With that cultural and colonial background, it will be difficult to adjust to a situation where Britain can thrive without chicanery and intrigue.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lyudmilavelya2140 The UK's interest is not clear to me. Generally, they follow what the Americans do, as they believe some gravy will come to them in the process. They have a blind belief in an imaginary 'special relationship'. In reality, they are door mats like everyone else who relies on America. In this, their mentality is like the Ukrainians who crave to be America's door mat.
But in the current situation, I don't see what the UK gains : it cannot make Ukraine win; it is wasting money for Ukraine which is not going to provide a return; it is saddled with refugees; it going to face a severe energy crunch, and although it boasted earlier that unlike Germany, it only buys 6% of its gas from Russia, it has to pay the same international price for gas. Then they found the UK has the highest usage in Europe of gas for central heating, and they are lagging far behind in the planning for the emergency, as they didn't have a functioning PM. And their currency is devalued by 20%.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The video is a mixture of western propaganda and its contradiction. Typically, they say Putin is losing, he is desperate, so he is going after civilians. They tell us Bakhmut is unimportant militarily, and we don't know why Russians are after it (why are Ukranians defending it then ?). They informed us Russia had run out of ammunition, but they are firing 9 shells for every Ukranians one. They told us Russian soldiers are unmotivated and Ukranians are highly motivated. But somehow the unmotivated Russia soldiers are coming forward. In between the gloom, the narrator cites the US that Ukraine and Russia have lost 100,000 soldiers but it is stated as it the loss is equal. But if Russia is firing 9 shells, to Ukraine's 1, then it is certain the Ukranians are being massacred.
Seeing the video and reading between the lines, it is clear Russia is advancing in Bakhmut, and the situation is getting desperate for the Ukranians. After seeing the video, it is clear all the tall talk and praise about Ukraine defeating Russia is wishful thinking.
The US and Europe should explain why they pushed Ukrainians to this massacre and then did not go to their rescue by sending troops to Ukaine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lorenzcassidy3960 When the Soviet Union showed good will and allowed the reunification of Germany, US Secretary of State James Baker said that NATO would not move one each to the east. But as Putin pointed out, the US lied and there were 5 waves of NATO expansion. It is irrelevant that Eastern European countries wanted to join NATO. NATO is the US. The US reneged on the understanding it gave Russia that NATO would not expand eastwards, despite protests from Russia. Don't use eastern European countries to justify US lying. The threat to Russia is the US, and not the Eastern European countries.
The US thought that Russia was bluffing about NATO expansion. Putin had warned as early as 2008 NATO expansion would lead to war. Now you know Russia is not bluffing. NATO expansion to Ukraine was the last straw. Russia has decided it will use the mailed fist to check NATO expansion.
Now you find the most valuable industrial part of Ukraine has returned to Russia, and the rest will be turned into a wasteland, and there will be no NATO bases in Ukraine. The US is planning an exit strategy. If Trump comes, he has said he will end the war on Russia's terms and seek good relations. And if Kamala comes, she will get rid of Blinken and Sullivan, and form a new team who would advise her to hand over Ukraine war to Germany and the EU. The US cannot afford to continue funding Ukraine, it is a divided society, its economy is not what it was, and it has other priorities like China.
Finland, Sweden and the rest of the Europeans are useless and cannot fight Russia. Once the US hands over the war to Europe, Ukraine has no choice but to accept Russia's terms. It was dumb of the Ukrainians and Europeans to rely on the US. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Arab leaders need to work with Russia, and not the US. They should open their eyes and realise the US and the west will always run to defend Israel. The Jews have a stranglehold on US politics, media and finance. The US defines the rules for everyone else. Israel can practise apartheid because it is in the western camp, but Palestinians cannot fight for their freedom as the US has labelled them with the T word. Also, the Arabs should realise, normalisation of relations with Israel without implementing the Two State Solution will not work. Israel is an abnormal apartheid state, so normalisation will not work. They are just greedy, they would take more land, and if you allow them in, they will undermine Saudi Arabia, Emirates. That is the Jewish mentality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There is no Islamist problem if the western countries, NATO, US did not invade their countries. Till the Iraq, Afghan and Palestine wars, there was no Islamist problems.
Wars create refugees. Denmark is a dirty NATO country that went to Afghanistan. So they cannot complain.
Anyhow, there is a bigger challenge to Europe than Muslims, it is the Russians. The Danish have shown they are militantly anti-Russian. But the Russians have given NATO and its proxy, Ukraine, a thorough beating. There are nine million Ukrainian refugees. You may think you can integrate them, but you will see the economic effect of fighting Russia will be even more catastrophic for Europe than Muslims. Because that country can destroy all of Europe. As for the Muslim countries, the EU was begging Qatar to give a discount for LNG.
Europe has a bleak future because it has supported Israel and instigated wars against Muslims; it has supported America to instigate Ukraine against Russia; and it is trying to instigate war against China. You cannot fight all three and win.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@madhulikanegi319 China and Russia are trading with each other using the Chinese yuan for trade settlement. Ironically, it was forced on Russia by the sanctions. Otherwise, Russia was using dollars mostly for settlements with other countries other than the US. It is possible for two countries to trade between each other providing the two countries make and provide complementary things each one needs. Thus Russia supplies energy to China and gets paid in yuans, and not dollars. With the yuan, the Russians can buy Chinese cars.
Russia and India had rupee-rouble trade. Russia was selling oil to India and getting rupees; the problem was Russia was accumulating rupees and India did not manufacture much that Russia needed or did not make. However, in India can make things that Russia needs.
All these countries are also setting up banking systems that bypass SWIFT. Russia, India, China have set up debit card payments not using American VISA and Mastercard. Before when they used VISA and Mastercard for domestic transactions, the Americans got 2.5% for each transaction. Now, money does not go outside their countries for domestic card transactions.
Further many governments are converting some of their dollar deposits to gold to avoid seizure by the US.
All this reduces the demand for the dollar. And Trump is aware what that means for the US. The way Trump is blackmailing BRICS, people will look for ways to trade without dollars - except when the trade is directly with the US.
BRICS may not launch a currency immediately, but they will seek trade settlements and payments between themselves in their national currencies; the US cannot stop that.
As for the US threat of tariffs, it is not a one way thing. The Americans will not have the cheap goods and they cannot manufacture it because their wages are too high. And the other side will also put tariffs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
While I tend to agree that Britain should have avoided getting into a fight with Russia and should have pressed for negotiations, the news analysis is crude and the choice of language shows it is motivated. The channel has an axe to grind.
Wion is a Indian Hindu channel which has a grudge against UK, US and Europe. Their presentation is shoddy and typically Indian; it gives the impression all the presenters desperately want to present the UK in the worst possible light.
I would like to know how India is doing - it has no energy, it needs LPG, how does that cost ? It has to suffer the same high prices. India's economy went down during the Modi era, and took a big hit during Covid due to his incompetence, and it would have gone down further due to the current rise in fuel prices. Can Wion make a similar video on what Modi is doing ? It would not dare. India had a great run with its economy under the previous moderate PM Singh (a Sikh, not a Hindu). This was between 2004-2014. But after that, Modi's obsession is to project Hindu greatness but he is clueless about the economy.
I notice the same attitude in other Indian channels - Crux, HT, TFI Global. They are crowing over the west. The reason can be traced to the rise of Hindu nationalism. On the one hand, they want India to be accepted as a democracy and a global power, but since Modi came to power, the Hindus now indulge in fascist intimidation of non-Hindus through vulgar and violent displays of 'Hindu nationalism' . They are anti-west only because the west has criticised the violent attacks against minorities in India. This makes them boil and this is the reason for how UK's economic woes are presented in this video.
The UK and India are trying to negotiate a trade deal - for which India demands more visas for Indians to study and work in UK, and immigrate. If India is such a global power as the Hindu nationalists imagine, why do they want visas for the UK ? Priti Patel who was hobnobbing with the Hindu nationalists in India allowed a lot of them to come here. Some of the militant Hindu youth from India created a riot in Leicester last month. At the same time, a Hindu temple in Birmingham had invited a Hindu extremist politician who organised a riot against minorities in India. Fortunately, the Birmingham police got wind of it and cancelled the Hindu extremist politician's visit and avoided another riot. The Hindu right is boiling at the BBC and The Guardian for linking (correctly) the Leicester riots to the Hindu fascists in India. The Indian media like Wion are looking at ways to run down the UK and the west. The war in Ukraine and the blow back on the economies of the west gives them a golden opportunity.
Suella Braverman the Home Secretary is of Indian origin, but she is unlike Priti Patel, she is of Christian descent. She does not want to give India free passage to export Hindu fascists to the UK. Truss wants to go soft on immigration from India for a trade deal, but it would be a serious mistake to over rule Suella Braverman. The India of today is not the same as it was before. Hindu militants rule, and they want to export their aggression against minorities outside. It is good that Sunak was not made PM, as he also showed the tendency to hobnob with India's Hindu fascists (to get the UK's Hindu vote) and he would have imported India's problems to the UK. It is time for Truss to wake up.
Take this presentation by Wion with a pinch of salt.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
NATO does not have shells to supply. According to western sources, they cannot ramp up production. Even Stoltenberg has said so in the past.
The saying about NATO is 'gros bouches, petits mains'. Big mouth, tiny fists.
When you listen to western officials, you get the impression they are trying to put a smile on a dead rat's face (Ukraine).
What is the progress Ukraine has made in recent times due to NATO ? They have lost Soledar and Bakhmut, and they have been massacred there. Their power grid is damaged. They can only hold the remainder of the frontline from shifting.
The Russians will wait, let the Ukranians come forward, see off the offensive and then they know Ukraine has no more cards, and the west will cut aid.
If the Ukranians offensive only holds the current battle lines without shifting them (getting territory and holding it), it is a defeat for them, and US will cut Ukraine's money. For Russia, at this moment it is enough to hold the front without pushing forward. Once the Ukranians have exhausted themselves, the Russians know they can back up with a heavy counter punch. They did that to the German Nazis.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The collective west has lost face and is smarting, so they are drawing comfort that the Red Square Parade was scaled down. It is a highly immature response.
The parade is only a show, the battlefield is the real thing. In the battlefield, Crimea is gone, Donbass is gone. It is not reversible. The west knows it cannot stop Russia. In the final analysis, the west does not have the courage to send troops to Ukraine - because of the fear the Russians will kill all of them. Russia will not let NATO set foot in Ukraine again.
The west has been boasting for months that there is a Ukranian counteroffensive. Now Zelenksy is asking for more time ! And western experts are saying not to expect too much. This is the last throw of the die, when the counter offensive peters off, the US will distance itself from Ukraine and move on.
On top of that, Russia has led in the economic warfare as well. The sanctions led to inflation which is killing the western economies; French, Germans, the British are on strike. De-dollarisation kicked off by Russia will undermine US power. The US will ditch Ukraine when it becomes unaffordable, and its vassals don't have the capacity to fight Russia.
Russia has single handedly ended the western 'rules based international order' - for good. No one else could have done that - not even China. That is the reason for western outrage.
1
-
1
-
We shall see the Russians destroy the Abrams with helicopters and drones, and put them on videos.
Earlier western media said that Ukranians had broken through in Robotine, but now Bell says, they have not actually broken through, they are on the verge of breaking through the fragile Russian lines !
Sky's propaganda just does not add up. If the Ukranians have not broken through as claimed for the last two weeks, but are on the verge of breaking through as claimed by Bell now, and these super Abrams will help Ukraine to charge to the Sea of Azov according to Bell, then how will they take part in the charge after the breach (which is imminent), when the Abrams have not arrived (10 Abrams by mid Sept, 20 by end of the year) ? In that waiting period before the super Abrams enter, the Russians will keep killing the Ukranians like flies.
This is the second last throw of the die. After that fails, they will say we need the F 16s.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Macron said once that the west must not humiliate Putin ! That was when westerners thought Ukraine is coasting to victory and would capture Crimea.
But Macron and the west feel humiliated after realising their Ukraine project has failed.
Macron's change from dove to hawk stems from two reasons (1) the humiliation in Niger, Mali and Burkina Fasso where Russia ended French colonialism and (2) the realisation if Trump comes, NATO will end; and it is an opportunity for France to lead Europe and for him to be the new Napoleon.
But the situation in Africa is irreversible. And on the anti Russian project, the Anglos will not allow France to direct Europe; they will support Russia if needed ! Everyone knows the British mentality; it is not much better than the French.
What Macron is proposing is nothing new. The British MP Tobias Elwood wanted to create a 'Coalition of the willing' outside NATO, to send troops to Ukraine. Poland and the Baltics would provide the foot soldiers; Britain and America would direct them and avoid getting killed ! That is the British brain - use others. That never got off the ground.
In 2023, Putin had asked those who think they can defeat Russia to come to the battlefield and show it. No one in NATO had the guts to take up the offer ! They know the Russians will kill the British, Poles, French, Baltics, Americans in the same way they killed the Ukro Nazis in Mariopol. Once that happens, they know the public reaction in those countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh come on, nobody wants uneducated racists with an inferiority complex, like Trump, who cannot accept an election loss ! At least in Europe, when Boris Johnson was unwanted, he resigned. Draghi resgined. Compare that with what Trump did. The US is gone - Trump or Biden. I agree Europe is in mess, Russia and China will overpower the US.
Trump himself was soft on Russia - because Putin had him. One American told me that when Trump went to Moscow, he womanised as was his wont, and the Russians have a dossier on him !
So let us not have this crap that Trump had great foresight and if only the election was not stolen, US will be leading. It is not only weak Europe, America's heyday is over, and it cannot be changed. Europe lives under fear of a beating from Russia, and has a shortage of energy due to not resisting US NATO expansion policy. But America also has the nuclear sword hanging on it. The greatest damage that Russia has and is bringing about to the US is undermining the dollar by creating alternatives to the dollar for trade.
What the Europeans have to learn is to kick out the US led NATO. Go with Russia. It makes more business sense than going with America. Then the US would respect Europeans more.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@darrenjohnston1744 Look man, it starts with a western biased criticism on Russia/Putin, saying there is a President openly critical of the western system, and then meanders on to the theme British society has become soft and is unprepared for Russia, and it ends with Cameron talking about lights flashing red on the international stage, , and there is war in Gaza and 'international security' experts are saying that the assumption we (west) can live in peace is being threatened by certain international actors, and the grand conclusion is we need to be prepared for war, and conscription.
You need to raise your IQ and look behind what he is saying and its veracity, and why he is lying. That goes beyond watching the video and saying there is very little discussion on Russia/Ukraine .
First Boulton's lies and distortions. Putin has not been critical of the western system, he is not against you living as you want. What he was against is the west threatening Russia by using NATO and ringing it with missile and naval bases. He warned the west in the security conference in Munich in 2008, and he said he would take action if NATO expansion continued. The west is guilty, they brought this upon themselves . YOU went to threaten Russia but she defeated the US designs on it, and hence the west feels threatened !
As for the Gaza war, that too is a creation of Britain and the US. The British created an apartheid state for the Jews and from the 1960s, the US has backed Israel unconditionally.
Who are the 'international security' experts who are saying that the assumption that we (west) can live in peace is wrong because it is being threatened by certain international actors ?
These are British and western security experts - who never factor into consideration that the international actors threatening peace have been Britain and the US. These two countries staged the war in Iraq; the US invaded Afghanistan and dragged NATO with it; in Ukraine, the US staged a coup and sought NATO expansion; Israel is a byproduct of Britain's wicked colonial past.
The British watch videos but you do not have the intellect to understand or question the assumptions behind the line being projected. But if you raise your thinking capacity, you will realise the British, the US and the EU have been stoking wars, but now you are facing its consequences. The solution is not preparing for a war - because unlike the past, your gunboat diplomacy will not work. Russia for one has the power to incinerate the whole of the UK with a single hypersonic Sarmat missile. And the US would not come to your rescue as it does not want to be incinerated. And the gap between Palestinians and Israel has narrowed, there are no more 6 day wars Israelis can win, and an attritional war is not winnable.
The British and Americans need to understand they have lived by warmongering, but this will not work any longer. You cannot do harm to others and live comfortably, and preach sanctimoniously and pretend you are angelic. If you don't change, then your security will be jeopardised and there is nothing you can do to win. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
India is highly immature and is nursing a Hindu inferiority complex. The G20 is a summit that is waning in value. So is G7.
G7 is run by the west. G20 was created by the west to show some inclusiveness. Basically, some second rank countries like Inddonesia, India, Saudi started getting some chance to show their presence. But countries like Indonesia did the job last year but did not lose their heads.
The problem with India is it would like to be considered a superpower like China, Russia, and the US. The problem it is not there now, nor does it have the capability to be a superpower. What it has is an excessive show of false Hindu pride, and vain self congratulations, and adulation for a Modi, their Hindu godman (in India, they have this creature they call godman). Indonesia and other second rank countries do not behave like this.
The reason India behaves like this lately is due to Modi's 'Hindu nationalism' (a polite western term for Hindu fascism). Modi has synced with the Hindu inferiority complex and created the impression in the minds of credulous Hindus that India is looked up on as a guru by the rest of the world. Indian media are full of self praise and congratulations. Hindus have a tradition of blind worship of godmen, and Modi is an infallible godman for them.
India spent 10x what Indonesia or a developed country like Germany spent on G 20. That is true Third Worldism. They actually erected sight screens on some roads to hide the shanty towns of Delhi. Everything in India is fake - like Bollywood movies. They have a craving for respect, but they hide the reality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@treygarver7791 The west also implanted a govt. in Afghanistan and spent 20 years funding them to stay in place. But one day, America decided it could not afford it, and walked away without informing its European subordinates. Zelenksy is the result of the US implant in 2014, and he embarked on a suicidal collision course with Russia, thinking he will have US protection. Afghanistan fighters or their supporters could only inflict a few terrorist strikes in the west; there was a cost for the west to defend against that, but essentially they were pinpricks, and the west could afford to support the implanted Afghan govt. for 20 years. Afghanistan was not capable of inflicting economic warfare against the west.
However, the difference now is Russia is capable of hammering Ukraine militarily while fending off NATO sending troops by dangling the nuclear sword; and it is capable of doing severe economic warfare by cutting off gas supplies and driving up the price. As Gazprom CEO said, commodities (especially energy and food) are more valuable than paper money. You can have all the euros, but it is no use if you cannot buy energy.
There is another aspect to Russia's economic warfare. They are driving (along with China) the creation of non-dollar trade between other countries. Oil is being traded in yuan, and between India and Russia, in rupees and roubles. This will diminish the dollar's value in the long run.
The Soviet Union had the capability for military warfare, but not economic warfare. Russia has capability of both; they understand the capitalist and international economy and know how to play the economic warfare game that the west has always played.
Hence, don't fool yourself. Come this winter, the west will be rethinking on affordability of funding Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markwilson1096 'So what you are saying is NATO is weak for not wanting to start the next world-wide conflict? '
No, I said NATO is inherently weak, as it is an unwieldy organisation of feeble European states, and dominated by a superpower living across the Atlantic which now uses NATO not to protect Europe in Europe's interest, but to advance its military and economic interests.
Rumsfeld said at the end of the Cold Europe, there is Old Europe and the New Europe. Old Europe is France and Germany, Rumsfeld felt they were obstacles to US interests. By new Europe, he meant Poland, Estonia etc. which would be susceptible to US money, and which could be rekitted with US arms. The US is a predatory ally within NATO, which controls NATO and uses it for itself. The others have to send troops to Afghanistan to fight a US war. In Europe, the US will not sent troops to fight a European war - as you can see in Ukraine.
NATO is as bureaucratic as the EU, it cannot take a quick decision in any war. Article 5 is vague and dubious. In an attack on a NATO state, it is left to each member to decide what contribution to make; there is no commitment that all members have to send fighting forces. The command and control is with the US, and the US is not willing to fight in Europe. Long ago Kissinger said the US will not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany and Europe. Then NATO's purpose is illusory. If the US walks out of NATO under Trump, that is the end.
'Russia is doing everything in its power to disrupt and divide nato because they know they’re involvement means their demise'.
You are stating the obvious. Why should they not ? NATO went to harass and confine Russia, but Russia ended plans for NATO bases in Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sababugs1125 'Not an inch forward was promised to Gorbachev during the ussr . After it collapsed west had every right to accept anyone it liked. '
You are a typical duplicitous westerner who wants his cake and eat it. So you think that what was promised to Gorbachov as Soviet Union does not apply to Russia. Even if legally correct, it was against the spirit of detente. Gorbachov has shown goodwill, but you stabbed Russia in the back. That is your culture and breeding. Yeltsin had been furious when he observed the first NATO expansion and saw it as a betrayal. He had said 'the Soviet Union is gone, but Russia will be back, you just wait'.
Russia is back. It had protested all NATO actions and seeing the west was ignoring it, Russia decided to take action against the remaining ex Soviet countries to stem NATO advance. Now you find Russia can take on 30 countries both militarily and economically.
'Ukraine being nato would mean it would be protected by article 5 meaning Putin couldn't take Crimea and donbass to boost popularity back home '.
First of all, Ukraine is not in NATO, so there is no Article 5. Secondly, you have not read Article 5. Article 5 offers no guarantee of armed counter. All it says is if one member is attacked, other members may/will take measures to defend that member, in various ways each one sees fit, including and up to armed attack. There is no compulsion nor guarantee that anyone will take armed measures. Thus, Lithuania blocked Kaliningrad claiming it was following the EU. That is a direct attack on Russia's internal business, then Russia could have pounced swiftly at some stage. If that happened, what would Lithuania do ? To invoke Article 5, NATO would have to call a meeting of 30 and get parliamentary approvals. It all depends on the US being prepared to fight. The US may decide it does not want a nuclear war, it will support Lithuania from the outside.
So don't fool yourself. Don't mess with Russia and don't over estimate about NATO's strength. When was the last time NATO won a war ? Afghanistan exit was a debacle.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Swish-x7b time, technology and democracy moves on!…
Indeed, you (British, French, Europeans) need to move out of your colonial times, and get to realise you are not powers anymore. There is a new world order set off by Sir Putin, which will not be controlled by you, and the rest of the world sees that as desirable. The GDP of BRICS now exceeds G7, and the difference will grow. Get it ? Move with the times.
Technology moves - Russia uses hypersonic missiles, the US has tested 4 times and failed. Britain's Trident tests failed and a satellite launch vehicle caught fire on lift off a couple of days ago. You need to do a lot of catch up with Russia.
Democracy - you engage in overthrow of governments worldwide, including in Ukraine, and you support even fascist groups like Azov in Ukraine. In your countries, you have mobs storming the Capitol, and race riots, and Nazis on the march in Europe and UK. The last time, Europe needed the Russians to crush the Nazis. True or not ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@eddastrohmayer251 The whole British establishment, whether Conservative or Labour, is bitterly anti-Russian, to the point they are delusional. The media is also united with them. Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Ben Wallace; Starmer all hold the same view on Russia. Boris Johnson said Russia should not be allowed to win, because that 'would be the end of western hegemony'.
They are delusional because they know Britain cannot fight Russia, but they just hope the US will do the heavy lifting under British guidance. The British have a craving for a Churchillian moment where the world will notice Britain, that it guided the US to battle against evil. They wanted to give the first battle tanks, the paltry Challenger, thereby claiming they crossed a red line, and they want to do the same with the Storm Shadow. Some months back when Trump's position on Ukraine became clear, the Daily Telegraph wrote an article saying if the US cannot lead Europe, Britain should. The same people look down on Europe and championed Brexit and boasted about 'taking back control from the EU', but they have delusions they can lead Europe in a fight against Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Simple way to end war : Ukraine should accept neutrality, and understand that there can be no US bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia. Any other path is self destruction. Sovereignty does not mean seeking to invite a foreign power to put missiles in your country to threaten a very powerful neighbour. Russia has not used yet its heavy weapons like the thermobaric missiles, but if Zelensky does not have sense and believes the west can save him because of his plucky stand, these thermobaric missiles will hit and it will be impossible to withstand. All this talk about the west sending weapons (but not troops) is hogwash created to placate western opinion which wants see their govts. to do something. How will this equipment be sent if the roads and airports are blocked by the Russians ? Advanced equipment needs training. The people who encouraged Russophobia and asked Ukraine to stand against Russian walked away, to save their skins. The US led NATO has created a big mess for Europe. NATO is not a defensive alliance, it went to Afghanistan. It was sneaky with Russia and expanded 5 times eastwards. Now Russia drew a red line. The US pressed for NATO and EU entry for Ukraine, although France and Germany opposed it in 2008, knowing it will provoke conflict with the Russians. But the US arm twisted France and Germany. So the EU itself does not have sovereignty on critical issues and is manipulated or arm-twisted by Americans to fit its agenda. The EU needs to come to its senses and realise that making enemity with Russia will lead to endless problems for the EU, and not so much for America. Europe, not America, will be saddled with refugees and economic problems. Shutting down airspace, SWIFT etc. will not change the outcome, as Russia said it will not allow a threat to its security, come what may. Iran has resolutely not allowed Americans in after 50 years, and cutting them from SWIFT has not changed that, so to imagine Russia will succumb is fantasy created by lack of clarity in thinking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I was laughing at the thought of Truss, Borrel, Wallace, BoJo, Olaf Scholz, Macron, von Leyen, or Blinken and Biden sitting with Lavrov, let alone Putin !
The west has no one of comparable intellect who can get past them. Wallace said that the British kicked the Tsar's backside in the Crimean war and will do so again. That was in 1856 ! He imagines that he can do that to Russia today.
I have seen a video of the American redneck John Bolton and delegation meeting Putin and delegation. Bolton who is normally brazen was quiet and submissive in front of Putin ! Putin even stunned Bolton with a mischievous joke about the American eagle and asked whether Bolton was coming with olives or arrows. Bolton did not seem to know about what the American eagle held in its claws ! He looked blank, it seemed the joke went above his head.
And if you want to see Putin handle a vain and conceited low IQ American journalist, see how he deals with Meghan Kelly in an interview.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Times Radio is a channel that has consistently presented 'Ukraine is winning' titles and stories. Every small Ukrainian achievement is inflated and Russians are underplayed. This is the first time we are seeing a more realistic report in Times Radio. The title 'Ukraine's counteroffensive is their 'last hope' of taking back territory' shows its realises Ukraine will fail, and then the US will say 'no more money' for lost causes.
The western media is gradually preparing its public which they had misled into thinking Ukraine will not only regain Donetsk, but that it will retake Crimea. Russia will defend and stave off Ukraine's last ditch effort, and then strike them. It will not be a stalemate after that.
Russia can and will continue to hammer Ukraine. Much of the professional Ukranian army has been massacred. The west cannot supply artillery shells. How can Ukraine win ?
The west itself is in trouble as many crises overlap. It is not able to afford high energy prices, inflation and de-industrialisation. There are worries of more bank failings. De-dollarisation that Russia and China have set in motion cannot be rolled back.
Hence support for Ukraine 'for however long it takes' will not be sustainable. Remember Macron said Russia needs an off-ramp, we must not humiliate Putin. In fact, the title of this video shows now the west feels Ukraine is a lost cause. The west is looking for an off-ramp - 'we must not humiliate the US' !
The west is continuing economic suicide now not because they care for Ukranians, but the feeling that not only Russians, but the rest of the world will see the west is defeated. That is, west knows the war is lost, but the west is continuing due to false pride.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The obvious and inevitable happened. Ukraine got defeated because it acquired delusions based on the belief it had become western. Its 'partners' who were encouraging Ukraine to fight and were swearing to support it for 'as long as it takes' realise Russia cannot be defeated. The west ran out of arms and money; and Ukraine ran out of people. Sobre minds saw this long ago. But the supporters of Ukraine carried on out of false pride. Being defeated causes burning especially when you believe you are the most superior in the world. Now the US wants to cut its losses and leave. The vassals of the US are also going to do the same, albeit with pious promises of Ukraine's entry into EU and NATO at an undefined date.
Boris Johnson, a singularly wicked former British PM, said in 2021, that Putin should not be allowed to win, as that would end the 'rules based international order' (look at his bloody cheek - the UK and US invaded Iraq based on false claims). In 2024, Johnson said in a video, if Putin wins, it will be 'end of western hegemony'. That was a candid admission of what the west is fighting for : 'rules based international order' = western hegemony.
Since Russia has defeated the collective west, and the latter has to surrender Ukraine to Russian demands, following BoJo, we can say Russia has ended western hegemony. The rest of the world feels sorry for Ukraine's foolishness, but thanks Russia for ending western hegemony
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dice3809 German reunification, and dissolution of Warsaw Pact, and freeing Baltics and Ukraine was done by the Soviet Union. They could have stopped it. But you thought it was one way, you were sneaky. Now, you have to pay the consequences. Russia has decided enough is enough, anyone who messes with Russia, be it NATO, Baltics, US etc. will be mauled. It is very clear, so no need to argue.
Keep your NATO, but don't cross the limit set by Russia. When Putin said you will face consequences you never faced (if you tried to put a no-fly zone), NATO understood and meekly withdrew. You don't want to be at the end of a Sarmat missile.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevebusfield199 'Can't afford it. It's less than 1% of our GDP... Russia’s GDP was $1.78 trillion in 2021 and California’s GDP was $3.37 trillion. That's just one state.'
Your GDP is irrelevant when it comes to decide whether you can win a war or not.
The US is not capable of winning a war against anyone because, its people are not willing to get killed. Thus they could not prevail over Taliban. Against Russia, there is the problem that the Russians have the technology to incinerate all US cities. So the US cannot fight a war with Russia. Get it ?
Even all these comparisons of GDP that you make (Russia's GDP is only the same as Italy's) are immature. It depends what is in that GDP. Russia has energy, it has gold, it has minerals, it makes metals like titanium (Boeing buys it from Russia still), it has full command of the nuclear supply chain, it is the biggest supplier of wheat; plus it can make shells, drones, tanks, space vehicles, thermobaric weapons, it has its own GPS system, electronic jamming and cyber warfare expertise. Italy cannot make any of these, its GDP is cheese, shoes, fashion, cars, tourism.... Russia has developed and used hypersonic missiles. US has failed to make hypersonic missiles after 4 tests. The west is unable to make military equipment in quality and quantity. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
He is a stupid comedian, an implant in the pay of the US, who could have opted for neutrality to avoid war, but decided to carry on with Russophobia because he thought he had American support, only to find the Americans do support but do not want to die for him, when the Bear came to maul Ukraine. With his foolish foreign policy, half his cities are rubble, more land is lost, more is going to be lost. He has made Ukraine a failed country. It is an unviable nation whereas if it had astute politicians, it would have remained a sovereign country. You can keep hoping he is going to lead his people to victory, but realistically, more Ukranian cities will be destroyed, and they will lose more land. Ukraine is a victim of Zelensky's immature political miscalculations, and western duplicity and mischief making against Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@csh5414 Does not matter whether you think mines destroyed those useless western tanks, they are all part of war. Drones and helicopter gunships also destroyed them. Ukranians are saying their offensive cannot proceed without air cover. Why do you think Ukrainians are begging for air support if it was just mines ?
It is 4 months now and you cannot maintain the counter offensive is succeeding. A breaching operation is meant to be done in a few days, followed by a blitzkrieg. And afterwards, Ukranians would need to hold the land. It is 4 months and they have not breached the first line of defence; they claim to have breached near Robotyne, but since there is no follow up with tanks etc., it is clear those were lies.
If you want to know what is a breaching operation through minefields and fortifications, read up about the Red Army's celebrated Operation Bagration, where they stormed through German minefields and fortifications after months of preparation. Once breached, the Red Army was like tsunami, they went through Poland and to Berlin. The Ukranians were in the Red Army once, they should know. Ukraine's counter offensive is hardly an Operation Bagration. It is an Operation 'Fooling Around'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Putin invited all those who think they can defeat Russia to come to the battlefield and show it.
The outspoken, almighty British did not take up Putin's challenge, even though they were the ones who pressed Ukraine not to accept negotiations in Turkey. All they could do was sent 12 Challengers, and when it finally appeared on the front, the Russians destroyed one, and then the British told the Ukranians to hide them !
The Ukrainians can fight, the Russians can fight; but not the British.
With the Americans withdrawing, the British are left as vain posers. There will be no war with Russia, it is just empty posturing by the British.
The saying about the British is 'gros bouches, petits mains'. Big mouth, tiny fists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michaelchiasson9088 Your starting axiom is wrong. It is a provoked invasion - the US and NATO provoked it. When the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, NATO should have been dissolved. Instead it was expanded, against Russian protests. The Russians were given to understand and expect that in the very least NATO would not be expanded east. But there were five waves of NATO expansion ignoring Russian protests. In Ukraine, Russia said it is crossing a red line and was a threat to its security. The US plan was to induct Ukraine into NATO, so it could missile and naval bases in Ukraine, which would cut off Russia's Black Sea fleet from sailing from Sevastapol in the Crimea. When the US sponsored coup in Ukraine took place in 2014, Russia took prompt action and moved into Crimea to neutralise the American plan. In Dec.2021, Russia asked the US to give a security guarantee that it would not set up bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia. The US refused. Why ? If your interest was averting the war, you would have negotiated. After you rejected negotiations, Russia said it will take military-technical action. It has kept its word. Now you know the US have will not have bases in Ukraine. Russia will fight a nuclear war if the US tries to induct Ukraine into NATO. Is the US ready to challenge Russia with a nuclear war ? I don't think so. It was not ready to put a no-fly zone or send troops to Ukraine.
The US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, then I did not hear your type say 'Tyranny cannot go unchallenged! Glory to Iraq and Afghanistan'. Your sort of hypocrite would have avidly endorsed the US. Well, you could do it against Iraq and Afghanistan. But with Russia, you will be thrashed, and you also know it. That is why you are standing on the sidelines and howling Tyranny cannot go unchallenged, but you dare not send troops.
1
-
@michaelchiasson9088 The west did not do anything to thwart the invasion, so you are guilty. Russia had been asking not to expand NATO. On disbanding Warsaw Pact, it was given at least a tacit understanding that NATO would not expand eastwards. The west with its customary arrogance ignored their concern. It thought could have its cake and eat it. When Yeltsin complained and reminded of the understanding not to expand NATO, he was told that commitment was made to the Soviet Union, you are Russia. Yeltsin was furious; he said 'you watch, Russia will be back'. Indeed Russia is back; it has the military strength and the nuclear sword, plus it has built the economic strength to strangle Europe. The most important outcome and benefit for the world is Russia has taken the steps to drive de-dollarisation and thus cut US power. They have teamed up with China and others for this.
Russia asked for a security guarantee and peace treaty from the US in Dec. 2021, such that the US would not seek to put missiles in Ukraine. The US refused. Why ? Then Russia said it would take military-technical action to make sure Ukraine will not join NATO and US will not have bases. They have made sure that will not happen - the US will have to fight a nuclear war to get bases in Ukraine.
Cut out your humbug about invading Iraq for democracy, and you could not find a partner for democracy, but in Ukraine you found a democratic partner. You lied Iraq had WMDs, that is the reason you said you had to invade. The real reason was Saddam attempted de-dollarisation by selling oil in Euros. You did not go into Iraq for democracy or even WMDs. It was to set an example to those who tried de-dollarisation. Now de-dollarisation is being driven by Russia and China, and you would not dare invade them.
The Ukrainian govt. was an implant from a US sponsored coup. They have closed Russian language newspapers and TV channels. How is that democratic ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bluecanary9417 In a war, there will be ups and downs. The sinking of the ship was due to American help. If the Russians had intervened and helped Iraqis in the same way, America would have also lost some big things. In future, Russia and China have to work and confront America in the same way when it launches unilateral invasions like Iraq.
As for Ukraine, its goose is cooked, sinking of a ship not withstanding. In the bigger schemes of things, see what Russia has achieved. Ukranians have been taught in no uncertain terms that Russophobia will bring such a severe beating that Finland and Sweden run for cover ! Ukraine has squandered its independence, its sovereignty is completely gone, one can see break up of the country, with part of it being reabsorbed into Novo Rossiya, and part being turned into a landlocked wasteland. Reconstruction is not possible without Russian permission. Ukraine dreams the war will come to an end but it does not know who will guarantee its security - US and NATO will not be acceptable. Whoever will be the guarantor has to be acceptable to the Russians. Thus, it is a Russian victory. You only have sinking of a ship to cite which is a minor achievement. Russia's enemy is not Ukraine per se, it is the US. In that too, Russia has checked the US's NATO expansion scheme, and the US knows no missile bases will be possible in Ukraine. Russia has made it clear they will fight a nuclear war if needed if the US tries to put missiles there. Russia has made the west feel the nuclear sword over its head. Last but not least, the sanctions and freezing of money has triggered the push for a parallel non-dollar, non-euro financial system. Russia has made that it will work with other partners like China and India towards that goal. That undermines the basis of US power - and that is good for the world. The era of printing dollars will come to an end. Russia is thus exerting counter pressure not only with missiles and nukes which terrify the west, but they are working to change the dollar denominated financial system.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cadicamo8720 Ukraine has a Nazi problem. Read up about Azov Batallion, Right Sector, Svoboda, and such groups that came to the fore after the US regime change operation in 2014. Why do you want to brush the evidence under the carpet. You are making excuses for them because Nazis are useful to you.
There was a Donbas genocide. When these Ukro Nazis came to power, they burnt Russian speakers in Odessa in a building.
Russia did not say Ukraine would fall quickly. US general Milley said so. Russia stated its objectives, it never gave a timeline. The western press currently says a new Russian offensive has started, but Russia has never said this or given any time when it will start.
'You believed those who said Putin was a geopolitical master, a paramount chess strategist...'
The evidence shows he is a geopolitical master, a paramount chess strategist. Both Biden and Trump have declared that Ukraine cannot join NATO and there will be no NATO peacekeepers. The US has abandoned its former line that Ukraine is a sovereign nation and it alone decides, Those are two key Russian objectives. Other two are de-militarisation of Ukraine and de-Nazification. These are in progress. Russia is killing off Ukraine's military, and the Ukrainians are not able to recruit enough people. Putin has split the trans Atlantic alliance, and US commitment to NATO has shrunk. The Europeans are groping about what to do.
The western led attempt to retake Crimea in the 2023 Ukrainian offensive was a failure. Ukraine has lost more, and it has to cede not only Crimea but Donbass. The western led drive to intrude Kursk was also a failure.
Now the west is asking for ceasefire and negotiations. Why ? Because the master strategist has defeated you. Why else ? Putin had said long ago in an interview with Carlson that 'we are not going to negotiate just because you have run out of weapons'.
'We're near 1'000.000 russian casualties. ' You made that up to console yourself. Russia is massing more forces, Ukraine cannot find more. You are misled by people who told you that Russia ran out of missiles in 2022 because of sanctions, that rouble will be rubble, the Russians are fighting with shovels in Bakhmut, Ukraine was going to re-capture Crimea in 2023, that Challengers, Leopards and Bradleys would be game changers; that ATACAMS and Storm Shadows would take down Kerch bridge; that F16s would be game changers; that drone swarms will overwhelm Moscow. Your latest fantasy is Taurus missiles would be a game changer.
Indeed, NATO expansion was a massive geopolitical and strategic miscalculation. Boris Johnson had said defeat to Russia would be the end of western hegemony. That is what has happened - Russia has single handedly changed the western world order. The US would like to wind up the war and leave Ukraine to its fate, and the useless Europeans do not have the capability to support Ukraine in any meaningful way. That is defeat.
1
-
@TheConverter330 If neither you or I know exactly what the real situation is like, why did you write, 'Bunkum,as usual on this biased site.'
I see what the Indian sites write, western sites report later. This video says the Russians have started the procedure to clear out the Ukrainians and they have retaken 10 settlements. Is that biased ? Later, the western press also said the Russian counter offensive has started in Kursk, and Zelensky says it as well. Do you think the Ukrainians have the numbers to hold on to Kursk ?
The western press is very biased. Has it ever asked a western politician why they went for NATO expansion, why the US staged a coup in Ukraine in 2014, and brought Nazi groups like Azov Battalion to power, why the US did not negotiate to avoid war, why Boris Johnson sabotaged the peace deal reached in Turkey ?
The western press gives weight to idiotic British intelligence which said the Russians are out of weapons and they are fighting in Bakhmut with shovels.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'War is at a tipping point, can't see how Putin will survive'. The west has been saying this since month one. They said Putin has hand tremors, he has cancer, there are officers plotting against him, crowds will come on the streets and overthrow him. Yet he is still there and the west is frustrated. In fact, some of his adamant opponents have not survived : Draghi is gone, far right is in Sweden, BoJo is gone, the media says Truss is to go, Biden will be paralysed after mid term.
Putin launched air strikes on 10 cities and the Ukranians were soon blabbering for help. Gone was the tall talk of capturing Crimea.
The west predicted the rouble will be rubble and thought Russia's economy would not survive. But if you look at the economies of Germany, Italy, France, UK, they are not going to survive !!
Don't fool yourself. It is humiliating but one has to be objective, and accept Russia is stronger and has more will power than the collective west. It is led by a leader who cares for the security of his nation, who will not compromise on that. You will not find a single leader in the west who has anything apart from doublespeak and pompous bombast.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@@rwafpre8246 Your information is out of date and built on western propaganda. Now Bakhmut is on the verge of capture, the west says it is unimportant. However, it was heavily fortified by Ukraine with NATO guidance since 2014 as a bulwark against a Russian advance. Once that falls, Russia can go for Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, and connect up with Zaphorozhia. Afterwards, it is easier to advance to central Ukraine as it is open steppes from thereon.
'because of the typical Russian military strategy that if they can't have something nobody can...' The Red Army crushed the Nazis in the same way. It had to be done to get to Berlin. The Red Army destroyed 80% of the German army.
'The story of the war so far has been Russia making slow grinding progress based on brute force, which then gets reverse all at once when Ukrainians come in using actual modern military strategy and tactics.'
Indeed. But things have changed. Ukraine will no longer be able to reverse its losses. Because it has lost too much manpower in places like Bakhmut and Soledar. The US is asking Ukraine to give up Bakhmut so it has some soldiers left to train with the tanks. The Russians fire 10 shells for every 1 shell from Ukraine. The second reason Ukraine cannot reverse the losses now is its supply chain is stretched - it is getting too little, too late. Russia in contrast has greater manpower, and Russia makes all components of a wide range of weapons. It has a larger stockpile than the west, and its factories are able to ramp up production.
The battle in the east and south is lost for the west. You need to update your information and expectations. Russia has Ukraine by the scruff of the neck and will not let it go. There can be a negotiated settlement but on Russian terms; or Ukraine's surrender. There are no other outcomes. The Nazis in Berlin had to surrender to the Red Army even though they resisted till the bitter end, and it will be the same with the Ukro Nazis.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is interesting to hear the reasoning Jake Sullivan and Biden gave. The US and its collection of puny allies are unable to supply artillery shells that Ukraine needs. That is a tacit admission that Ukraine does not have the basic munitions to support their offensive; therefore Russia is winning. [All this while, they had said Russia had run out shells, missiles, tanks etc.].
To sustain the Ukranian offensive that has got nowhere, the US needs to supply what is left in the cupboard : cluster bombs.
The Russians are not going to sit back. They can start spraying cluster bombs on Kiev and Lvov. Who can complain about war crimes ? They can make all of Ukraine uninhabitable.
Further, such steps by the US bring Ukraine a step closer to receiving a tactical nuclear strike.
It shows the dire position of the US and NATO. The original belief that the Russian economy will collapse and Putin will be overthrown has failed. In the war, Ukraine has lost land - and is threatened with loss of more. The Ukranian offensive to regain land is going nowhere. The US realises Ukraine cannot dislodge the Russians; they say the Ukranian offensive is disappointing !
Meanwhile, Ukraine is pressurising the US to join NATO; but the US does not want Ukraine to join NATO, as this will mean the US will need to send troops to Ukraine. The Russians will then kill the Americans like the Ukrainians. And no US President will survive that. If Ukraine joins, and the US does not go through with Article 5, then that is the end of NATO. Even the dumb Europeans will realise it is foolish to be doormats of the US.
The US needs an off-ramp but there is none. It is trapped by its false pride and the loss of face is unbearable. Some of the less rabid US neocons have started speaking to Russia to seek an end to the war (reported by NBC). But Russia does not want to negotiate till a guarantee is given that there will be no NATO bases in Ukraine. That is the key requirement which Russia will not back down on. Till then, Russia will pulverise Ukraine, with or without cluster bombs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lancelittrell369 Would you like to address the subject of what I wrote instead of launching personal attacks ? The US has been responsible for more wars in the last 70 years. Who the hell are you to talk about China's bad behaviour ?
You have invaded countries, you have overthrown governments, you torture people in Guantanomo Bay, and your own society is violence laden. How dare you lecture others ?
You had a treaty with Kuwait you say. But Rumsfeld was meeting Saddam for various deals before and was encouraging him. Saddam only became a problem for you when he started selling oil in dollars. That would have undermined the dollar.
The US has spent more than 1 trillion in wars in the last 30 years. You are living in debt, printing dollars, and using your war machine to maintain that life style.
However, that is coming to an end. After Afghanistan chased you out, Russia has given an even bigger kick, and if you mess with China, you will get a similar sized kick.
'Iraq was warned not to invade Kuwait.' Why did you not warn Russia in the same way ? And why after encouraging Ukraine, did you not go into Ukraine to save it like you saved Kuwait ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Katoshi_Takagumi 'Debatable, but we don't even know if it was ever on the table or had they done the risk assessement.'
There is nothing debatable. At the start when Ukraine was pleading for a 'no fly zone', Putin issued one of his inimitable statements. He said the west 'will face consequences it has not faced before'. That was understood as Russia would shoot down US planes if they entered Ukraine and it would be ready for escalating to nuclear if needed. The Americans understood, and the next stay Biden announced there will be no 'no fly zone'.
Nuclear is a serious factor, and Ukraine cannot win. Russia has stated that nuclear weapons will be used on Ukraine if Russia was placed in a position of strategic defeat. Strategic defeat is Ukraine enters NATO and grants the US naval and missile bases. Before that can happen, Russia will use a nuclear strike on Ukraine.
The Russian nuclear doctrine is understood by all in the non-west, but is beyond the grasping power of the western intellect. They think Russia is bluffing. Some of them think Russian nuclear missiles will not work.
' I'm hoping there are contingency plans in work unless the west is hoping for some devine intervention to remove Mr. Putin.'
The west was hoping that the sanctions would cripple Russia, and the Russians would do a Maidan revolution and overthrow Putin, and they could put a Zelensky type of implant in Moscow, who would give access to Russia's minerals and oil and gas. That did not work out. Thereafter the west has been hoping for divine intervention. Western media said in the early months of 2022, that Putin had a hand tremor, he had a mysterious illness and he had cancer etc. Zelensky even said Putin is dead and a look-alike was acting on his behalf. The west was so ardent in its fabrications that it believed them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SK-lt1so You also need a reality check.
The coast will be devastated, and economically isolated from the world. That is a great setback to Ukraine, not Russia.
'The market for Vlad's hydrocarbons is shrinking by the day, and sanctions make them more difficult to harvest.' China, India and others are already buying the Russian hydrocarbons, yuan, rupee and rouble trade is already functoning and bypasses the dollar. It will reduce the demand for the dollar.
'NATO is on Vlad's borders, getting bigger, and overtly cooperating with Ukraine.' It is not numbers that make difference, it is decision making and resolve. NATO's cowardly exit from Kabul was only recent. NATO is all mouth and no trousers. What happened to the 'no fly zone ' ? How has the cooperation with Ukraine helped ? It is reduced to rubble, and EU has 5 million refugees.
The west is paying for its arrogant and reckless NATO expansion - rocketing fuel price, expense for refugees, increased defence expenditure, loss of life = massive cut in standard of living.
You are trying to put on a brave face - vainly.
1
-
@SK-lt1so Resorting to personal abuse is a sign of weakness and inability.
The meaning of the message is not clear 'One minute you are "Vlad is taking over the south!", the next "if the south is destroyed, it's Ukraine's problem!"'
Learn to write English. Russia is indeed taking over the south, that is clear. Only Odessa remains. They will come after it.
'if the south is destroyed, it's Ukraine's problem!"
If they can take the south without destroying, that would be better for both. But to take the south, if it gets to be destroyed, , so be it - as in Mariopol. Berlin got destroyed when taking out the Nazis. Mariopol got destroyed taking out the Azov Nazis. But it had to be done.
'And Europe is a much bigger customer to Russia than China and India will be any time soon, and Europe as customer is lost forever.'
It is best if Europe is lost forever. If the Russians cut off the energy immediately, Europe will beg. Already, German and Italian companies are paying in roubles as ordered. In the long run, any alternative to Russian gas will be more expensive. LNG costs 7-10x the price. Means a cut in living standards, and the cost of industrial production goes up, making European goods uncompetitive. As Europe declines economically, China and India and others will replace it.
'Vlad's armies are getting chewed up by an army a fraction of NATO.'
Is that so ? Then why does not NATO have the guts to put a no fly zone ? What is NATO - it is a bunch of cowards that fled capture by the Taliban.
1/5 of Ukraine is under Russia, more will go, 1/3 of it is destroyed, more to go. NATO can delay the result but cannot stop it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Crashed131963 'I do not think any country thinks Russia is a conventional military superpower with their performance in the last 10 months.'
Russia is fighting a conventional war not just against Ukraine, but against the US and NATO. In that light, Russia has done remarkably well, it has taken 4 oblasts, made Ukraine landlocked, warded of NATO from entering Ukraine by dangling the nuclear sword on your heads. It has made sure that the US cannot have NATO bases ever in Ukraine; that was its principal objective.
Moreover the west waged an economic war on Russia, but Russia waged a counter economic war effectively, it is in the process of crippling Europe by de-industrialisation, and by speeding up de-dollarisation, it has served a long term blow to the US economy. Effectively, Russia has ended the western 'world order' for good. Only Russia could do this. Throughout history, Russia has been exceptional.
When you look at US wars, it fought against Iraq. Afghanistan etc. Iraq did not have any supplies from a superpower like Russia or China. If those countries had been given weapons as Ukraine, they would have inflicted heavier casualties on the US.
The proof of the US being a superpower would have been if it had sent troops to Ukraine. After all, the US staged a coup in 2014 and their implanted govt. is in place. But the US dared not send troops to Ukraine to save its implant. Why ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jannekiljunen6784 In history, Russia has been attacked by European powers like Germany, France, Poland-Lithuania, Sweden, and since 1945, the US + NATO continuously threatens it. There can be no European security without Russian security. Russia has put its foot down on NATO expansion, and they will break and destroy any country that threatens its security. That is the bottom line. Ukraine played a dangerous anti-Russian game using the US, as a result, its independence has come to an end. The Ukraine of 1991 is not returning. Lithuania also tried to blockade Kaliningrad but after 3 weeks, after Russia threatened a beating, it climbed down and abandoned the blockade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JamesC785 You have selected the bits you want and omitted the bits you don't want. Typical of a propagandist.
Article 2 of the Budapest memorandum says :
2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
It allows an exemption for Russia to attack Ukraine if it threatens its security (the statement 'except in self defence' allows that). There is an unforeseen circumstance. Ukraine gangs up with two of the three guarantors of Ukraine's security (US and UK) against the other signatory, Russia, seeking to enter a military alliance (NATO) which is anti-Russian. Ukraine, US and UK are therefore guilty of breach of the Memorandum.
The Memorandum is therefore now null void and Russia has taken corrective action to see that US cannot put missile and naval bases in Ukraine. Ukraine of 1992 will not exist, and corrective action can include a nuclear strike.
It also means in any future settlement between Ukraine and Russia, Russia will never again agree to US and UK being a guarantor of Ukraine. These countries have breached trust and cheated. Guarantors have to be maybe Turkey, China, possibly France and Germany.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mr.Cerera69 Bush will tell you many things, you are foolish to do foolish things like bait Russia and believe when Russia gives you beating, US will come to your aid. Have you read Article 5 and understood ? It only says if any member is attacked, there will be a collective response and member countries may respond as they say fit, including and upto armed intervention. However it does not say there is a compulsion on armed intervention, and individual members are free to respond as they see fit. Thus, the US can opt out. Why would the US risk nuclear annihilation to save Lithuania ?
'President Bush speech in Lithuania where he said: By NATO Article 5 i announce that from now on whoever attacks Lithuania will attack United States of America and NATO alliance. These words made a tear in my eye thinking: Finnally after so many decades and centuries of occupatuon of russian empire, soviet union. russia is no longer a threat to us.'
Bush might have said it to induce tears in your eyes, but tomorrow it might be Trump and he does not give a damn about NATO. Remember Kissinger had said the US would not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany and Europe. That would be the situation now also.
At the end of the day, you have to live next to Russia and if you misbehave, Russia will crush you, Article 5 notwithstanding. Lithuania was very foolish to try to blockade Kaliningrad. Russia can easily sieze the corridor and cut off the Baltics. Take it from me, the US will not fight a nuclear war to save Lithuania. In the end the EU realised and pressured Lithuania to back off. But Lithuanians appear to be as thick headed as Ukranians.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kpadalldotablet1009 What you are missing is that the west has always lived on 'might is right', so you should not be moralising. See your behaviour in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine. I never heard your type shouting about their sovereignty, so why this sudden passionate defence for the sovereignty of Ukraine ? Your whole colonial past, subjugating the world, and justifying it, has been 'might is right'.
Even now you continue with freezing the money of others (Afghanistan, Russia, Iran). What is that other than 'might is right' ?
You fellows complain that Russia is blackmailing you with nuclear weapons. Who made nuclear weapons first and who used it first ? If you do not believe 'might is right', then set up an example and give them up, and persuade Russia and others to give them up.
Sovereignty does not include the right for Ukraine to conspire with US to give missile and naval bases to threaten Russia. That is also the practice of might is right.
There is no absolute sovereignty. That is a totem pole invented by the west - when it suits them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Princip666 Can you read up about the Azov Batallion and Right Sector, two Ukro Nazis groups in govt. and the army, which took part in the coup of 2014 ? Andrei Biletsky, the founder of Azov, said he wanted to save the white race from Jews and untermenschen.
The US branded the Azov Batallion as terrorist, but in 2023, it shamelessly lifted the ban to allow arms to be supplied to the Azov Batallion. The Russians hammered the Azov Batallion in Mariopol, killed many and took them prisoner. They are identifiable by their Nazi tattoos.
During the WW 2, Ukro Nazis were active in western Ukraine supporting the German Nazis. Their leader was Stefan Bandera. There was a SS division of Ukrainians. The Germans often chose Ukrainians to be concentration camp guards in Poland. After defeat of Nazi Germany, Bandera escaped to West Germany and was given asylum in Munich. The US shamelessly recruited this Nazi Bandera to work against the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union eliminated Bandera in 1958.
After the US sponsored coup in Ukraine in 2014, roads have been named after Bandera in Ukraine, and statues have been erected of this wannabe Ukrainian Hitler.
There is nothing imaginary, it shows you are ready to support Nazis to gain advantage against Russia. Shameless scum.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pgpython Russia could not take Kiev on the first attempt - but will come back for it, unless the Ukranians go back to neutrality and distance themselves from NATO. The window for negotiations is diminishing, after a stage, the Russians might decide to go after all of Ukraine.
Russia has taken 20% of Ukraine, more is about to go. The polar bear has got the Ukranians and their neo Nazis by the scruff of the neck and will not let them go - they have taken the industrial heartland, and the coastal areas, and are strangling Ukraine's economy. There is nothing the west can do to reverse it - in fact Russia has got Europe's economy by the scruff of the neck as well !
Russia is now stronger than the Soviet Union. The USSR became a military superpower, but its economy was a stand-alone type that operated outside the western system. Russia is still a military superpower, its hypersonic missiles are awesome, and as it integrated with the world's economy, it has learnt all the tactics to wage counter economic warfare, squeezing energy supplies and undermining the dollar in the long term. You know the reality but you are in denial.
As in 1943, once the Russians have to fight, they fight very hard. Time is on Russia's hand. Like in 1943, the Red Army recovered from initial set backs and fought their way to Berlin.
The US plan in Ukraine was not only to put missiles in Ukraine but also to have naval bases in Ukranian Black Sea ports - which would be a direct threat to Russia. There is no way Russia was going to allow that. If Ukraine has to disappear, so be it. Basically American and NATO interference in Ukraine has brought an end to its independence. Of course, Ukraine has to blame for its folly, and for allowing neo Nazis to drive its nationalism.
Now, ask your self 'was NATO expansion worth it' ? It benefited US arms companies, but what about Europe and Ukraine ? Did not Russia warn you not to expand NATO to its borders ? When Russia asked NATO for a security guarantee in Dec 2021, why did not NATO agree, and thus avert war ? If the west wants Ukraine so badly in NATO, why don't you send troops to Ukraine now ? Putin asked NATO to come to the battlefield and see if you can defeat Russia. Your cowardice and miscalculation have been exposed. Russia has created the conditions for end of western military and economic dominance.
1
-
@pgpython You are so foolish as to not realise that Finland and Sweden expressing desire to join NATO does not prove NATO's capability, it just proves these two are weaklings who took fright when they saw a far away war and ran helter skelter for cover !
Russia has just proved that it is stronger than Europe + America put together. Their combined efforts could not save their protege, Ukraine.
Ukraine or rather US presence in Ukraine is a big threat to Russia, not only in terms of missile stations, but the danger of the US operating naval bases from the Black Sea. Russia by its prompt action in 2014, and now has closed that threat for good. Ukraine is feeling the heat because its access to the Black Sea is closed; it wanted to do the same to Russia using America, but its planned mischief has been nipped in the bud.
'Ukraine to do that it would have to be in nato and that would be impossible'.
The US was working towards inducting Ukraine in NATO. It organised sand supported the coup in 2014 that brought the Ukro Nazis to power. Victoria Nuland and John McCain were amongst the crowds celebrating the coup. What were they doing there ? NATO has a training base near Lvov which was wiped out by an air strike in the first month. Foreign merecenaries had come there and over 35 were killed. Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan. Why ? It was becoming a de facto member, it was working towards formal membership. Anyhow, Russia has ended all that.
Ukraine will be rebuilt by the Russians without western help. Ukraine was rebuilt by the Soviet Union after the German Nazi destruction. The Antonov aircraft factory, the tank factory, the steel factories, the nuclear power stations, its universities were all built by the Soviet Union, in which the dominant contribution was from Russia. The Ukranians became back stabbers, so Russia will take Ukraine back, and yes it is worth it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pgpython So you confirm the familiar western duplicity : Russia should give up Warsaw Pact and increase your security, but you have no obligation to reciprocate to Russia.
There was a window of goodwill during the Gorbachov and Yeltsin era. But the US took advantage seeing Russia's weakness at that time. NATO expansion and inciting Eastern Europe to join was driven by the US's arms industry, not because of any commitment to freedom, but out of sheer lust for money. This was reported in the NYT in 1997 and 1998. The US arms industry like Lockheed saw that with NATO expansion, the former Warsaw Pact countries could be made to replace Soviet arms with US ones.
Read New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
Thus your claim that the decision to expand NATO was due to 'the serious risk Russia would drift towards authoratism and try to reclaim its former soviet states' is fraudulent and is motivated by your ignorance (which is self evident) or worse due to your duplicitous character.
Now, if you think Russia should make all the concessions and you do not have to make any because in future Russia might revert to its ways, then at some stage there will be a reaction in Russia, and someone will say 'we should not have made these concessions, the west is our enemy, and always will be, and the only way to handle them is by dangling the nuclear sword on their head'. That is bound to be the case.
The west's duplicity can be seen in the following. Us Secretary of State James Baker had said NATO would not expand one inch to the east (beyond East Germany). When the Russians raise this now, the west says, there was no written treaty. When Boris Yeltsin objected to the first NATO expansion, he was told that agreement was with the Soviet Union, you are Russia. Yeltsin was furious and he told 'the Soviet Union is over, but you wait, Russia will be back'.
Indeed, Russia is back. It took 30 years to rebuild. It has got the hypersonic missiles and the Sarmat that can wipe out France in a single strike. And unlike the Soviet Union, which ran an economy isolated from the rest of the world, Russia has entered the world economy, and it has such clout that it can wage counter economic warfare. Russia can strangle Europe's economy. Europe's prosperity was built on cheap Russian gas. There is no alternative that is not 5x more expensive, so Europe has to decline.
The west pushed neo Nazis in Ukraine to usurp power, to promote an anti-Russian, pro-west agenda. When Russia countered and gave Ukraine a beating, the west was found wanting in courage to intervene and save Ukraine. The west thought they could win with economic warfare, but even that has backfired, and the western economies are pushed against the rope.
It is you who needs introspection. You need to ask whether it was right to push NATO expansion when Russia had repeatedly warned against it. Is the Ukraine and the west now better off due to NATO expansion ?
The west is living dangerously. It has pushed Lithuania to put a blockade on Kaliningrad. That is again flouting the agreement that gave Lithuania independence. In which case, Russia at some stage will take back Lithuania, NATO not withstanding.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MM-tw7pu 'They need to wake up and think about their country and interests, not the US, UK and western Anglo block'
The interest of the Anglo block : the US wanted NATO expansion to requip the Eastern European countries with American equipment; the UK seconds America generally to show it has a special relationship, and BoJo declared we cannot allow Putin to win and disrupt the 'international order' (which is set by the US and followed by the west, and flouted when it suits them). The Ukranians got tangled up because the west made them believe they are of the European family (the words of Ursula von Leyen, who speaks like a German Nazi). The Ukranians think they are part of the sacred 'free world'. The Ukranians now use these terms and tell people they are fighting to save the free world. If they go down, the free world goes down.
Once the Ukranians were someone when part of the Soviet Union - they produced rulers who governed from Moscow. Now they are a confused lot, they don't know what is good for them, they don't know how to steer through a middle way, they are pawns in the hands of America and Russia, and the great power battle is fought over their dead bodies. It is unbelievable that the Ukranians allowed this to happen. Still more unbelievable that they do not even realise their folly and are trapped in a self destruct mode.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
India is now well known for killing its minorities - Sikhs, Muslims and Christians. This is in its quest to make a Hindu state. It is no longer the country we cherished earlier due to Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru. India might have been poor, but it was dignified and held up as a model for tolerance and co-existence, unity in diversity. It is not that anymore. Modi spearheads this campaign of 'Hindu nationalism' (actually Hindu fascism) and although he is elected through his BJP party, it is a front for the Hindu Nazi paramilitary group called the RSS. In case people do not know, the RSS killed Mahatma Gandhi. The RSS leaders in the 1930s wrote articles admiring Hitler and wishing for the same model in India - these can be found on the net. Modi has been a member of the RSS and he organised a pogrom against Muslims in Gujarat. Before he became PM, he was a persona non grata and he could not get a visa for western countries due to the pogrom. After he became PM, western states had to lift the bar to him because he was head of state. Under his rule, Muslims have been lynched over cows. Recently, his party organised a pogrom against Christians in Manipur state.
Western countries need to beware as the RSS is infiltrating its Hindu Nazis into the west, with the aim of influencing western polity, so they turn a blind eye to their genocide of minorities. The Indian media is not independent as formerly. It now tows the lines of Hindu fascism, partly as it has been purchased by powerful oligarchic Hindu businessmen and independent Indian journalists have been killed, threatened and harassed by the Hindu nationalist government. This can be seen in the shrill Hindu hysteria in all the videos from HT and others in the Indian media. This killing of a Canadian Sikh is a case where the Hindu nationalists have decided to silence their critics abroad as well.
Western governments need to be very careful in their assessment of India. They are courting India, somewhat half heartedly thinking it has a large market, and it can be bulwark against China. India's economy was built by Dr. Singh but it has withered away under Modi. It cannot become a manufacturing alternative to China. Hence, India is of little economic value for the west. Besides, despite the posturing by Hindu nationalists of being a superpower, India is not strong enough to counter China. China took Indian land and Modi kept as quiet as a mouse to avoid a fight in which India would have been publicly defeated. Thus on both counts, the west is clutching at a straw.
Indians (rather than India) is more dangerous for the west than Russians and Chinese. The Hindu nationalists have infiltrated western polity in their quest for Hindu domination. Unlike Russians and Chinese , Indians immigrate to the west in large numbers. Thereby Indians pose a threat to the west due to the sheer volumes that migrate. Thus western governments and Middle East countries need to be careful about giving work visas to Indians, particularly Hindus. Last year, newly immigrated Hindu youth created a riot in Leicester, UK. UK newspapers reported that it was a outfall of the culture of mob violence the Hindu nationalists ruling India have nurtured.
Canada has instituted a visa check on Indians who have served in the Indian army. If they have served in the Indian army in Kashmir, they do not get visas. Canada needs to extend the visa security check to Indians who have been in the RSS and deny visas for them. This is absolutely necessary to stop Hindu fascists from infiltrating Canada and fighting with Sikhs, Muslims and even 'low caste' Hindus in Canada; that is, to avoid replicating the mayhem they create in India. In fact all western countries need to screen Indian visa applicants to check if they have been members of the RSS or raised funds for it.
If Indians agents assasinate Canadian Sikhs, then what is to stop the Sikhs from assasinating Hindu diplomats in Canada ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andrewmckenzie292 It is best for the US to be cooperative, and not try for a unipolar world. At the end of the cold war, the neocons emerged and they got carried away. Wolfowitz wrote a doctrine that the US would not allow any other power to rise. The US also seems to need a permanent enemy to fight, to mobilise the western public. In the 1990s, it was Muslims and Islamophobia. Fighting with Muslims over 20 years did not lead to a win and cost over a trillion dollars and sapped US economic strength. By 2018, under Trump, China was proclaimed as the new enemy, and he vilified China on every occasion. Biden withdrew from Afghanistan to focus on curbing China. In between, unexpectedly, Russia came in. Now Russia is the main enemy that makes the western mind distraught, followed by China. The west is not going to lose fighting Muslims (not even a power), Russia and China.
Why can't the west learn to live with others ?
1
-
1
-
Very interesting effort to boost morale with tales of drone hunters. But it does not change the reality. Ukraine is on the back foot, the great bear is on the march, it is prowling around Chasov Yar, seeing that, the US has abandoned Ukraine, and the hyena hordes of Europe are afraid they will be clawed by the bear if they intervene.
Trump said yesterday, he will settle the issue, and ask Ukraine to give up Crimea and 4 oblasts. But even that will not satisfy Russia now. There have to be punitive reparations that Ukraine has to pay, and it needs to return to neutrality and be demilitarised. There will be no negotiations, no return to 2022 borders, let alone 1992 borders.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is not unlikely that Putin is going to be tried, it is not going to happen. The US and the west have no credibility, jumping mindlessly from issue to issue. It conveys only their frustration and impotency. The US is not a member of ICC, anymore than Russia and Ukraine. There is no credibility because first of all, one would need to try Bush and Blair for the false flag attack on Iraq claiming WMDs, for drone strikes on Afghan wedding parties, and for waterboarding and holding prisoners with no trial in Guantanomo. The west talks about rule of law, which they make for others, but do not follow themselves. Secondly, there is no way of bringing Putin to the Hague. US and NATO would have to invade Russia and go to Moscow and get him. When the US and NATO could not cross into Ukraine and implement a no fly zone after Putin mentioned consequences they have not ever faced before, what is the chance it will cross into Russia ? It is the habit of habitual cowards to make noise when they do not have the capacity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Very childish and dishonest analysis from this Lithuanian lady with Ukrainian name. Putin has said the Soviet Union had many achievements which is correct. But he said he had no desire to recreate the Soviet Union. However, if NATO threatens Russia using Ukraine, Baltic states etc., these countries will be made redundant. Putin has never said he wants to grab the Baltics if they mind their business and do not gang up with the US to threaten Russia.
This Lithuanian lady should recall that in 2022 Lithuania tried to blockade Russian trains to Kaliningrad for about 1 month, claiming they were flouting EU sanctions - till a Russian politician said Lithuania's independence should be reconsidered. Lithuania became independent on the condition that it will keep a rail corridor open for Russian trains to Kaliningrad. If Lithuania continued to blockade Kaliningrad, Russia would have Ukrained Lithuania, NATO membership notwithstanding. Russia can seize the narrow Suwalki corridor cutting off the Baltics. The Americans would not have not come and fought a nuclear war for Lithuania. And the rest of the Europeans are incapable. Realising this, the EU advised Lithuania to climb down - which it did.
Hence, this lady needs to be reminded, if you deliberately poke the bear, don't cry afterwards when it mauls you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Ukrainian fellow at the end is pretty sour. He is not happy being asked in a doubtful tone 'how is the counter offensive going ?'
He knows the Ukrainian claims of capturing Crimea are just not credible. The perceptive knew Russia will prevail in the end. The Ukranians must be feeling they were let down in Vilnius when the US vetoed Ukraine's entry into NATO and refused to give a time map. The US was not going to be trapped into sending troops to save the wretched Ukrainians. They don't want to be killed by the Russians. Instead, they created a NATO-Ukraine council.
This unhappy fellow is going to find the US will ditch the Ukrainians, and the Danes, Finns, Germans and other Europeans are useless, and cannot save Ukraine from defeat.
If you read the western press (WP, NYT), there self-congratulatory articles saying that Russia got weakened without a single NATO soldier losing his life. For Americans clearly, Ukranians are cannon fodder. The articles also claim NATO has become stronger - because two chicken, Finland and Sweden, joined !
Maybe the reality has still not dawned on the Ukranians. They think the Americans and Europeans are 'our partners' and Ukraine is fighting to save European values. But maybe the unsupressed and helpless anger of the Ukranian towards the DW interviewer at the end shows it must have dawned on Ukrainians that they have been taken for a ride, and they have had a lot of people killed, and more to be killed, for America's games.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Putin is very clear minded unlike western politicians. There is no point getting western analysts to analyse, because they will always pretend that west has the upper hand.
Putin is correct, the era of the unipolar world is over - US domination is unsustainable. The US cannot expand NATO to Ukraine and put its missiles there. That is surely incontestable.
The west also needs to understand that it had control of the international financial institutions - once. It was the west's trump card. But that is changing because the west undermined it by freezing Russia's money. The west had done this with Iran, Afghanistan etc. but got away with it, but Russia will not let it pass. Banking works on trust and the belief that you will get your money back. The west has undermined that and shot itself in the foot.
Putin has shown Russia has the military and economic power (and understanding of economics) to challenge the west. The west said the rouble will become rubble. But it is now the strongest performing currency. The CEO of Gazprom pointed out that commodities (especially energy) are more valuable than paper money. That is correct. Russia has the food and energy to heat its homes. The west will freeze and face power cuts this winter if it persists in its fight to expand NATO and threaten others. Its euros and dollars are no use if it cannot buy energy.
The most significant outcome of Putin is not what happens to Ukraine, but two key effects he has triggered : (1) the gradual spread of non-dollar transactions, and countries understanding the need to diversify their savings from the dollar; this will undermine the value of the dollar in the long term. This means the US cannot have a unipolar world which it imagined was possible forever, after the end of the Soviet Union (2) the shift from a euro-centric world to a non-euro centric world where Russia and China will be major players, with more countries aligning with them.
The necons in America like Wolfowitz said after the US victory in the cold war, the US will not allow another challenger to rise ever again. Fukuyama wrote about the end of history. Huntingdon wrote the clash of civilisations, in which the west will always prevail. Putin has ended that. 30 years later since these Americans made their exultant projections for a unipolar world dominated by the US and its subordinates in Europe, there are two countries now that have the military AND economic power to challenge the west. And the west is not going to win against them. Europe is a collection of weak states. The US is in decline after two wars that sapped it. It has little manufacturing.
It is not the end of the west - but it is the end of a unipolar world dominated by the west. That is for the better. Russia as usual has played a seminal role in bringing a big change.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@christianevanherck6023 In 1992, Ukraine signed the Lisbon Protocol and it joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapon state in 1994, along with Byelorussia and Kazakhstan. It was a condition of independence for them. All the three former Soviet states that had nuclear weapons stationed in their territory had to hand them over. The transfer of all nuclear material took some time, but by 2001, all nuclear weapons had been transferred to Russia to be dismantled and all launch silos decommissioned.
The Budapest Memorandum was a security assurance given to these states after they signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia, UK and US guaranteed Ukraine's independence and agreed not to use military force against the three states, "except in self-defence'.
Later, Ukraine - and the two other guarantors - of the Budapest Memorandum flouted the spirit of the memorandum by scheming together against Russia by trying to induct Ukraine into NATO. Russia had explained it is a security threat if the US got missile and naval bases in Ukraine, and had warned Ukraine against it. The last Article of the memorandum says that in the event of a dispute, the four signatories would sit together and resolve the issues peacefully.
In Dec. 2022, Sir Putin had sent a letter asking to have a meeting to negotiate a security guarantee for Russia. The US and UK made a deafening silence and Ukraine also did not urge a meeting to avoid war. The US and NATO took the line sovereignty meant Ukraine alone decided whether to join NATO or not. Sovereignty does not give the right to invite a distant super power to threaten the security of a neighbouring super power. The US-implanted govt. in Ukraine had been told that US and NATO would support Ukraine if Russia attacked.
Russia took action in self defence to protect against the US threat projected through Ukraine. You gambled that with military aid to Ukraine and sanctions, you could defeat Russia. You thought that there will be an Euromaidan style mob that would overthrow Putin and then the US could implant a pro US govt. in Moscow that would hand over Russia's assets to US companies. The US wanted a regime change in Russia. It did not work out as you hoped.
Russia has defeated you, Ukraine will not exist, and if you want to fight Russia, it is ready. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'Putin's weaknesses will be targeted in Zelensky's Nato shopping list'.
The very title shows Russia has the upper hand, and the west has to rummage for a weakness. Such is Sir Putin's mystique in western minds ! His methodical coolness deranges and demoralises the west.
The west tried everything - sanctions, seizing Russia's money, sending tanks, cluster bombs, Himars, ATACAMs, Patriots. But all to no avail. Russia destroyed the Leopards, Challengers and Abrams, and made videos of them. It neutralised the Himars with electronic jamming, and the Patriots cannot cope with the hypersonics. The west boasted about the arrival of the F16s, and so the Russians destroyed the air bases. No doubt they will destroy the F16s on the ground. Meanwhile Ukraine is being pummeled with glide bombs, and Kinzhals, and nobody can stop them. Ukraine's power supply is halved.
Let us face the reality : a paper tiger cannot fight a real bear !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jimtalbott9535 Don't equate yourself with any NATO generals. Russian generals are fighting a combined arms war, and they have more experience than what NATO can manage. Combined arms means artillery shells, helicopters, planes, missiles, hypersonic missiles, thermobaric weapons, electronic warfare and GPS jamming, drones, ships, satellite knockout capability, and they have the nuclear sword at their disposal to ward of western intervention. Plus they have at their disposal hardy, patriotic soldiers who fight for their country. You have none of that. Get it ? You might have fought in the Falklands 40 years ago, but fighting Russia, don't even imagine you are remotely capable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@billyray7067 'Clearly the west could have crushed Russia early on.'
If that was possible, they would have done it early on. They don't have the capacity then, and even less now. Now that you have seen Russia's formidable arsenal, and you know you cannot stop the hypersonics, you are not going to stop them.
'Russia to this day still doesn’t have air superiority. They only fly over occupied areas.'
It is an old fashioned concept that you have to fly over a territory. They can fire their missiles from inside Russia - fire and forget. You have military thinking of the 1990s or earlier. The Oreshnik was fired from a land site inside Russia. The FABS are fired from aircraft inside Russia. It does the job if the delivery system has the reach and accuracy. Ukraine's power grid is taken out.
After defeat, it is customary for the loser to say, 'if we had done this or that earlier, we would have won'. You are like the Nazi general Manstein who wrote a book called 'Lost Victories' claiming if Germany had done this or that, it would have defeated the Red Army. Another variation of this syndrome is people who now say the Oreshnik missile has western technology ! If so, why are you unable to make any hypersonic missile ?
The fact is Russia has superior military technology in quality and quantity, the Russians are brave and have better fighting ability, two qualities that the west does not have. The combined effect is they have won, and the endgame is on.
'The long war is having irreparable effects on Russias economy. That’s the goal. '
When you say to damage Russia's economy was the goal, you have made that up to console yourself after defeat. The US goal was to have missile and naval bases in Ukraine to shut Russia off from the Black Sea. That has been stopped. Ukraine's goal was to be in NATO. That too is not possible. Ukraine lost land and another stated goal is to retrieve it. That too is not possible. One has to judge you by the goals you set, and since you cannot achieve them, you are defeated. You retro fitted a goal after losing.
The Russians buckle down, tighten their belts and make sacrifices for their country, something which the effete and emasculated west cannot do. The long war has destroyed Ukraine's economy with damage over 1 trillion. Ukraine has lost all its industrial area. The war has de-industrialised Germany and Europe. It has triggered de-dollarisation. You have shot your own economy down.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lukebandolino882 Yes, de-industrialisation has been happening earlier as the the capitalist sought higher profits using cheaper labour - it was called globalisation. However, Germany was a last bastion and hub of European industry. The rise in energy costs - inflicted on the west in retaliation for the west's economic warfare on Russia - is the death knell for Germany's industry. If there is little production left in Europe, can Europe live just on financial services ? The UK has done that, can the rest do that ? Even the UK will not be sustainable after Brexit.
Well, the Europeans have shot themselves even in the field of financial services by seizing Russian money. The west had control of the banking system, but they have undermined it. Seizing money undermines trust in western banks. Mastercard and Visa were in Russia, and for domestic card transactions in Russia, they were earning 2.5% per sale. Now that is gone, and Russia brought its own card system, it is domestic for now - but it means Russian money will not go to the US. Other countries can also do the same.
The net result of the west using the dollar and euro as a weapon is de-dollarisation and de-euroisation
The effect of de-dollarisation is not as fast as de-industrialisation. When you see no evidence, the reason is it occurs at a slower pace. The US was bothered when Saddam started selling oil in euros. They did not wait to see evidence of dollar decline, they invaded to stop him.
Give it time, Putin has accelerated de-dollarisation, and a rolling stone picks up speed. The US cannot invade Russia like Iraq, to stop him. Russia now sells oil in yuan to China, rupees to India. Hence, Russia's non-use of the dollar is a permanent dent in dollar demand. Likewise, others are looking into non-dollar trade. China is asking Saudis to sell oil in yuan. The day the Saudis do that, there will be another dent in demand for the dollar.
The west has shot itself in the foot as it has undermined its chief asset, the banking system. You have down sized industrial production, and you cannot have others' money to play with, and you want to spend money on wars. It leads to a decline in standard of living and it will be permanent.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Amanpour is typically patronising and pompous and this attitude, coupled with her stuffy British accent, makes her nauseating. She is bobbing up and down searching for the right words, as she does not know what to ask. She is searching for a put-down to start off, so that gives the bias away. She starts off with low Russian morale - it is largely unsubstantiated. Peskov remains calm, he says 'let us discuss the causes for the operation'. His point 2 is the most important : Ukraine's declaration of independence stated it would be a neutral country and would not join any military alliance. Otherwise, Russia would not have agreed to let Ukraine become independent. After the 2014 Euromaidan coup, it reneged on this commitment and put NATO entry into its constitution. That is a direct threat to Russia and hence one can see why Russia felt compelled to take action.
Generally, the Russian diplomats are cool, whether it is Peskov, Lavrov, or Putin himself. Maria Zakharaova on the other hand gives testy replies with pointed and accusatory finger. I enjoy watching the Russian diplomats and contrast them with the raging western ones, who goes to China and India and Arabs and demands them to accept their western rage.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@inquisitvem6723 There is an influential group called neocons, whose members are predominantly Jewish, and who are both present in Republican and Democratic Party. The necons plotted the Iraq war. Among them was Robert Kagan, husband of Victoria Nuland, the arranger of the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Both are Zionist Jews. The American people are not consulted on Iraq or Ukraine, the neocons arrange it, the media is used to manufacture consent and the American people fall in line. Bush did not face any consequences, nor Kagan and Nuland. Bush is gone, but Kagan and Nuland remain peddling their influence. The malignant neocons are not the wielders of power, but they direct those in power. You will point fingers at Bush, but not at Kagan, Wolfowitz, Perle, Kristol....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You are ignorant. Ukraine had nuclear power stations, tank factories, steel mills, aircraft factories, it produced good aero engines - it was all due to the Soviet Union, of which the major constituent was Russia.
You imagine it is better Ukraine is 'destroyed but FREE cause one day Ukraine can have its Economy fixed without Russian interference.'
It is good you understand Ukraine is being destroyed. The rest is wishful thinking. Russia will destroy Ukraine and make sure it cannot be rebuilt and the west will not be allowed to set foot there again. Ukraine will be returned to an agricultural state as it was before it joined the Soviet Union. It will have no factories, no electricity, no armaments.....
Russia fought this war to prevent NATO expansion and western interference, do you think Russia will hand Ukraine back for western interference again ? Ukraine lives next to Russia, so Russia will have a say.
In any negotiated settlement, Russia will demand there are no NATO bases in Ukraine. Otherwise, it will indefinitely keep hitting various cities randomly, and no westerner will go there as they don't want to get killed.
1
-
@maryanchabursky9148 You talk like Zelensky : a beggar who claims Ukraine is winning.
Ukraine's GDP is under 50% of what it was. You do not have electricity to run industry, so what are you talking about ? Donbass is where the Ukrainain industry is . If you say, there is industry in Kiev, Dnipro, Krivy Rih, Kharkiv, and Odessa, Russia can destroy that in due course.
If you continue misbehaving, Ukraine will be returned to an agricultural state. Whatever Ukraine has is due to the Soviet Union. You are an ingrate, that is why I favour Russia taking out all Ukrainian industry, arms industry etc.
'ruSSia started the war to annex Ukraine and end its existence, NATO and western intervention is a myth (and you know that).'
NATO expansion to Ukraine has been an American plan. Ukraine changed its constitution and made NATO entry an aim. If you wanted to avert the war, you could have reaffirmed neutrality in Dec 2021. But you thought you could be part of NATO and threaten Russia. Then Russia decided to annex parts of Ukraine to prevent NATO entry. So don't lie.
'If ruSSia keeps hitting Ukrainian cities they will start too run out of munitions capable of doing so and Ukraine will get more AA'.
In the first month, Zelensky said Russia would run out of missiles in 3 days. You are delusional. The missiles keep coming in. Russia is preparing the hypersonic Tsirkon for you. Let the ceasefire end. The west is running out of ammunitions.
'if ruSSia refuses to sign a ceasefire after Ukraine kicks them out of it's territory then Ukraine will go into ruSSia and destroy ruSSian installations. All this is already happening.'
You mean to say Ukraine will launch an Operation Barbarossa ? Then you will receive a nuclear strike on Kiev to force unconditional surrender.
Ukraine is a failed state. You should never have been given independence. You don't have the skills of statehood. Russia gave you independence in good faith, and you blew the opportunity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rifkind is a pompous British ass of the colonial era, imagining Britain is a superpower like Russia.
The efforts to denigrate Russia and under estimate its capacity comes from frustration. The claim that its GDP is only the same as Italy, or that it is a gas station is one dimensional thinking.
What matters is what is in the GDP. Russia is the world's biggest wheat producer, it has oil and gas, it is the one which has the complete nuclear fuel supply chain, it makes metals, from steel to titanium, it makes gold, it can launch satellites and knock out satellites, it has its own GPS system. Finally, it has the Oreshnik missile which travels at 11 Mach and whose impact even without explosives is equal to a meteorite hitting the earth. Italy's GDP is pasta and cheese, shoes and fashion, some cars, tourism.... It is no match for Russia.
As for the talk about China being a threat to Russia, that is wishful thinking, hoping somebody will check Russia because you cannot. China is not looking to fight, it is busy building its economy. Russia has nuclear weapons, so why would China go and pick a fight with Russia.
The west underestimated Russia, it thought it could encircle and contain Russia - and it got defeated. The rest is sour grapes. The fact is Russia brought de-dollarisation and that itself ends western hegemony. Germany and Europe are being de-industrialised, and the UK is caught sucking up to America thinking it has a special relationship, and the US is mired in its debt and de-dollarisation undermines its future power.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NoExpertHere 'Is Taiwan defence India's Problem or Not? Whats your opinion?'
It is for Indians to say. I expect them to say Taiwan's defence is not India's problem. They would see it as another US created problem, and if the US persists, China is capable of giving a punch to the US just like Russia has done. The Indians would sit and watch.
The Indian foreign minister Jaishankar memorably asked when he was pressed by a western reporter or politician, why is it a western created problem (like Ukraine) is a world problem, and the rest of the world's problems (example Palestinian problem) are not your problems when you created it ?
An Austrian news presenter interviewing Jaishankar said Russia is India's ally. Jaishankar corrected him - India is not in an alliance with anyone. Russia is also not part of any alliance. The European thinks he is part of an alliance and he has a feeling of superiority, but actually European countries are just vassal states of the US. Europeans cannot think outside that box.
Perhaps Putin summed it up : there are only four countries that are independent, Russia, US, China and India. The rest follow orders from the US.
You need to look at the mirror and see that Israel, Taiwan, Ukraine etc. are all US created problems and the collective west is drowning in the problems it created.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DSan-kl2yc Independence is not absolute, it depends on history, size of the country and neighbours. Under Ukraine's historical circumstances, it had to commit to giving up nukes, agree to neutrality and allow the Russian navy to use Sevastopol. Ukraine reneged on the last two, and therefore its independence is curbed and its future depends on Russia.
'If Ukraine had give the US bases, Russia wouldn't have invaded.'
It is a pointless comment like saying if Ukraine had not given up its nukes (if Ukraine did not give it up, it would not have got independence).
Ukraine would have given naval bases to the US, that would have come if it joined NATO, and Russia was not going to wait to find out.
Ukraine should return to neutrality, or else Russia will continuing bombing it to a wasteland, maybe even hit with a nuke. Those are the only two options.
1
-
1
-
@DSan-kl2yc If Ukraine had said it wanted to join NATO in 1991, it would not have got independence. Its Independence Declaration stated it would be a neutral state.
You have never read the Budapest Memorandum. It says the signatories will not attack Ukraine unless it posed a security threat to any of the signatories. Ukraine started posing a threat to Russia by seeking to join NATO. It conspired with two signatories, the US and UK, to threaten Russia by joining a military alliance of which the US and UK are members. That is against the spirit of the Memorandum. The last Article of the Memorandum says that should there be a dispute, the parties would sit together and negotiate. Russia asked for a meeting to negotiate a security agreement. The US declined, and Ukraine went along. Hence, all three signatories stabbed Russia in the back, and so that is the end of Ukrainian independence.
Russia will take the Russian areas, and the rest will be bombed into a wasteland and no one will be allowed to reconstruct. If the rump Ukraine is to be independent, there has to be closure of all armaments factories in Ukraine and no US bases. All that Ukraine has got is due to the Soviet Union - arms factories, aero engine factories, steel mills. These should be closed or confiscated. Ukraine should be returned to a pastoral state as it was before joining the Soviet Union. It needs to be deNazified and Azov Batallion and Bandera worship have to be stopped.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MrBahjatt 'Nielsen is an idealist.....'
I do not think so, he has a typical western colonial mindset which believes in innate superiority, the belief that the west sets the rules for others, but can flout any rules when needed. Nielsen is a neocon, the same as Boris Johnson, Blinken, Biden etc...
'He doesn't think NATO expansion should be seen as a threat to Russia.'
Whether it is a threat or not is decided by Russian perceptions. He should know that Russia has been the victim of countless invasions, the last one being from Nazi Germany. Soviet casualties were 20 million. Hence, the Russians are paranoid (with good reason) about being attacked. It was highly insensitive of the US to push NATO expansion.
Russia does not fear any of the Europeans. They know the Germans, British and the French are yesterday's powers. The British talk big and act Churchillian because of US cover. But the US is the threat. The Russians know NATO is just a cover for the US. The US plan was to have naval and missile bases in Ukraine to shut off Russia from the Black Sea. There is Rand Corp. report which the CIA commissioned on how to contain Russia, and it actively describes methods to stir up anti-Russian sentiments in surrounding countries.
'He doesn't know that it is a threat and may not know the Manroe doctrine.'
If he does not know what is Monroe Doctrine, he should not make videos. He knows everything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The IDF will go into Gaza, and get killed, and then find they cannot get out as that would be defeat, so they have to be there for years.
I guess the Americans now know after their Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq debacles that it is easy to get in, but not easy to get out with a victory against a guerrilla war. Biden is giving the right foreboding. But the Israelis are trapped. The Israeli population is angry with Netanhayu, and demoralised. The Palestinians knocked out their self-confidence. The Israeli govt. is under pressure to do something, but is in a mess. It has to (1) get the hostages out (2) destroy Hamas without being sucked into an attritional no-win war (3) stave off a three front war. If Israel goes in, it can say farewell to the hostages and the public will be furious with Netyanhu. It cannot destroy Hamas. They have the will power and spirit, they are ready to take casualties, the IDF is casualty averse. A three front war is even less winnable. Israel needs money and arms, and the US is struggling in Ukraine to supply. That is why the US is pressurising to avoid a long conflict.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SVSky You have view that is self absolving. It was the US that pushed NATO expansion. Merkel and Sarkozy warned against inducting Ukraine, fearing to would lead to war - but Bush twisted their hand. It was the US that financed the 2014 coup in Ukraine that brought neo Nazi, anti Russian nationalists into power. From that day on war was inevitable.
You have not bailed out anyone, you created the Ukrainian problem with the 2014 coup - and you are going to walk away. This is after saying you will support Ukraine for however long it takes, after refusing to reply to Putin's request to guarantee Russia's security, and after scuttling the peace agreement reached by Ukraine and Russia in Turkey. The US incited the war, you dragged Europe into it, you blocked the peace agreement in Turkey, and now that you are defeated, you say Ukraine is Europe's problem, we are sick and tired of your wars! Shameless fellow.
Europe and Ukraine are at fault no doubt - for consenting to be US vassals. They deserve what they are getting. But don't put on airs of innocence. Get it, scumbag ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The British below are fondly quoting Churchill as if he was a great savant. Churchill went to see Stalin and prostrated himself to get Soviet support. If Churchill had been around, he would have behaved just like BoJo, Sunak, Starmer. He would have talked big about the need to fight Russia, but would have expected America to do it for him.
As it is, America created the crisis in Ukraine by staging the coup in 2014, and now it wants to exit after seeing the mire. But the British want to be more American than the Americans, thinking it is a great Churchillian moment for them to shine and save the free world !
Boris Johnson stated recently that Russia must be defeated as otherwise it ends western hegemony (his exact words). No doubt that is the thinking of the collective west. But the collective west has been defeated in Ukraine, as the US is looking to exit, and EU + UK cannot save Ukraine. Western hegemony is ended for good. There is a new world order, the west can join it. Churchill was the epitome of western hegemony but it is not sustainable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gottfriedheumesser1994 Personal attacks are a sign of weakness. Putin is not a nationalist 'just like Hitler', so don't make false comparisons. Only Germans and Austrians can be like Hitler. The Ukranian Nazis like Azov Batallion's founder Andrei Billetski said he wanted to save the white race from Jews and the untermenschen. Only Ukranians are proud that they had better Nazis than Germans. Ukrainians were employed as concentration camp guards.
Putin does not follow any theories of racial supremacy. He does not say the Ukranians are sub humans. Ukrainians in contrast have made racists statements. Kuleba, a Ukranian minister said Russians are not human because they are not European, they have Asian blood.
Russia has many nationalities and they support Putin because he has not persecuted anyone due to their ethnicity and religion. For example, he told the 15% Muslims in Russia that he will not allow any cartoons of the type Swedes, Danes and French allow under the pretence of free speech. He is a proper leader compared to all the duplicitous ones you have. He does what he says.
As for your father being a well known antifascist, send me a link, and don't put on airs. Germans must be considered Nazis till proved otherwise. From your sly writing, you are an Austrian or German Nazi type. The rest of the world is grateful to the Soviet Union for putting you in your place. If Germany is a peaceful nation today, it is thanks to the beating the Red Army administered to you.
'Soviet humanity was that they captured 90k PoWs, but about 6k returned.'
Where did you get the figure 90k PoWs ? Just made it up. They might have only captured 6500.
The Germans killed 25 million Soviets, how dare you talk ?
If the Soviets had been like the Germans and Austrians, they would have put 25 million Germans in East Germany in gas chambers. Instead, they encouraged them to build a socialist state and DDR did quite well.
Most of the Austrians collaborated with the Nazis. When Toscannini was asked to conduct the Vienna Philharmonic, he refused unless 50% of the orchestra which had Nazi membership was sacked.
Austria was under the occupation zones, and the Red Army only left after Austria agreed to neutrality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When you look at all of NATO's claimed game changers, from switch blade drones to Stinger missiles and Himars, in the end they made little difference. Russia has taken the land that generated Ukraine's GDP, Russia controls the shipping lanes, they have destroyed the power grid, Ukraine has lost more than 100,000 soldiers, Russia is on the move, and after taking Soledar, they are after Bakhmut. As always, Russia has the nuclear strike to finish Kiev if needed. A few tanks will not make much difference, the Russians have the firepower to continue to batter Ukraine. Russia is not going to allow NATO bases in Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
You will agree that Russia has courage more than the combined west !
The Germans do not have the courage anymore because they were beaten into a pulp by the Red Army. They know what fighting Russia means.
'Britain is fine. France is in the clear. The Scandinavians and the Polish are on top of their game.'
You exaggerate their capabilities. They are hawkish for now, because they have US support. Once that goes, they will back down, they will quietly seek trade with Russia ! When you cannot beat them, join them.
Britain's army is just 40,000 and they have a missile called Storm Shadow. When Storm Shadow was deployed in 2023, the British media were boasting that it would take down the Kerch Bridge and Russian soldiers will be trapped and Ukraine will retake Crimea. They boasted about their invincible Challenger tank and forced Germany to send Leopards. The Russians destroyed both. The Ukrainians could not cross the first layer of the Survokin line. The Kerch bridge was hit by the Storm Shadows, but it could not be taken down, and the Russians found ways to take down the Storm Shadows.
France is inconsistent. In 2022, Macron said Putin must not be humiliated - he assumed Ukraine and the west would win, and Putin must be given an off ramp. But now the situation is reversed and Macron alternates between wanting to fight and negotiate. It is the west that is seeking to negotiate and freeze the war.
The British and French can be summed up by the saying 'Gros bouches, petits mains'. Big mouth, tiny fists.
The Scandinavians joined NATO and now wonder what would happen if NATO is disbanded. They are training their populace for living in bomb shelters ! They are a pathetic lot. Sweden sent electronic warfare experts to train Ukrainians in Poltava. About 50 of them were killed by a single Kinzhal. Swedish electronics could not detect the Kinzhal ! Since then Sweden as gone quiet.
The Poles are rabid, they want to be America's attack dog. Again, it will last as long as America is there. We know their performance in the last war. The Red Army liberated Auschwitz and the Poles from the German Nazis, the Poles could not do it themselves, and they would have been waiting a long time if they relied on the British. If it was left to Germany, there would be no Poland. Putin reminded the Poles that what Poland has today was a gift of Stalin. Stalin could have easily incorporated Poland into the USSR as it is a troublesome country on its own.
As for Germans, you need to pick up courage - to turn down America and say you will not commit economic suicide. You also need to pluck up the courage to denounce Israel. You have no shame for subservience to the US and Israel - but you want to fight Russia. If you fight Russia, the outcome will be like 1945. You need to remember that the Soviet Union was gracious to allow German reunification, but you have stabbed Russia in the back by ganging up against Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This academic is not neutral, he is wearing a heart with the Ukrainian flag, just to make sure everyone knows !
It is clear to everyone outside the west that Putin has won the military war and economic war - and now even the media war ! That is what is causing burning to Times Radio and all the western media.
This academic says it is unfortunate that Republicans are not backing the war. In other words, he would like the US to continue funding the proxy war for the US.
Putin said in the interview that there is no way Ukraine can win the war or reverse its fortune, and the only way is for the US to stop sending weapons in the futile hope Ukraine can defeat Russia. He is correct. Tucker said this is now accepted by many analysts in the west privately and he asked whether Putin thought the problem for the west to accept that Ukraine has to accept negotiation is a humiliation. That is what it is - the west needs a way out of this globally viewed humiliation, and this academic and others who persuaded themselves and others about the righteousness of the west to back this proxy war, now are left hoping that somehow the aid will be continued and Ukraine's fortunes will be reversed by a miracle. Putin was very diplomatic in his answer - he did not comment on the western humiliation, he did not want to rub it in, but he suggested a diplomatic off ramp for the US.
All in all, Putin does not indulge in name calling, he has a class, sophistry and diplomatic control that western leaders simply do not have. Just listen to Kirby, Blinken, Biden, BoJo, they foam in rage and called Putin a war criminal. After all that, now to negotiate is humiliation ! Yet that is the only way out for the US. And negotiations will be held when Trump is back.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ra-ox1cm 'The Russian Economy is the size of spain. '
That is a one dimensional story designed to make you feel better. It depends what is in the GDP. Russia makes metal alloys, titanium, it is the biggest wheat producer, it launches satellites and space stations, it can knock out satellites, it has the best hypersonic weapons, it is the key player in the nuclear energy industry, and it is also a leading oil and gas supplier, it is also is a gold producer. Can Spain produce any of these things ? The whole western world could not produce 150 mm shells to match Russia.
'Outside of Ressources russia is economically irrelevant.'
Russia's gas fired Germany and Europe's industry. Now Europe and Germany face de-industrialisation. High wages, high energy, so BASF is shutting plants and moving to China.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jcoker423 You need to become realistic. The collective west - US, NATO, EU - has failed. They could not stop the Russian operation, they do not wish to cross the border, sanctions don't seem to have any effect. Read the Chinese, Indian, Arab and other non-western media. They are openly lauding western failure. The western people are like lemmings, jumping into the cauldron because everyone else is doing the same. Russia and China will build an alternative financial system which is long overdue, and this will undermine the dollar and hence the US war machine.
Get facts correct, then you will find a solution - otherwise, the west will not be part of a solution, it will be only stand outside and be part of Ukraine's destruction. Why was NATO not dissolved when Warsaw pact was dissolved ? Why did NATO say 'not an inch to the east' and expand in 5 waves ? Why did NATO ignore Russia's warnings ? When Russia asked for a written guarantee that no missiles will be placed in Ukraine, why did not NATO agree ? Russia warned it will take technical-military solution.
Russia then did what it said it would do. It called NATO's bluff, and the US, NATO and EU are running like beheaded chickens. One day, it will say 'no fly zone', then it will say that is not possible; then it will say Poland will send planes, then it says it cannot be done; it sanctions a few oligarchs, and then unsanctions Abramovic because Zelensky says so; it allows Zelensky to speak in its parliaments, he insults, accuses and blackmails, and everyone meekly claps, and no one has the guts and minds to ask why this actor is being backed blindly, in the destruction of Ukraine. Turkey has played a more useful role trying to bring the warring sides together.
NATO does not inspire confidence. The world saw how the US ran away from Kabul, without even bothering to tell its NATO allies. When NATO talked about a 'no fly zone' as asked by its comedian, Russia warned NATO of 'consequences it never faced'. Biden and Stoltenberg immediately said there will be no 'no fly zone' . So who is more powerful ? The one who does what he says, or the one who shouts a lot and runs away ? After the Kabul exit, Putin decided this is the time to settle NATO expansion for good. He has achieved what he set out to do. Ukraine and NATO now know there can be no more NATO expansion. Zelensky has agreed to give that up.
The west incited Ukraine with false hopes, and then was too cowardly to go and fight for it. Now, if you cared for Ukranians, you would play the role of Turkey and try to mediate a peace.
1
-
@jcoker423 Why are you acting like a headless chicken ? It is as if Russia gave you a personal beating.
NATO didn't want to stop Russia because it is a cowardly, brain dead organisation (Macron). It ran away from Afghanistan with its tail behind its legs, led by its leader the US, which took the first flights out, and forgot to tell its 20 other weak allies.
Biden thought withdrawal from Kabul would allow US to concentrate on its rising enemy China. But Russia came in between. Now the US has two enemies, Russia + China is formidable.
The reality is Russia has already won. It called NATO's bluff. Ukraine became an unviable, failed state run by Russophobes and neo Nazis who imagined they could bait Russia and NATO would come to their assistance. Ukraine has given up the dream of joining NATO - Zelensky himself concedes it. He wants security guarantees. That is going to be difficult to get because Russia ain't allowing US in, as it is the creator of the problem in the first place. No more Victoria Nuland in Kiev. Zelensky's only option is to surrender and ask for a ceasefire. Continuing a prolonged fight would mean more Ukranian cities will be turned into rubble by air strikes - Kiev and Lvov included. What is the point ? Russia can keep a low intensity war going for a long time, preventing rebuilding of Ukraine.
Zelensky can continue his theatrics on war crimes etc. for another 2 days, after that he will move on to some other drama, but he cannot stop his cities being razed. There is no way Russia is going to let him off the hook. He keeps begging the west to intervene but the west does not have enough spine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hindurashtra63 'RSS promotes Nation first.'
That is a very convenient doublespeak - the RSS promotes nation first, because nation is Hindu according to them.
Why did the RSS assassinate Gandhi ?
The RSS has no original idea of its own, its notion of a Hindu state is a copy of Hitler's notions of nationhood. Indians don't produce ideas of their own, they are mere copiers. Where they have their own ideas, they are primitive and reactionary, such as caste and discriminaton.
As for the Indo - China war, in the last skirmish, China took some land India claims. Why has the RSS's disciple Modi not got the land back ? RSS members should be marching to the border to wrest the land back. Instead, I read they vandalise churches at Christmas, and march in support of a Hindu priest who raped an 8 year old Kashmiri girl in a temple.
The Leicester riots are a wake up call for Britain to the threat posed by Hindu militants to Britain. Britain needs to deny visas to RSS people coming to stir riots as in Leicester. Otherwise, they will create Hindu-Muslim/Sikh riots in Britain as they do in India.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@putinmustenduplikegaddafi2236 You are a liar because you want to talk what happened after 2014, but not what happened in 2014.
In 2014, a coup was staged that violently overthrew the Yankovich govt.. Participants of the coup included Ukro Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion. In the crowds in the Maidan, Victoria Nuland and John McCain were there distributing sweets. Why were they there ? The coup was organised by America and Victoria Nuland had been liaising with and funding Russophobic groups. In 2008, Merkel and Sarkozy had opposed induction of Ukraine into NATO saying it would lead to war. But the US arm twisted Germany and France to accept its plan to induct Ukraine into NATO. Nuland was caught on tape saying F..k the EU. In other words, the US determines what who will run Ukraine.
After the coup, and only after it, Russia took the Crimea. The reason is Sevastapol in the Crimea is the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet. At the time of independence, Ukraine made agreement with Russia it would lease out the use of Sevastapol port to the Russian Navy. With the seizure of power by Russophobic Ukro Nazis, they could unilaterally cancel that agreement after NATO entry, and the the US Seventh Fleet would be sailing from the Black Sea. Thus, Putin acted quickly to stop that, and took Crimea.
Ukraine has continued flirting with NATO reneging on its independence declaration which said it would not join any military alliance. US and NATO forces were training the Ukranian army near Lvov. Russia demanded commitment from Ukraine to honour its original agreement with Russia of neutrality, and asked NATO to give a security guarantee. Ukraine and NATO refused, so Russia had no choice but to take technical-military action. That is going on.
Russia has taken the industrial heartland, and the coastal area, and is strangling the Ukranian economy. It has got Ukraine by the scruff of the neck. Ukraine has only two choices now : accept neutrality AND cede more land (that is the price for inducing war); or continue till all of Ukraine is demolished city after city. There is nothing that NATO can do to thwart it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@putinmustenduplikegaddafi2236 The clause in article 2 negates Article 1. I caught you out, I bet you did not know about it. If Ukraine threatens any signatory of the Budapest Memorandum, action in self-defence can be taken against Ukraine. Ukraine, in coordination with one signatory, the US, was threatening Russia with NATO. The plan was to put US missiles in Ukraine, stop the Russian navy's use of Sevastopol which was originally agreed by Ukraine, and make it a naval base for the US Seventh Fleet. Hence, Russia has the right to annul Ukraine's independence or take action to degrade Ukraine. All the other signatories of the memorandum tried to be sneaky, but Russia stopped their wicked machinations against it, in no uncertain terms. You can howl as much as you like, the fact is Ukraine will be broken up and taken back over a period of time. Ukraine has squandered its independence due to the the irresponsibility of its politicians and people, and due to US manipulations.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'‘It’s the beginning of the end of Jewish life in the West'.
It is all rubbish. Is life safer for Jews in Israel ? Will 1300 Jews be killed in Europe ? No Jews has been killed in Europe since 1945.
The reality is more and more Israelis are taking German passports for safety !
However, the professor is right that the demographics are not in favour of continued Israeli or Jewish dominance. The Israelis and the Jews have been pursuing a suicidal policy. Israel lives on the support from the west and lives in enmity with its nearest neighbours, who have a huge population. Like Ukraine wanted to live with US support and enmity with Russia. Or like the whites dominating over the majority in South Africa.
The Jews living in western countries were also backing Israel. But the Arab and Muslim population has grown in Europe which was inevitable - considering that France, Britain, ruled Arab countries and created wars and refugees. Eventually, a new generation of Arabs and Muslims will not only have the numbers to be on the streets, but they are coming in universities, media and business. Numbers count. It was suicidal of Jews to make enemies against people with numbers. It will work for some time, but when it fails, either you adapt in time or perish.
The Jewish professor in Austria slyly mentioned 'western values' (and implied Jews are part of that). What are western values ? The west produced that famous Austrian painter, who invented gas chambers. The Arabs did not come up with that.
The thing about this Professor is he can see the writing on the wall, that Jewish dominance over Arabs cannot continue; but he shamelessly tries to ride on the back of 'western values' . He says this to make out the Jews are part of the west, unlike the Arabs. But even that game will end, because the Arabs will also be part of the west. The Jews cannot fight Arabs because eventually numbers matter. The best is for Jews in Europe to show solidarity with Palestinians.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joyduncan9434 America is in economic decline and the western world is coming down not due to the left, but due to the unsustainability of insatiable capitalist growth, centred on money for a few rather than human welfare. The working class and even middle class in the US has lost jobs and income to China, and they are in a rage. Capitalism is driven solely by the profit motive, and if producing in China is cheaper and more profitable for the shareholders, then that is what it will do. The people who have lost out on jobs in the process and living standards is the non-shareholding working class. They are the victims of the right wing which had deified capitalism where people are expendable. The right wing has engaged in wars to bring booty in the old colonial style - Iraq for instance. But they dress it up like Joe Bloggs as fighting for the free world, women, our boys in uniform etc. In the end, the booty did not come, the invaded were ungovernable and it became unaffordable, so they cut and run. They do not want the left pointing this out. They want to keep the dispossesed occupied with blaming China, Mexicans etc. Joe Bloggs is more American than American because he feels his country cannot stand on its own feet. He covers it up by saying he loves the commitment to free speech. He loves the shared history - of invading Iraq etc. It has become fashionable to blame the left, out of frustration when things do not go according to their world view.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joyduncan9434 In America, there is the inculcated belief that one can get as rich as one wants, if you try hard. If you are not rich, you must be a lazy bum. That worked when the non millionaires could also feel their living standards were improving. During the cold war confrontation with the Soviet Union, the capitalism in the US became as doctrinaire as communism, perhaps as a reaction. In Europe, they accept notions of social welfare, and they are not so doctrinaire about capitalism or socialism. The tragic part is that the victims of America's raw capitalism actually side with the extreme right - Republicans, Trumpists and further right. The extreme right offer no solutions to the problems they created. Trump cannot reverse the cost of the wars, he cannot bring jobs back from China, but he can direct public anger on China, Mexicans, the refugees, and on Democrats (as if Republicans did not contribute to the downward slide). America has a tabloid press like Fox News that specialises in fanning anger (the election was stolen) and stoking social divisions. This has spread to other countries (Sky Australia). GB News is another clone, but it has not caught on in Britain as they have a long established standard like the BBC. In America, the combination of economic decline, cost of wars, refugees, immigrants, gross disparity, social polarisation between Republicans and Democrats has brought a condition where even democracy is threatened. Trumpists and Republicans believe the election was stolen. The mindset has come where one side believe grabbing power is needed to save the nation. Any questioning of increasing social disparity is shouted down as socialist and leftist.
1
-
@joebloggs3551 Capitalism was so wonderful, we had Nazism, and colonialism and neo colonialism. You benefited from it, at others' expense, that is why you are smug about it. American capitalism is now based on a war machine, that is used to force other countries to sell oil only in dollars, allowing America to live beyond its means to print dollars. However, that era is drawing to close. America is set back financially by the two wars, and China has floated a gold back currency and it is already used by China, Russia, Venezuela and Iran to sell oil. America could invade Iraq to prevent it from selling oil in Euros, but it cannot do anything against China. Britain has been sailing with America and has been a willing accomplice in its criminal invasions. Now, America has cut and run, and it forgot to tell Britain, and in fact holds Britain responsible for the last blast in Kabul. Britain has shot itself in the foot by disconnecting from the EU. Without EU and the US, 'global Britain' is not very credible. When America made enemies of Muslims, China and Russia and ended up in a sorry state as a result, do you think Britain can fight all three at the same time and win ? You need to get out of your state of dependency on Americans, and cut out the 'free world versus enemy of free world' rhetoric, and show how to get people together, for example to solve climate crisis.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davehallett810 You are trying sanctimonious and irrelevant diversions. Just because I did not criticise Mynamar, or China does not mean I endorse them. They are not relevant to this discussion. Those countries are not posing as the defenders of the 'free world'. You and the likes of Joe Bloggs pose about that. The subject here is the ‘special relationship’ between the US and UK. The speakers in the video say it is largely a wishful construct of the British, and it never existed in American minds. After Kabul, it has dawned even on the British,that it does not exist anymore. Anyway, what has this special relationship meant ? From 1945 to 1992, the west led by the US worked to break up the Soviet Union (a great country I admired). After that, the US continued to try to break up Russia – till Putin came and decided to do tit for tat. After the Soviet Union’s end, Wolfowitz published a doctrine saying the US will never allow another power to rise again. With the Soviet Union gone, the neocons and the Zionists declared Muslims are the next threat to western civilisation/ free world, and they made propaganda. Due to the US, there was the Gulf War, Israeli aggression backed by the US, and Afghanistan and Iraq wars. The US and the west waged brutal wars on Muslim countries and maligned them, but pretended it was for the benefit of those they invaded. The Muslims have suffered – but the west has also paid a big price financially. The Muslims fought a guerrilla war that drained the west and the US, so the US withdrew. Meanwhile China has grown financially and militarily strong, and so has Russia. True or not ? Biden says he wants to concentrate on China and Russia. One cannot say whether the US wants to continue fighting Muslims also. The US wants to continue to threaten others to have hegemony. Once a tiger becomes a man eater, it remains so, I pointed out the US is not going to win fighting all three. The US has become dependent on using its military machine. This must be used continuously to maintain its lifestyle. The US economy and the dollar are dependent on enforcing on others the threat of war.
See Fox News on Youtube, 'Erik Prince: The US military may not be as capable as they claim'. Watch the Blackwater founder Erik Prince candidly and shamelessly say the US has to exercise military dominance to maintain the dollar as a reserve currency. The US prints dollars so it can live beyond its means. Listen to it, and you will realise the sheer wickedness of the US. Erik Prince is not left wing or a woke, he is from your stable. There is no mention of free world, he says the wars were to maintain the dollar and the US’s lifestyle, which is to live beyond its means. So let us not hear any more humbug from you about defence of the free world. The US is pulled down by fighting the Muslims, and China and Russia will do the rest. That is telling you unsentimentally the writing on the wall - which the US has brought on itself. To try to counter that by telling me the US is better than China or Myanamar is missing the point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ikkeligeglad Brave talk to cover up your ugly face.
'It is not possible for a country to become a member if it is at war'.
It is possible if the US decides so. If it was sure Ukraine would win, it would have bent all rules.
Now there is no question of Ukraine becoming a member - as it will not exist.
'Ukraine just has to hold its own on the battlefield until Russia falls apart due to internal discord and economic crisis'.
Ukraine is on its last legs. The US knows it is defeated, that it why it vetoed entry to NATO. Britain knows it, that is why it told Ukraine to be grateful and get on with what it has.
There is no sign Russia is going to fall apart due to economic crisis. Whereas Germany is being deindustrialised. And inflation is high in Europe.
Russia can supply weapons, you are unable to supply. Russia is not giving up the 4 oblasts and if Ukraine continues, it will lose more.
'No one in the west will allow Russia to become strong again...'
See the contradiction in what you fellows say. Earlier, you were saying that Russia is weak, see they took so long to take Bakhmut. Now you say 'No one in the west will allow Russia to become strong again...' That means Russia was strong ! Russia did not become strong because you allowed it (see your western conceitedness ?). If you mess with Russia, it has the capacity to destroy the US and Europe.
You in contrast are weak and will remain so. The weaklings of Europe will remain helpless, and rely on the US, and agree to be its vassals. The US will fight small countries but it is too cowardly to fight Russia and China.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gazpachopolice7211 There is not contradiction in the statements. Russia's intention was not to take all of Ukraine. They gave them independence in all good faith. There are parts like Crimea, Donbass, Odessa etc. which were Russian from the time of Catherine the Great. Lenin attached these Russian areas to Ukraine. When modern Ukraine was created, Russia let Ukraine keep Crimea, Donbass, Odessa etc. out of goodwill; they should have not given these areas to Ukraine, but they regarded Ukrainians as part of the Russian family.
However, Ukraine has been subverted by a US sponsored coup in 2014. Ukro Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion took part in the coup. They spear headed a militant anti-Russian nationalism which suited the US. Ukraine was encouraged to ask for NATO membership which would allow US to get missile and naval bases in Ukraine. The US 7th fleet could displace Russia's Black See fleet and then sail from Sevastopol in the Crimea. Grandmaster Sir Putin saw the plan and took Crimea after the 2014 coup as he read the US plan and saw what was coming.
Now with US NATO expansionism, and US training of Ukrainian forces since 2014, Russia decided to cut Ukraine to size. Russia would have preferred not to go to war and take territory if Ukraine renounced NATO and the US gave the security guarantee it asked for. However both Ukraine and the US had malfide intentions. Hence, the war started. Putin said war is costly, but it would be even more costly for Russia if Ukraine joins NATO and the US gets bases. Then Article 5 would be brought and Russia would have to fight a nuclear war to evict the US.
Hence, Putin said Russia had to take action now. Their plan was to decapitate the Kiev govt.. That did not work out, due to western support. So they adapted the strategy. They decided to take Donbass and the coastal lands and link them to Crimea. Odessa also needs to be added. War aims can change according to the course of the war. The current plan is to take the Russian areas up to Odessa, and make Ukraine effectively landlocked. They do not want to take the rest of Ukraine. Unless the left-over Ukraine goes back to neutrality, it can be bombarded to a wasteland. I don't think the Russians plan to take the non-Russian areas of Ukraine.
'As for not understanding of comment about OP's numbers, you again prove that you don't understand English.'
You certainly are an amateur in geopolitics. If you knew English as you pretend, you would say what are 'OP's numbers'.
1
-
@JD-jl4yy Russia is a superpower. That is why Finland and Sweden want to join NATO even before Russia cast an eye on them ! The whole of Europe is a collection weak and feeble states. None of them will survive one day without US support.
Russia has food (it is the biggest wheat producer), it has water, land, energy, a skilled and educated populace, a military with strong defence and offence capability, and they have not outsourced their manufacturing like the west. How many countries in the world have all these ? Nobody in Europe. When Mastercard and Visa ended operations in India, Russia made its own credit cards. It works for transactions in Russia and so money does not go to America in transaction and conversion charges.
Your estimation of Russia is based on western misrepresentations - the assumptions are false. You are a typical westerner incapable of independent thought and analysis.
Look at the status of Europe and Russia. Europe is being de-industrialised. In Italy, fascists are ruling and they may break ranks with the EU to get Russian gas. In Germany, the world's biggest chemical company BASF has announced it cannot afford the gas prices and will shift production to China. That means job losses. The world's largest glass factory in France has to turn off production. It is the same with steel and aluminium plants in Europe. That means Airbus and car industry are affected. In Britain, BMW has announced it is going to close its electric car factory and shift to China. The British govt. is grappling with Brexit and energy crisis, and the only solution is savage cuts.
Meanwhile with America, Russia has sped up the de-dollarisation of international trade. With that, the dollar's dominance will erode and with that America's power.
Russia has single-handedly ended the western 'rules based international order'. Only Russia could do this - not even China. That is why Russia is a superpower. The rest of the non-western world is aligning with Russia. Saudis are not listening to the US - who would have thought this ? Turkey is also independent minded. Iran has not had relations with the US for 50 years. China is of course an emerging superpower and does not listen to the US. India also does not listen to the US.
The only vassals the US has now are the Europeans. You are one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well done Ali, to point out the reality. Much of the British public has been misguided by stories of innocent Ukraine subjected to an unprovoked attack. They are also told Russia is weak, and the collective west is strong.
The reality is the US and the Europeans sought NATO expansion to surround Russia, although they had said NATO would not move one inch to the east. The Russians threw the gauntlet and fought hard. Ukraine lost the war, and the chief instigator, the US, decided to abandon it. The European chicken like the UK are squawking in fright, and want to support their proxy, Ukraine, till it wins. They fear the bear will eat the chicken as well, so they want Ukraine to keep going somehow ! But the Ukrainians do not have much manpower and it must have entered their dim heads why they are dying for the Americans and Europeans who don't want to die for them.
The saying about the British is 'gros bouches, petits mains'. Big mouths, tiny fists !
1
-
1
-
1
-
@solmak47 This economic-sanctions business is a typical western conceit. The US put sanctions on Iran, and Iran has not had diplomatic relations with the US for over 50 years, yet it is making everything including killer drones.
You said Russia and the rouble would not last one day, but Putin floored the western economies. Russia is de-industrialising the west. BASF is downsizing in Germany and EU and shifting to China. The rouble performed well while the pound and euro lost 20% of their value.
Turkey is also capable of surviving sanctions. The fact is countries like Russia, China, Iran, Turkey are truly sovereign and can tell the US to go to hell. European states, in contrast, are pathetic vassals of the US.
The west has shot itself in the foot by sanctions on Russia. It has undermined its key asset, the banking system, which it controlled. Now the trade in non-dollar currencies has increased. Even the Saudis, Qataris and Emiratis now do not listen to the west.
If you put sanctions on Turkey, it will team up with Russia and close all western and Ukranian shipping in the Black Sea. You need to realise the days of your colonial blackmail are over.
1
-
1
-
@solmak47 Turkey has made leaps and strides, it makes Bakratar drones, it makes carbon fibres and composites, many German companies use it as a manufacturing base.
There is no way NATO will kick out Turkey. They do not have a mechanism for expulsion. Further, the US needs Turkey more than the other way round. If NATO does what you demand, Turkey can join fully with Russia, and that would be a formidable combination. They control the Black Sea, and can shut off NATO access.
Turkey is a medium size power, and can act on its own. There is no country in Europe that has that capability and sovereignty. Even France and Britain are vassal states of the US.
Turkey acted as the intermediary between Russia and Ukraine. Only it has the trust of both. They have been brilliant in that. Switzerland offered to host talks, Russia rejected saying it was not neutral because it took part in sanctions. Flights from Turkey go to Russia and Ukraine. It is a truly sovereign country unlike the servile ineffectual nations of Europe
Try to engage your brain instead of succumbing to emotive frustration.
Sweden and Finland will join if Turkey allows. Anyhow, even if Sweden and Finland join NATO, they are irrelevant weaklings. With or without them, NATO will not dare send troops to Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
von Leyen has sold EU to the US and that is what has impoverished Europe. A few refugees are not the problem. Poles are hard core racists like this lady, the Poles should not have been let into the EU. The Poles have also stoked Russophobia and played the role of US's agent to control Europe.
Western Europe is subsidising Poland and Poland wants to dictate policy and bite the hand that feeds them. Cut the money to Poland and make them face Russia on their own. That eventuality will come. Germany is halving its expenditure on Ukraine because it cannot afford to subsidise Ukraine. Nor does it have the capacity to fight Russia. Likewise cut half the funding to Poland and ask Poland to fight Russia on its own. Either Poland accepts common decisions or gets out of the EU.
The way the EU and NATO are going, they are going to break apart. Farage and Boris Johnson stabbed the EU at the behest of the US. The eastern Europeans who are the net recipients of western European aid have been given free hand to dictate policy, only on the grounds of their anti-Russian rhetoric. The EU has been dumb to allocate the Estonian Kalljas as the foreign minister. She is rabidly anti-Russian and wants to fight Russia and break it up. Estonia has a population of 1.5 million and is a recipient of aid but will run foreign policy. If the Baltics provoke Russia, it will seize the Suwalki corridor and the US will not come to its aid.
What has impoverished western Europe is US policy against Russia (and a not a few refugees). The western Europeans need to take back control of EU and NATO from eastern Europe and the US, or the impoverishment will bring Nazis to rule western Europe. In the 1990s, Rumsfeld had said, the US does not need old Europe (France and Germany), it has new Europe. New Europe like Poland was bribed with US money, and Poland acted as US'a attack dog in order to get more biscuits. And Ukraine was following the same model. All that is unsustainable now - because not only Germany, but US cannot afford to fight Russia. Trump and Vance have indicated what will be their stand.
My advice to western Europe is to cut Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics, they are a much, much bigger drain than some poor refugees. Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics etc. eat away the funds and cause demand for more military expenditure because of their Russian baiting. The Polish lady can have her freedom and operate 'no refugee' policy and keep Poles completely safe. And she can continue baiting the Russians till the Russians kick Poland's head in, and she can see how safe she will be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russia responds militarily, not emotionally. It has calculated and decided the way forward is (1) to check the Kursk advance, and build barricades so that the Ukrainians cannot advance to the Kursk nuclear plant which was their objective (2) don't slacken the pressure on Donbass, go after Pokrovsk whose fall will cause disintegration of the Ukrainians lines in the east and (3) start killing the Ukrainian intruders pinned in Kursk and destroy their scarce weapons.
The Ukrainians and their western handlers thought Russia will panic and rush troops from Donbass to Kursk. And Russia would be forced to negotiate - they would give back Donbass and Crimea to get back Kursk ! Can anyone be so dumb ?
Kursk can wait; the Ukrainians are pinned there, they cannot advance, they cannot retreat.
The Russians have made mistakes but have always shown they think strategically. During Ukraine's Kherson's offensive, Gen. Surovikin advised to withdraw to the eastern bank, because Russian troops risked being cut off. He said it may not look good optics politically and for the media, but Putin did not over rule him. Then Survokin built the 3 layer fortification, and Ukraine impaled itself on this in their 2023 offensive. The Ukrainians could not even cross the first line, and they lost so much manpower that they are faced with the present shortage.
Russia's response to Kursk is militarywise and strategically sound. Ukraine has not got any strategic advantage in Kursk, it has thinned itself and weakened Donbass. Hence, Russia should finish off the Donbass operation, and then go after Kursk. That is indeed how it is playing out.
Ukraine has run out of options, Kursk has not got them anything, so it is begging the west to allow strikes into Russia - which could trigger a Russian nuclear strike on Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kingsfield1270 Well, the Ukranians and their handlers were predicting Kherson offensive for months, and they hit some bridges, and Zelensky was saying his goal was recapturing Crimea, and Russians were already fleeing not only Kherson but even Crimea.
After the offensive started, Ukrainians said they had broken through the first layer of defence in Kherson. Then what happened ? The Ukranians said they want to keep progress a military secret.
Now the Ukranians are claiming they captured some villages in Kherson oblast, we are only asking the Ukranians to name the villages they captured. Why is that secret ? If the Russians lost them, would that be a secret to them ?
If the Russians took Ukraine by 2100, that is fine. Ukraine will be reintegrated where it belongs.
I suspect it is correct that the counter offensive was ill fated, and the Ukranians got massacred, that is why it is a secret after all that boasting by Ukraine and its handlers.
1
-
1
-
It is amusing to see Indians ('Hindu nationalists') itching to fight Palestinians and support Israel. What is the reason ? 'Hindu nationalists' have this frustration with Pakistan and Kashmir. They are unable to win in Kashmir. They take out that frustration on other Indian Muslims.
'Hindu nationalists' have this belief that little Israel is beating up the Muslims, and Hindus can learn from Israel how to do the same. However, Israel has been doing that only because of limitless US support. India does not have that support - in fact, after the fallout of the Indian terrorist attack in Canada, the US ambassador went to Pakistan and visited Kashmir.
Further Israel's invincibility and narrative of exceptionalism was finished by the strike on 7 Oct. Israelis are demoralised by the blow and its flawless execution. The Palestinians advanced to the kibbutzim only after neutralising Israel's security system and killing IDF soldiers in the way. Now Israel is far from winning position - they do not have the capacity to fight a prolonged urban war in Gaza while the Palestinians are willing for that, Israel faces multi front wars, the Israeli population is divided with people shouting to get their prisoners released, and its PM's only interest is to save himself from prison for corruption. The US and the west, who are the principal backers of Israel find there is public opposition at home, the US does not have the money to back war in Ukraine and Israel, and fight Iran, and maybe Turkey also.
India has misread and is not on the right side of history. It has become an Israel supporter at the wrong time, just when there are moves from Israel's strongest supporters in the west to scale back that support. Even Blinken said Israel cannot go back to the status quo. Afterwards, India might find the Arabs will reduce Indian workers in their countries due to the blatant Hindu stance against Muslims. The Hindus and Jews are together in a sinking boat ! Why a nation of 1.3 billion wants to be in a sinking boat with 5 million shows a weakness of character.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Heckling is not a prosecutable offence in democracies. It may be in India which has a dictatorial PM with a Hindu fascist mindset. Hence, the title is all wishful thinking from the HT. The world is not all with India as Modi's Hindus imagine.
If India does an extra judicial killing in the UK (just because someone heckled a Hindu leader), as it did in Canada, India will find itself even more isolated. The UK will be forced to cancel any trade deal and support Canada.
India does extra judicial murder all the time against Sikhs, Muslims and Christians in India, and this has become the highlight of the Modi years. Modi himself came to power by killing 2000 Muslims using a Hindu mob. Western countries banned him for several years. Only some months back Christians were killed and raped in Manipur.
India needs to stop the persecution of Sikhs, Muslims and Christians by 'Hindu nationalists'. The 'Sikh problem' has come because the Hindus alienated the Sikhs by trying to erase their identity, claiming Sikhs are Hindus.
Earlier, Hindus were not a threat to the UK and the west, they were seen as sobre, hard working, humble people. That was from the days of Gandhi and Nehru.
But in recent years, due to the rise of a Hindu supremacist ideology inculcated in Hindus by Modi and his entourage, the Hindus of current day India pose a threat to western countries. The riots in Leicester by Hindus against Pakistani British who had lived together peacefully since the 1970s last year, were created by newly arrived Hindus from India. This year also some Hindu group took out a procession in Leicester for their elephant god, without police authorisation. When the police stopped it, the Hindus manhandled the police. The Hindus have become very brazen.
Similar violent altercations have taken place by Hindus against Sikhs in Australia. The Hindus themselves defaced Hindu temples in Australia and demanded punishment of Sikhs. The newly migrated Hindus behave as they do in India.
The west needs to realise the Hindus in India are not civilised as they were in the time of Nehru and Gandhi. They have become supremacist and they claim they are world teachers. Hindus are now exporting their extremists to the UK, Australia, Canada and the US. They even have a strategy for infiltrating the west with their cadre to capture power. They were celebrating Sunak becoming a PM as a Hindu achievement to capture the west; Sunak projects himself as 'proud Hindu' instead of a proud Briton.
Hence, while not allowing Sikh violence in the west is fine, don't forget the real problem the west faces : the Hindu supremacist militancy that led to India believing it can shoot a Canadian national, and get away. The Hindus imagine India is now a superpower and it is entitled to do these things.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@parvizdeamer Iraq was not supported by Russia like Ukraine. There was no economic blockade or sanctions on the US.
Russia has taken on NATO and Ukraine single handedly, fought militarily and waged economic war. And it has largely succeeded.
You tell me 'the West is reluctant to go to war and abhor loss of life....'
That is a lie. If the west thought for one moment it could win, it would have sent troops into Ukraine and put a no fly zone. But it knows it can't because the Russians will obliterate all their cities. Those hypersonic missiles cannot be stopped.
You put on a brave face and say 'But at some point they will put their foot down and will fight tooth and nail to defend their territories from aggression. And like Nazi Germany, Russia will find itself fighting a well equipped and well industrialized West, with more manpower and resources. It will lose. It only recourse will be to draw on its nuclear arsenal. '
Read your own last sentence. Russia has recourse to nuclear weapons and therefore the west will not put their foot down and will fight tooth and nail as you think. The west is US, the Europeans do not have a spine. As for the US, Kissinger had said that the US will not fight a nuclear war against the USSR to save Germany and Europe. That will the same case now - even if Russia takes Lithuania.
You boast 'But conventional war… well we saw what happened to Iraq twice, what the Israelis have done countless times to its Arab neighbors… western military doctrine and weapon systems tend to be far superior.'
You clearly approve what happened in Iraq twice and what Israelis do. Israelis are fighting someone that has no army or air force.
But even with conventional war and 'western military doctrine and weapon systems that tend to be far superior', the Red Army defeated Nazi Germany and dictated the post war terms.
And as pointed out, there is no point even considering your claimed superiority in conventional weapons. Any advantage is neutralised by nuclear weapons.
When Chairman Mao met Nixon, he told him, we know you can drop 100 nuclear weapons on us, but we shall drop only one on you - and we know you will not be able to take it.
Putin, like Mao, knows the western psyche. You will fight against a weak opponent like Iraq, Palestine etc., but not against a strong one. The US and therefore NATO will not fight Russia even if it took Lithuania besides Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
@parvizdeamer Russia is not interested in taking Germany, so don't make up scenarios that don't exist, and argue against it.
You say Russia can barely take Ukraine. It has taken 20% and that 20% is more valuable than 20% - they have taken the industrial heartland, and the coastal areas, which puts them in a position to strangle Ukraine's economy. Ukraine has little revenue and the EU has to provide handouts. The rest of Ukraine is hit with missile strikes; so nu reconstruction is possible without Russian permission.
NATO is not a defensive organisation just because NATO says so. It is a US tool and its sole purpose is to check Russia. NATO went to Afghanistan, so it invaded another country. Ukraine agreed to neutrality at the time of its independence, that was the condition Russia made it independent. It flouted that after the US instigated coup of 2014, and hence Russia has the right to terminate its sovereignty as Ukraine was planning to get the US to put missiles in its territory. The rise of Ukro Nazis and their nationalism discriminating against Russians naturally brought this reaction.
It won’t be successful against NATO in a conventional war, and if it tries to go nuclear, well then MAD will take place in which Russia and the west will loose.
If NATO is so powerful and believed for one moment it could beat Russia, it would have sent troops to Ukraine and put a no-fly zone. But since it did not do that, one has to believe either it did not have the capability you claim, or it was filled with cowardice. On Ukraine, Russia is prepared to fight a nuclear war, and the US understands. When NATO talked about no fly-zone, Putin said NATO will face consequences they have not faced in their lives. Biden quietly declared there will be no no fly-zone.
Chairman Mao once told Nixon 'we know you can put 100 nuclear bombs on us; but we shall only put one on you, and we know you cannot take it'. He understood the western psyche. Putin also understands western cowardice. A couple of American mercenaries are captured and the west is unnerved.
Under your vain bluster, there is no substance.
1
-
@parvizdeamer What are you talking about ? Russia is taking Ukraine. Lysichank is about to go, Mykolaiv is under attack. And Russia also proved NATO with USA, UK, France, Germany and 26 other countries is all mouth and no trousers. None of them can fight, they don't want to get killed.
The same NATO scrambled to exit from Kabul 2 years ago, in the most cowardly show, with the leader of the pack taking the first planes out. With that kind of record, do you really think you can fight Russians ? If for one moment NATO thought it could win, it would have sent troops to Ukraine.
Russia uses the nuclear option to check NATO. If it were not for that, NATO would have gone into Ukraine. NATO talked about 'no fly zone'. Putin warned of consequences you have not ever faced. You know what that means. Next day, Biden announced there will be no 'no fly zone'.
There is no point boasting that NATO would be superior in a conventional war with Russia. It has not been proved and it cannot be proved. For Russia is conventional + nuclear, and they are simply formidable. When you have a Sarmat hypersonic missile that can take out an area the size of Britain in a single strike, you will think twice about messing with Russia. Get it ?
You are covering up western cowardice and sense of defeat and trying to put on a brave face. It is so obvious you are burning inside.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This enraged Jew in the video tells us Jews have been hated for millennia and that is something unique. He is full of self pity and Piers pities him as well !
If everyone is against Jews, and I was a Jew, I would think 'are we doing something wrong ?' instead of 'why is the rest of the world mad ?'. Often the madman sees the rest of the world as mad.
The Jews do need to introspect instead of saying everyone is madly against them.
As for Piers, let me remind you it was the genius of the most civilised country to create a Final Solution. It was British genius to re-settle the Jews - not in Britain, but in some one else's homeland, and then back them piously.
The civilised Europeans, not the Arabs, who massacred the Jews. For 2000 years, the Jews carried the stigma of Christ's cruxifixion. And afterwards, the Europeans do not want the Jews in their countries. They settled them in Palestine and they give them endless support to stay there so that they do not come back and create trouble for them.
Judaism is a religion of exclusion and apartheid. The Jews will always be a problem - for others and themselves. They should join the mainstream, Christianity or Muslims.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stada Your interpretation is highly immature - Russia has lower GDP than Italy etc.
It matters what is in that GDP. Russia is self sufficient - it has land, water, food (biggest wheat producer), it makes metals, it has nuclear power, it has energy (a big asset), it launches satellites, it has its own GPS, its industry is not outsourced, and it has the military power to vapourise any enemy including the US.
It is because Russia is self sufficient, it could not be brought down by sanctions. It is in many ways unique. Instead, Europe is being de-industrialised by the sanctions. You understand, dimwit ?
Italy whom you cite and all the other weaklings of Europe are dependent, vassal states. It needs energy and security from others.
So GDP alone is a very shallow measure.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anchorread68 But US murdered even more people in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Israel which is supported by America has annexed neighbouring lands, in fact it was formed by annexation of Palestine. America recognises Jerusalem that was siezed in the 1967 war as Israel's capital. No talk there of 'international rules based order'. So cut out your hypocritical double speak. That is why the west has no credibility, and no one else is joining in sanctions; China, India, Arabs, Africans and Latin Americans are trading with Russia.
And come to think of it, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union, and all it is has - Antonov aircraft factory, nuclear power plants, ports, steel factories etc. were built by the Soviet Union, so a lot of Russian money was pumped in. Russians in the Red Army paid with their lives to free Ukraine from German occupation. Hence, thinking about it, Russia has the right to take Ukraine back, especially if it indulges in Russophobia and tries to bring foreign powers to threaten Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
That is the view in all the non-west countries. Sir Putin has single handedly ended the western 'rules based international order', rigged by the west, to be enforced on others, with exceptions for themselves (like Iraq).
Sir Putin is a judo black belt and when the west came with economic sanctions, he flipped western economies, and on the battlefield, he holds the nuclear sword on the west, and he has thwarted American plans for bases in Ukraine.
No other leader or country, not even China could have done this.
Other leaders see that this is way to deal with the west if they threaten other countries. The post-western order is beckoning and the dollar will not be used except for trade with America. Both Russia and China are pushing this, and others are lining up with them, except the servile Europeans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wokeaf1337 I asked why does not NATO send its armies to defend Ukraine ?
NATO has been training Ukraine and encouraging Ukraine to join NATO. Russia said 'no, we shall not allow Ukraine in NATO, you have crossed is a red line, you are using Ukraine to put missiles and threaten Russia'. Russia asked for a security guarantee, which NATO refused. Then Russia took technical military measures it said it would take if a security guarantee was not given. It did what it said it would do, it gave Ukraine a thorough thrashing. The question is when it was NATO that pushed Ukraine into seeking NATO entry, and Ukraine is being smashed for it, and considering how everyone in the west is combusting in outrage, why does NATO not do the honourable thing and enter Ukraine and stop Russia ?
You have given a weak and evasive answer to cover NATO cowardice. Your answer was 'Because they dont want to start a war, RuZZia needs to declare war on Nato for that to happen'.
The reason NATO has not entered Ukraine is not because NATO does not want to start a war, it is because NATO fears if it starts a war, NATO also will get a beating from Russia. If for one moment, NATO thought it could win, it would have sent troops to Ukraine. Putin has invited NATO to come to the battlefield and see if it can win.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AlexKarasev 'The Germans and the Poles are pretty good in that regard also, to be fair, but that's about it'
I don't think present day Germans can fight. The Red Army gave them such a thrashing that the German temperament has changed, and they have become a peaceful nation ! Mind you, neo Nazis are awakening in Germany, but fighting Russia does not appeal to them anymore.
I don't know why you think the Poles can fight. In the WW 2, they were over run by the Germans, till the Red Army came and liberated Auschwitz. The Poles are barking chichuas. They are rabid xenophobes, with an inferiority complex. They badmouth the Russians, and Germans also (while demanding money from Germany). But I don't think they can fight. When Russia moved some of those Wagner musicians near to the Polish border, the Poles had a shaking fit.
The British and Anglo Saxons are Russophobes. They do not have fighting ability, but they have great manipulative skills, and are masters at using proxies. The British ruled India by pitting one group against another, telling the Hindus and Muslims there they were different; they broke the Ottoman empire by inciting the Arabs against the Turks, when they had a lot in common as Muslims; now they and the Americans have pitted the Ukrainians against the Russians, telling the Ukrainians they are Europeans and they have nothing in common with Russians. The Anglo Saxons want to break up Russia like they broke the Ottoman empire, this time using the Ukrainians. Make no mistake of their intentions.
The fighting ability of the British in the past has been based on using Indian soldiers (Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas etc.) to fight their wars. They cannot do that anymore, so now they try to use the Americans to fight for them. Starmer went to see Biden to incite him to give Ukrainians the licence to fire their missiles into Russia. But the Americans refused as they are like the Brits, they don't want to die. If you look at the American army, it is full of Hispanics who were given citizenship in exchange for being a fighting force for the US.
The only one left in NATO who can fight that you missed out are the Turks ! They have the largest army in NATO, and they too are brave fighters. However, the Turks will never fight for the Anglos because they know how the British are.
In summary, NATO is a paper tiger, an expensive and cumbersome bureaucracy, run and controlled by the Americans, but the minor vassal states like Norway, Baltics etc. are given the post of Secretary General etc. They praise themselves as the richest and most powerful alliance, but none apart from the Turks can fight, and the Turks won't fight for any NATO cause ! The Ukrainians can fight, NATO would love to have them, but Russia has stopped that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@quantuman100 Kherson shows the difference between the Russians and the Ukrainians, and why the Russians will prevail. They saw the west bank of Kherson was vulnerable, so they withdrew without losing people. And they stayed in the east bank, let the Ukranians come in and then started shelling them, so Kherson is not very usable. By that strategic withdrawal, they took out the sting from the Kherson offensive and it petered out. Before the west was saying with Himars, with the Kherson offensive, Ukraine would trap the Russians and severe it from Crimea. And Zelensky said he would take Crimea by Dec 2022. He said no town will fall after Severodonetsk. But the Russians destroyed the power grid and Soledar fell.
The Ukrainians in contrast are holding on to Bakhmut and getting massacred, so much so the US is asking them to withdraw, so they have troops left. The dilemma for the Ukrainians is if they withdraw, they are afraid it will open the storm gate for the Russians. If they stay in Bakhmut, they get massacred. Avedivka is in a similar plight.
The spring offensive that the west is touting for Ukraine is the last throw of the die for the west. Russia has fortified its lines, they will sit it out, and they know after that Ukraine will run out of steam. Then the west will be forced to scale back the support of Ukraine.
Overall, Ukraine is devastated. And Russia will continue to hammer Ukraine till it agrees to stay neutral. The west cannot change that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SuperHero-dq4jc
'As far as the US staging Maidan, its a joke '
Can you tell me why the necon Jewess Victoria Nuland and John McCain were in the Maidain distributing sweets and celebrating the violent overthrow of the Ukranian government ? (Were the US rioters who tried to storm the Capitol worth celebrating ?).
'for having an economy smaller than Italy. '
Is that so ? Can Italy take on 30 countries + US, and stand one day ? Can Italy launch hypersonic missiles, drones, nukes ?
Only Russia, not even China, can take on 30 countries + US, and stand unflinchingly. Russia has changed the course of world history more than once. It has ended US and western hegemony, it has flipped the western economies and caused the de-industrialisation of Europe, and it is driving de-dollarisation, which will surely end US power. The rest of the world became aware for the first time that it is feasible to trade between countries without the US $.
'No wonder they will fight you to the end. No wonder why they want to join NATO.'
You can keep your wondering to yourself. The Ukraine of 2014 is not coming back, let alone the Ukraine of 1991. Russia will take part of Ukraine, and the remainder will be made a landlocked wasteland.
Ukraine is not joining NATO and Russia will not ever let NATO enter Ukraine again. You will have to fight a nuclear war to change that. The final borders of Ukraine, and what it will be allowed to do and not allowed to do will be decided by Russia.
1
-
@SuperHero-dq4jc No need for your pretentious condecension. Russia is great, it shapes history. It has taken steps to end western domination and their 'international world order'. It is de-industrialising Europe, and it is driving de-dollarisation. The rest of the non-west sympathasizes with Russia.
'Russian propaganda is hilarious because it can turn ANYTHING—including the fact that Nuland is Jewish—or an Arizona senator into a conspiracy. I assure you that you would not be aware of names if there was a US conspiracy at Maidan.'
Your writing is evasive. Your wicked necons (the Jewess Nuland and McCain) were distributing sweets in the Maidan. I asked you to explain what they were doing there. Is it normal to attend the violent overthrow of an elected govt. of another country if you don't have motives ? You did not answer. The fact that those prominent people were there and not hidden means the US felt emboldened and cocksure. They felt by this time no one could stand in their way. Merkel and Sarkozy opposed Ukraine in NATO in 2008, but Bush twisted their hands. No US conspiracy ? The outside world has seen your character, you also know everything, but you think 'so what?'
Well the result is it led to the decapitation of Ukraine. You made a coup in Ukraine to put your govt. (as you have done in Latin America). The aim was to get NATO entry for Ukraine, and then cut off Russia from the Black Sea. But this is not a small Latin America country, you are against Russia. Russia stepped in to stop US bases in Ukraine, and you in the most shameless manner did not send troops to save the protege you encouraged. You got Ukranians massacred and the best you can do is send some weapons. You do not have the courage to go and fight. True or not ? Putin invited those who think can fight Russia and win and come to the battlefield and show it.
As for the rest of your rant, it is frustration stemming from your cowardice.
'And the people in that one nation would perish rather than allow you to steal it. '
Let them perish. Or if you feel so strongly, overcome your cowardice and send your troops.
'Dnipro, your hypersonic missile destroyed an apartment building. Murder a few civilians. It make you feel better about your devastating losses as a result.'
It was not a hypersonic missile. That is saved for you. The various news media said that most of the targets were the power grid. This was caollateral damage, and it could be collision with a Ukranian missile. No one has identified what caused it, so don't make up lies.
' I am the kind of person who thinks some things are worth dying for. One of them is preventing an authoritarian bully from seizing power in a sovereign state.'
So why have you not gone to Ukraine ? Did you go to Iraq and fight against your own army ?
' I have had many dealings with Russia and count many of them as friends. '
Cut out the patronising. You want to say you are not anti-Russian.
'Leave that Ukraine immediately. There is no reason for you to be there.'
Ukraine of 2014 is not returning, let alone 1991. True or not ? Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall and had a fall, and after that, all the King's men and horses could not put him back. That sums up the situation of Ukraine.
Ukraine was given independence in good faith, but Ukraine sold itself for 5 billion dollars to Victoria Nuland. It conspired with the US to threaten Russia, so that is the end of Ukraine. Some of it may be allowed to exist only on condition of neutrality. That means, no US bases. Get it ? That is final, Russia will not allow it. If Ukraine does not agree to neutrality (or is prevented from agreeing to neutrality), it will be turned into a wasteland. You cannot stop that because you do not have the guts to send troops to Ukraine. As for reconstruction, you will need Russian permission, and it will never allow US and NATO trainers to roam around again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Marin is shallow, like most Europeans. Her argument is that 'we had good trade ties with Russia, it would be total madness to go for war and destroy those ties. But Putin did that, so the conclusion is the Russians don't think like us, they are irrational, to them business ties etc. are not important.
She is either ignorant or deliberately disingenuous. The factor that is not mentioned is US machinations for NATO expansion and US goal of getting missile and naval bases in Ukraine.
What must be asked is why the Europeans have aided and abetted the US in world hegemony including threatening Russia. Ukraine wanted to join the US-European bandwagon to threaten Russia.
Russia is not irrational, it just saw through the US game, and it knows the Europeans are worthless doormats. Russia has a leader who puts his country's security above anything. What bothers the Europeans is that Russia is prepared to act to defend its security and is strong enough to block Europe + US.
Russia finds that making Ukraine independent led Europe and the US to create security threats, and it is prepared to take action. If the Baltics, Poland, Finland allow the US to use them to create security threats to Russia, they too will get a beating.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Don't miscalculate. Years back, Putin warned in the Munich security conference that NATO expansion would lead to war. The US did not listen, it got away with six waves of NATO expansion - till it came to Ukraine. When Russia collected troops on the Ukrainian border in Dec. 2021, the west thought Putin was bluffing. But now they know - Russia rendered Ukraine into a failed state, Ukraine cannot join NATO and the Ukraine of 1991 will not exist, and there is nothing the west can do about it. The west escalated as each of its steps did not work - Javelins, HIMARS, Bradleys, tanks, cluster munitions, F16s.....
If Ukraine is given missiles to hit Russia, then Russia will escalate. It maybe Ukraine's missiles can still only do pinpricks, and Russia can respond with a higher volume of conventional strikes. If that does not work, then a stage will come when Russia will have no choice but to reach out for the nuclear strike. I would imagine a strike on a Ukrainian city on Poland's border like Lvov would be exemplary and send a signal on what happens if you cross red lines. No NATO country can do anything after Ukraine is hit with a nuclear strike. They would not want their own cities incinerated. Hence, don't fool yourself. Russia did not use a nuclear strike after the Kursk incursion. That does not mean Russia is bluffing or will not retaliate. Russia believes it can get back Kursk without a nuclear strike. But if Russia thought that Kursk cannot be recovered by conventional means, it will use a nuclear strike.
Russia can also select non-nuclear options for retaliating against the west. They could give similar missiles to Houthi and other groups who are fighting America and enable them to strike at western ships and bases in the ME. It could cut internet cables.
Hence, don't fool yourself - Russia can and will damage the west.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The difference is Modi kills Indian citizens to win elections and hold power. Therefore India is internally a weak country and might break up. Look at Manipur, Kashmir, Punjab.
Putin does not make Christians, Muslims, Jews etc. in Russia fight. He fights those from outside who threaten Russia. In contrast, when China took Indian land, Modi was quiet as a mouse. He did not have the courage to fight China. Whereas when the US went and threatened Russia with putting bases in Ukraine, Putin took pre-emptive action. Modi can learn from Putin to look after his citizens without discrimination and persecution, and unite India, and then take on external enemies.
India was always non-aligned, it is not due to Modi. Modi in fact craves for western acceptance, as do most Indians. But the Hindu violence Modi has spawned against minorities and even Hindu opponents in India puts off the west. There is a question mark about India. It does not look after its citizens like a democracy in the west, and it is not really strong economywise and militarywise as China. All we see about India is a boastful and vain Hindu nationalism, which reeks of a Hindu ineferiority complex.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HenryTudorVIII Your post is well intentioned, but it betrays a certain naivete and loose thinking. Hence, let me address the points.
'But how does a lack of security guarantees for Putin become a land grab? '
Ukraine had the chance in Dec. 2021 to declare it would be neutral and not join any military alliance against Russia (as it promised in its independence declaration and which backtracked on after the 2014 coup). That would have averted the Russian attack. Why they not do that ?
During the first month of the war, there were negotiations, but Ukraine backed off. Why ?
After driving back the Russians from Kiev, then it could have announced it will go for neutrality. Why did they not offer neutrality from a position of strength ?
You won't be able to answer these whys.
The reason Ukraine did not offer a return to neutrality in Dec. 2021 is because the govts. that have been in power since the 2014 coup are US backed implants, the current one being Zelensky. Whether or not to accept neutrality is not determined by Ukraine's leaders, it is determined by the US. Victoria Nuland and US Democrats had funded Ukrainian nationalists, some of them neo Nazis like Right Sector and Azov Batallion. (Read up on Ukro Nazis, Bandera, Right Sector and Azov Batallion). Naturally, if you are brought to power with US help, you have to do the US's bidding - whether it is Afghan govt. or Ukrainian.
During the first month of the war, there were negotiations between Ukraine and Russia in Turkey, but Ukrainian leaders backed off. The reason is pressure from the US and UK not to compromise. For these people, negotiations with Russia = defeat for the west. They told the Ukrainians they could beat the Russians with advanced weapons. The US has its own agenda - which is regime change in Russia, and eliminate a powerful competitor. Ukraine is only a proxy for the US, like Afghanistan was.
After driving back the Russians from Kiev, the Ukranians egged on by the west were celebrating a victory. The west announced Russia's military was shambolic. They did not think Russia would come back from the back door and concentrate its force. Hence, Ukraine ended up losing land in Donbass, Kherson, and coastal areas, and that is gone for good. The Russians had warned if the Ukranians continued to fight, it stood to lose. Once Russia got the upper hand in Donbas, they were not interested in negotiations. After spending money and blood, why should Russia give back the land ? It is like after the Arab war with Israel, Israel captured the West Bank and Jerusalem, and they will not give those back - and the west who armed Israel accepts that. So like that, Ukraine and the west should accept Donbas will be part of Russia. You threatened and waged war on Russia, so accept the consequences.
Any future settlement will require Ukraine to assure neutrality AND cede Donbass.
'Will this land grab stop ukraine from seeking nato membership? On the contrary, I think this will make Ukraine move even closer to EU and Nato.'
Again, this is a naive question. Putin has said he has no objection to Ukraine joining EU - he said this in the middle of the war. Putin said EU is an economic alliance and he does not have objection. Russia's objection is to NATO which is a military alliance whose mission has always been to surround and threaten Russia. You recognise that more of Ukraine of 1991 is gone. As for the Ukraine that remains, do you think Russia will allow that part to join NATO ? They need not occupy the less Russian regions of Ukraine like Kiev, but they can subject the remainder to continual air attack and prevent reconstruction.
Russia has the strong cards. There is no option of ceding Donbas and getting the remainder of Ukraine into NATO. The cards on the table say the only option is Ukraine to assure neutrality + cede Donbass. If it does not accept that, more of Ukraine will be destroyed and more will be taken. Ukraine's handlers are also facing the economic pinch because Russia has the strong cards for economic warfare as well.
1
-
@UdumbaraMusic If you have the capability, then refute me. But if you don't - and you don't - don't read what I say, you can ignore me.
If you are a small country, and you invite a far off power to come and aid you to threaten your powerful neighbour, and continue to do so after he warned you, then you will get a beating, and the far-off country on who you relied may support you from a safe distance (for sometime) but he cannot prevent you from getting the beating.
Whether it is right or wrong does not matter, the only question is whether you are wise. Ukraine has been foolish besides being wicked in trying to backstab Russia after it gave it independence.
The second aspect is 'do you think the people who invaded Iraq using a false flag attack about WMDs, who used depleted uranium, made Iraqis into refugees, have any credibility when they shout about war crime trials, and go to UN etc. ? It is justified whataboutery. It is not arbitrary as you make out. That is why I have not seen anyone including you write a refutation. They indulge in personal attacks.
1
-
1
-
@UdumbaraMusic 'Ukraine had an 84% voter turnout and 90% voted for independence.'
There was a referendum process which Russia, the central power let happen. They had zero choice according to you, so you want to take advantage and use Ukraine to threaten them now. But they have rebuilt their economic strength (they had always the military strength), as they are showing by strangling Europe's economies.
'That agreement you speak of was null and void the moment Russia invaded in 2014 via merc groups.
That agreement to neutrality became null and void when Ukro Nazis overthrew the elected govt. with US backing. Victoria Nuland and John McCain were in the crowds in the Maidan distributing sweets. What were they doing there ? Suppose in the Scottish independence referendum, Russian politicians came and offered money and support, and then celebrated, would that be acceptable ?
Due to the Ukro Nazis and US interference, Russia took Crimea. Crimea holds Sevastopol, the HQ of Russia's Black Sea fleet. Ukraine had agreed as part of the agreement with Russia on independence to lease Sevastaopol port to Russia. With Ukro Nazis and Russophobes taking power in 2014 due to US machinations, Ukraine could revoke the agreement unilaterally, and then the US Seventh Sea Fleet would sail from Sevastaopol. Russia put a stop to it. Ukrainians have acted in bad faith, and stabbed Russia in the back. The Crimea, Donbass, and the region along the coast past Odessa were built by Catherine the Great and was Russian. Lenin attached it to Ukraine when the Soviet Union was formed. Even on independence, Russia did not ask for these Russian lands to be given back. But after 2014 coup which was a stab in the back, Russia has decided to take back these Russian lands. They are on the way to do that. They need to get Nikolaev, Odessa etc.
As for puppets, you can thank Zelensky, the US puppet who has got Ukraine smashed and a part of it taken away, and more to go. See where western help has landed Ukraine. So what is Zelensky's achievement. It was better under Yankovich.
As for the groups involved in the EuroMaidan coup, read up about Ukro Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion. The Azov was founded by Andrei Biletski, a white supremacist to save the 'white race'. White nationalists from US and Europe used to flock to his training camps.
Inside A White Supremacist Militia in Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy910FG46C4
Zelensky 'not all he's portrayed as' by Western media: Bernardi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEPWgMXut_8
On US motives for NATO expansion, see
New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
They have been planning NATO expansion for the benefit of Lockheed. It is not driven by any love of democracy, it is driven by cynical greed. So cut out your pious humbug.
As for authoritarianism and oligarchs, how is Zelensky different ? He closed Russian language TV channels in Ukraine, arrested Russian language media men. Is that democratic ? Ukraine is amongst the most corrupt countries and the IMF was unwilling to give a loan due to that (it changed after the war, when everything was waived).
Basically, the US took advantage of Russian weakness at the end of the Soviet Union, and it got greedy with NATO expansion. When the first wave of NATO expansion started, Yeltsin had protested citing James Baker promising 'not an inch to the east'. He was told 'that was said to the Soviet Union, you are Russia'. Yeltsin was furious, he said 'you wait, Russia will be back'. Russia is indeed back. It has rebuilt its economy, stopped NATO expansion, it has turned the tables and is strangling Europe's economy, and is holding the nuclear sword. The most far reaching step Russia has taken, even more than the gas cut, is to accelerate non-dollar and non-euro trade. That will chip away at American strength and its capability for military adventures in other countries. The EU will fragment as each one looks out for its own, and fascists and neo-Nazis will come to power (as in Italy and Sweden) and they will end democracy. The west has shot itself in the foot. History has shown most who have fought Russia have lost.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tasiedell3753 The Russian military has taken 20% of Ukraine that produces 90% of its GDP, it has control of the Black Sea outlets, it has cut 20% of Ukraine's electricity supply. Putin has given Ukraine permission to export wheat but Ukraine is misusing it, so he may cancel that agreement; basically Russia is strangling Ukraine's economy and that has not changed one bit, and it has done $1 trillion damage to Ukraine's infrastructure, and will do more, so that Ukraine cannot be reconstructed. Is that losing ?
Ukraine launched a Kherson offensive, there was some bombing of some bridges, then they tried a ground assault, but that was beaten back with heavy casualties for the Ukrainains. After that, they launched an offensive outside Kharkov where it was lightly defended with mostly militas, they captured a few thousand sq. km., that is about 1.8% of what Russia took. They are boasting about it, and the west is beating the propaganda drum for them. But now we hear no news, so that advance near Kharkov has stopped. There is no chance Ukraine can just push ahead, that is wishful thinking. It is like the sinking of the ship, or taking Snake Island. They are symbolic victories, but the ground reality has not changed for Ukraine.
Further, Russia is strangling Europe's economy. Europe is losing. There is no cheap alternative to Russian gas. Europe will have to ration energy, some governments will try to tackle it by giving subsidies either by printing money or by borrowing, and both have negative consequences. The Russian plan is to de-industrialise Europe. Then Europe will never again be able to threaten Russia with NATO and US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sudhirlakshmanan
The western media says India lost land to China. Indian media and you say 'Not even a cm of land was surrendered. '
No one knows. You want to believe Indian media. Fine. Western media does twist and even lie when it comes to its challengers like Russia and China, but probably on an Indo-China affair, in which they have no interest, they would not lie.
Even in the Indo-Pak war, the western media doubted Indian air strikes hit anything more than trees. If I remember correctly, India lost a plane and the pilot was captured, but returned; I don't think India disputes this, so how can you say India won ?
Anyway, your thread is your claim that Putin and Modi are the most powerful leaders the world has seen in the 21st century.
I say there is no comparison. Putin is a strong leader, he can take on the US + EU together, both militarily and in economic war and win. Putin does not create divisions in the Russian Federation. He does not organise riots against Ukrainians or other ethnicities.
Modi's power base is Hindu, and he thrives on Hindu mobs attacking Muslims, Christians, Sikhs etc. You regard that as a powerful leader.
In the western media, Modi's brand is called 'Hindu natonalism'. It is more akin to fascism and is disintegrative.
I have been to India, before Modi and after Modi. I have been to China and many countries. India has been disappointing. You go to Shanghai, and you see it is more developed than Europe. You come to Bangalore, you will see chaotic traffic, and unbelievable noise. Once I was going from a hotel to Bombay airport. I was trapped by an oncoming Hindu procession with the elephant god on a chariots; they told me it was a religious festival. If you go to northern cities, you have cows on streets.
To people in India, it might seem India has become a great power because Modi says so. But have you been outside India ? Go to not only China, go to Singapore, Malaysia, Turkey, Dubai and you will see India is no match. That is why Indians migrate. How many Indians have gone back to India because Modi is a strong leader ? And how many are leaving ?
Indian society revolves around caste and religion. It always was like that, but under Modi, that is the ONLY thing. India has slipped in economic growth, education, democratic standards, protection of minorities and women. After the Leicester riots, BBC and The Guardian noted that Modi's Hindu nationalists are spreading their mob riot culture abroad. It is disgraceful.
Kissinger had said long ago that India is the largest unimportant country. Objectively, that is the correct assessment even now, despite PM Singh's great efforts (I did appreciate him). Apart from large population, India has no major achievements commensurate with that population. Recently, the US and EU said that Russia is the main threat now, and China is the long term challenger. Nobody mentions India as it is not a real competitor to anyone.
To me, Indians suffer from an inferiority complex arising from frustrated impotence. Your comment illustrates that. It is wishful thinking. Indians would like to be a superpower. But aspirations do not match ability. To be a superpower, India would need to eliminate the caste system and religious intolerance, get fully educated and thereby reduce population, and cultivate a scientific attitude. Can Modi do that ? Putin does not carry all this baggage that India and Modi do. So, no comparison.
1
-
1
-
@sudhirlakshmanan ' no my aim is not to praise the Modi government.'
But you are the one who wrote Modi is the most powerful leader in this century. That could be true only if you meant he has a grip on India, and any one opposing him will be neutered by any means. But it does not mean Modi has any world impact or is admired outside.
On the hunger index, are you saying the methodology was inapplicable only to India ? What about countries in the list like China who are much higher up ? A visit to India shows Indians look scrawny and famished compared with people in other countries. A visit to China shows people look well fed. So the data correlates with what we see in a visit to India.
India comes bottom on many indicators. I remember a few years, India was near bottom for women's safety and rape.
India comes near the bottom in Olympics medals. That is not subjective or wrong methodolgy.
On the Covid situation, I saw (on BBC) pyres burning on streets and bodies floating on the Ganges. I did not see such a pitiful scenes anywhere. I don't know if Modi was fooling around, but facts are facts.
I have no hate for India. But I feel Indians can be more successful if they did not talk too much, but solved their problems like corruption, caste, religious fanaticism, and the chaos you mentioned. Instead, they blame the British, or someone else, and then pose as the greatest country. Indians don't solve their problems, but Indians boast there is no leader like Modi and the world is in awe of India. I do not see that kind of mentality in the Chinese. Their results speak for itself. Indians can learn to be doers like the Chinese rather than talkers.
1
-
@sudhirlakshmanan You may not be seeing the poverty in India because you may be from some elite caste and you may be surrounded by them.
When you come out of any airport in India, and see the crowds, you can see the difference.
On the Ganges and dead bodies during Covid, I am only saying what I saw on the BBC. I don't think it was bias. BBC also showed there is a southern state called Kerala which had lower Covid mortality due to the Health Minster there. In fact, the BBC asked this Minister what she could teach Britain on controlling the spread of Covid. Earlier, there was a flood in Kerala, and the BBC coverage was sympathetic and it showed the people there worked together with the government. It is not all dismal in India, but Kerala appears to be an exception as it is unusually educated. It could be because it has a high number of Christians. I understand the cow lynchers and rapists are in the north.
You are claiming that traditions will vanish and people will be using electric crematoria. But I read Modi is a great traditionalist and is promoting cow veneration. People are lynched for it. Where in the world do you see this ?
On Olympics, yes, everyone wants to be a doctor in India, so people don't go for sports. But Jamaica and Kenya win medals. For 1.3 billion, India's performance is dismal. Same with Nobel prizes. There are none since India became independent. Which Indian University has made it to even the top 300 ? China has several, Singapore University is up there.
Whichever metric you look at, India does not excel in any. Granted you have good cuisine, and colourful dresses, but overall India's performance is poor on most metrics. Yet, you are claiming Modi is the most powerful leader of this century. Countries like Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, UAE, Singapore etc. keep quiet and work, and come up. India talks too much and feels entitled to great power status, just because it has a large population.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@freeheeler09 If the west escalates by supplying weapons, instead of persuading Zelensky to negotiate, it is possible that Putin will settle it with a tactical nuclear weapon. After all the, US did it on Japan, and they defend it saying it brought an end to the war. A CIA man has said so, even Zelensky thinks so, he is almost resigned to it. But it will not lead to a world war. Neither the US and NATO want to fight a nuclear war, as they cannot win that, because Russia will do in kind. If they drop a tactical nuke on Kiev, the west will shout about a war crime, but will not do beyond that.
If the west wants to save Ukraine, instead of its own false pride, it will make Zelensky negotiate now. The problem is the west feels that then Putin has won.
Alternatively, Russia takes Mariopol, and Donbass and then agrees to negotiate (it is a good bargain), without having to use the nuke.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@currawong60911368 I was not referring to Budapest Memorandum, so don't make assumptions. Ukraine's conditions for independence were not laid out there. Ukraine had to return the nukes to Russia and agree it will not be part of any military alliance against Russia. Otherwise Ukraine would not have got independence. Ukraine's declaration of independence said it would be neutral and that was prior to Budapest Memorandum.
The Budapest Memorandum allows the use of force against Ukraine in self defence. After the 2014 coup instigated by the US, Ukraine wanted to join NATO, thereby threatening Russia with US bases. The US would have placed missiles with a few minutes striking distance of Moscow, and it would have shut out the Russian Black Sea fleet. Thus, in self defence, Russia acted against Ukraine.
The Budapest Memorandum assumes US, UK, Russia and Ukraine would cooperate. But the US, UK and Ukraine sneakily plotted against Russia, to get Ukraine into NATO, a military alliance that threatens Russia. Hence, these three sabotaged the Budapest Memorandum, and so Ukraine will not exist.
Russia gave Ukraine independence in good faith, even giving away Russian lands like Crimea, Odessa and even Kiev etc. But Ukraine tried to stab Russia in the back. And the US was behind this incitement - as usual.
Now you have the result. Ukraine will be no more, it will be partitioned, the Russian part will return to Russia; what may be left will have to agree to be neutral or it will be turned into a wasteland. And the US and UK don't have the guts to go and fight for Ukraine. If they feel the Budapest Memorandum was violated by Russia rather than Ukraine, why don't they send their troops as signatories who guaranteed to defend Ukraine ? Since they have not, they agree to the exception clause that force can be used against Ukraine if Ukraine threatens the security of a signatory.
Ukraine's declaration of independence which said it would be neutral was in 1991, Budapest Memorandum was in 1994. Get it ? Don't come here with your half knowledge.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kingpietro1279 'because they invaded a country in europe that hasn't happenned since world war 2. Withouth any good reason.'
The second statement is a Boris Johnson style pretence of innocence. The US has sought missile and naval bases in Ukraine to shut Russia out from the Black Sea. This was the provocation by the US and its vassals. Ukraine is merely a pawn. It is not an independent democratic state. The US (under the neocon Jew Victoria Nuland) organised a coup in 2014 to overthrow the elected govt. of Victor Yankovich, and install a US friendly regime.
So don't pretend innocence. There is good reason for Russia to react as it did. And now you know the cost for Ukraine and Europe. You will supply long range missiles to Ukraine, help them strike Russia, and when Russia hits UK assets as it has said it will do, you will claim it was ' Without any good reason, first time of WW 2. ' You can plead innocence, but Russia has the capacity to destroy Britain with a single hypersonic Sarmat missile, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. It has the capacity to do the same to all NATO nations, and if push comes to shove, Russia will do it. Come out of your delusions about your innocence, you have been warned about the consequences, so don't force Russia to do something it does not want to. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@redeyexxx1841 Read what I wrote. The commitment to neutrality was in Ukraine's Independence Declaration, not Budapest Memorandum. Even recently Putin said he had no objection to Ukraine joining the EU (an economic alliance). NATO is a military alliance with the sold purpose of attacking Russia. Ukraine wanted to join it after 2014 US sponsored coup, it is paying the price for reneging on the commitment to neutrality.
Article 2 of Budapest Memorandum
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
The parties can use weapons against Ukraine in self defence. Ukraine wanted to get into NATO, give US missile and naval bases, and use Article 5 to get the US to threaten Russia. Hence, in pre-emptive self defence, Russia took a military technical action against Ukraine according to the Budapest Memorandum.
Article 6 of Budapest Memorandum
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.
Russia requested a consultation with the US for a security guarantee in Dec, 2021, the US declined which is a violation of Article 6. The US had acted in bad faith - they wanted to have bases in Ukraine by hook or crook.
Also the Budapest Memorandum did not foresee western duplicity. One guarantor the US conspired with Ukraine to threaten the most important guarantor, Russia. That was sheer wickedness. Hence, Ukraine is a failed country.
Hence the situation today. The Ukraine of 1991 is gone for good, part will be re-absorbed and the remainder either has to sign neutrality or face being turned into a wasteland. With US guidance, Ukraine that remains will be a wasteland.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@trytwicelikemice3190 The problem is the Baltics and Poland have become belligerent, and they are living dangerously because they think they have US support. Ukraine also thought the same, and tried to misbehave with Russia, and it got beaten into a pulp.
Look at Lithuania. In 2022, it tried to show off by organising a blockade of Russian trains to Kaliningrad, piously stating it was enforcing EU sanctions. Lithuania's independence was based on giving Russian trains to Kaliningrad a land corridor. Two weeks later a Russian politician said it was time to reconsider Lithuania's independence. The media reported Russia can seize the Suwalki corridor and cut off the Baltics. Within a few days, Lithuania climbed down and abandoned the blockade. If it had not, Russia would have seized the Baltics regardless of Article 5 - and the Lithuanians would have found the US would not come to fight for it, and the rest of the Europeans are useless.
As for Poland, it acts like America's attack dog. Putin reminded that Poland was a gift of Stalin. If it had been left to Germany, there would be no Poland. The Poles were unable to free themselves from the Germans. If they had waited for the British, they would have been waiting a long time. It was the Red Army that got to Auschwitz and freed the Poles. Stalin could have incorporated Poland into the Soviet Union, but he did not. Stalin gave one of the Red Army's greatest generals, Konstantin Rokossovsky, a Polish officer who became a Marshall of the Soviet Union, to become Poland's defence minister. I would advise the Poles not to be ingrates.
So don't put on self-righteous airs about the Baltics, Poland, EU and NATO. You want to bait the bear, then don't cry when the bear mauls you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The British Army is certainly not a fighting force against Russia - no one in NATO is, not even the US when it comes to fighting the Russian army. The Ukrainains can fight because they are Little Russians, hardy people from the same family. If NATO for one moment thought it could win, it would have sent troops to Ukraine. While they scraped through in Afghanistan with a few thousand of NATO forces killed in 20 years, fighting Russia would involve tens of thousands of western soldiers killed . Afghan fighters only had RPGs mounted on Toyota pickups and IEDs. Russia on the other hand has unbelievable firepower.
In WW 2, as the Red Army approached Berlin, Gen. Montogomery asked Gen. Eisenhower who was in charge of the western command, whether the western armies could race to Berlin before the Soviets. Eisenhower stopped the silly idea as he was sure the Red Army would not stop with fighting the Germans, but it would fight the western armies. He had seen the Red Army was willing to take any casualties which the US army cannot.
The British Defence Minister Ben Wallace said in the first month that a alliance of Britain, France and Turkey kicked the backside of the Tsar in the Crimean War in the 1850s, and it could do it again ! It struck me as vain bravado and British delusions of being a great power (a colonial nostalgia). Now the US general says the British do not have an army. They cannot afford it. Ben Wallace demands money but Sunak in the present condition cannot afford it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Crashed131963 There can be no European security without security for Russia. You understand ? Russia has been invaded and suffered grievously due to Europeans - Swedes, Poles, French, Germans. It is in Russia's collective memory. The US does not share a continent with Europe, but it comes to disturb European security on behest of its arms mafia. After blowing up Nordstream pipe, it is clear that the US is a predator that will stab even its allies for gain.
In Ukraine, the US is seeking not only missile bases, it is seeking naval bases. Sevastopol in the Crimea is the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet. If Ukraine joined NATO, it could ask Russia to leave Sevastopol and the US Seventh Fleet will sail from there. Russia therefore took Crimea. Russia is not going to allow US missile and naval bases in the Ukraine. That is a red line it will not allow the US to cross. If Russia needs to take back Ukraine, or destroy it, or nuke it, so be it. . Putin had said he has no objection to Ukraine joining EU - that is an economic alliance. But he will not allow NATO spreading its tentacles in Russia's underbelly.
The US has a Monroe doctrine that says the US will not allow any non-American power to come to the Americas and set up military bases. So don't moralise and put on airs.
Sweden and Finland are irrelevant countries. Even if the Turks permitted them to join, they will not make NATO any stronger. NATO is an alliance for weaklings. This war has proved Russia is stronger than US and Europe put together. Russia was not planning to attack Sweden or Finland. But if these countries misbehave like Ukraine and threaten Russia, then Russia will hit them, whether NATO or no NATO. Lithuania which is in NATO tried to blockade Kaliningrad using EU sanctions as an excuse. One Russian politician said Lithuanian independence should be cancelled. Then the EU panicked and asked Lithuania to climb down. Russia does carry the big stick and will use it against those who threaten it, whether it is US or Ukraine. You need to sobre up to the reality. Sir Putin says 'if you hit me once, I shall hit you twice'. That is how he deals with the west.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RRDARGAD ' India's strength is its rising GDP'
Even that is grossly misleading. GDP is linked to population, and India's population is rising, it has overtaken China. More relevant is the GDP per capita or per capita income. On that India, is now lower than Bangladesh, at around $ 2500. China is $ 8000, Europe $ 60,000 and US around $ 80,000.
There is no point saying India has overtaken GB's GDP. GB is achieving the equivalent GDP with 60 million people, India with 1.3 billion people.
In all other matters of welling being, India comes in the bottom 30 - in standard of living, infra structure, literacy, health care, housing, transport, security of women, security of minorities, corruption. These have all worsened under Modi.
Modi is riding on the wealth created by Singh and Chidambaram. Some things clicked for him this year which he could appropriate even though these are from existing programmes of previous governments - the moon landing, G 20. His own programmes like demonetisation knocked off 2.5% of GDP; Covid handling was poor and people were cremated on pavements; China took Indian land and he could not do anything.
As for image, no doubt in the eyes of his Hindu devotees, he is a Hindu god. But the image abroad is riots in Manipur and vandalisation of churches, bulldozing of Muslim homes etc.
What one sees in the Indian media is excessive self projection and boasting. It comes across as a gross Hindu inferiority complex. China and many other nations have progressed without making self-proclamations about being a world power. Hindus in the Modi era have developed a vain boastfulness which was not there in earlier days.
Modi is an uneducated Hindu with a sordid past of genocide, it sounds like he is trying to cover up for that. The Hindus have pinned their hopes on him, so they also look they are covering up for hollow content.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@leisakovacek8965 Russia does not dream of taking over the world, it is US neocons who published after the end of the Cold War that the US would take steps to remain the sole superpower forever. Russia has ended that US dream rudely. It has ended the-neo colonial world order for good.
'But their "Kiev in 3 days" operation failed...'
Russia never said it was a 3 day operation. Show me a video. A US general said it. It is typical of western propagandists to make up lines, attribute it to Russians, and the low IQ like you cite it.
'...now they have been taking over several streets of a small city for 6 months. '
Why does it bother you so much that it is a small city ? The Ukranians don't feel so. Why does the time bother you ? The Red Army took time to demolish the German Nazis, and the Russians need time to demolish the Ukro Nazis and their foreign supporters.
'Ukraine can win, the only question is when they have enough weapons to do so'
With the Himars, Zelensky said he would take Crimea by Dec 2022. His Kherson offensive could not get past the river in Kherson city. It has petered out.
As for supply of weapons, Stoltenberg has said the west cannot supply shells and ammo at the rate Ukraine is using. Lately after the EU said it would crank up production, and announced a figure, Zelensky said it is only 1/4 of what Ukraine needs.
Therefore from your own statement (that Ukraine can win if it has enough weapons), it follows Ukraine will lose as its handlers cannot supply the weapons in quantity.
It is a lost cause. Russia is stronger than the west combined, they have defeated the west in economic warfare and military warfare. You need to apply your intellect and analyse the causes for your failure.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dragon723. Cut out your pious humbug. You froze Russia's euro assets, so your currency became worthless to Russia. You made your currency worthless, why should they accept payment in euros which they can't use ? It will be equivalent to supplying gas free. You can't have something for nothing.
Russia attacked Ukraine because the US was attempting get Ukraine into NATO, so the US could get missile and naval bases to threaten Russia. Don't pretend you do not know.
When Warsaw Pact was dissolved, why was not NATO dissolved ? Russia was given to understand at the very least NATO would not be expanded eastwards. But the west was duplicitous. It thought it could have its cake and eat it.
Russia objected many times to NATO expansion to its borders. It asked for a security guarantee from the US and a peace treaty in Dec. 2021. The US refused. Then Russia said it will take military-technical action.
This video of BASF is entirely correct. It is the world's biggest chemical plant, ingeniously interconnected so all waste products are converted to something useful. If BASF will shut down, Germany and Europe will be de-industrialised. Aluminium, glass and steel plants have been shut in France and Germany, and as the losses pile up, they will not be re-opened. One day, you will buy aluminium, glass and steel from China and India and Russia ! That is, if you still make something in exchange.
With your European arrogance and indifference to Russian security, you deserve what is coming - after de-industrialisation of Europe, you will not be able to threaten Russia again using Ukraine and other proxies. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, the US has screwed Europe and is responsible for Europe's predicament. In 2008, Germany and France (Merkel and Sarkozy) did oppose Ukraine's induction into NATO. Merkel had warned it will lead to war. However, Bush twisted their arms, and the US pursued Ukraine's induction into NATO. The infamous US ambassador to Ukraine, Victora Nuland (neo con Zionist and wife of Robert Kagan, an archietct of the Iraq invasion) had said 'f..k the EU'.
Europe's natural partner for business would have been Russia. It was a win-win situation and Germany did nothing wrong. However, an Euroasian economy (EU, Russia, China and India) would have been formidable and would have left out the US. The US was determined to prevent that and keep Europe dependent on it. The strategy was to use the Eastern Europeans to push for NATO expansion. Rumsfeld had said in the 1990s that the US does not need the old Europe (France and Germany), it will work with the New and Real Europe (Poland, Lithuania etc.). Now that the US has used NATO to create a war in Europe, the Europeans ironically line up behind America for protection, although the EU is the loser. NATO expansion and the resulting war with Russia interrupts the emergence of an Euroasian economy. But it does not prevent Russia, China and India working together and that undermines the EU and the US. Europe is the biggest loser : dependent on America for military support, but economically damaged by aligning with America. With the risk of stagflation, neo Nazi groups will stalk Germany and France. The neo Nazis were already an under current in Europe.
Unless Germany stands up for EU independence from the US, Europe is gone.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Metoo3232-pu2wc 'That is only because they don't have 5% of the weaponry Russia has. 2.5 years into the war they still don't have F16s, atacms, proper air defenses, ammo, enough armor etc etc'
When Ukraine went for its famous counter offensive, Stoltenberg said that Ukraine had 98% of what it needed. Did Ukraine achieve 98% of its objectives ? You will find their record is minus despite having what they needed.
If they went to war and 'they still don't have F16s, atacms, proper air defenses, ammo, enough armor etc etc.', whose fault is it - the people who had these and incited Ukraine to war, or the Ukrainians for being dumb enough to believe they could defeat Russia ?
Could it be that the people who have 'F16s, atacms, proper air defenses, ammo, enough armor etc' do not have enough at the rate Ukraine consumes them ? If so, why did they push Ukraine to fight when they cannot supply them ?
Why are you making excused for the defeated ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@not.likely Putin said that in a certain context. Did you hear his full speech ? It was about why Russia decided to cancel the grain deal. He explained that Russia cancelled it not to create a food shortage or raise prices, and make poor countries starve (as western media make out) but because the west did not do its share of the deal.
He said that the grain deal was not a unilateral concession to Ukraine. Behind the grain deal was the understanding that Russian grain and fertiliser exports specifically would not be hampered by shipping obstacles and payment obstacles for SWIFT. Russia supplies 20% of the world's grain and fertilisers, Ukraine only 5%. Thus he explained cutting off Ukranian grain does not cause food shortage so much as cutting off Russian grain. If the west was so concerned about food for African nations, it would not block Russia's grain by shipping obstacles and payment obstacles for SWIFT.
He said the west profited from Ukrainian grain (90% went to the west), while mouthing holy propaganda for Africans. Seeing this, and the west continuing the attempt to block Russian grain and fertiliser export, Russia withdrew from the grain deal. As Ukraine and the west did not fulfill its side of the bargain, Russia blocked Ukraine's grain exports, and thereby Ukraine has lost $ 500 million of income. The west will have to spend that money to subsidise Ukraine.
Russia is doing economic harm to Ukraine and the west in the same measure as the west does to Russia. You continue with economic warfare, and Russia will also do the same in kind. That was the context.
It is the same as when the west blocked Russia from Swift and took its euro and dollar savings, and so Russia asked for payment for gas in roubles. The west refused. Then Russia said it will not give gas for currency that is worthless for Russia (euros and dollars). Russia did not choose an economic war. Russia did not weaponise energy as the west says. The west weaponised its currency, and the result is Russia said no gas, and it triggered the global de-dollarisation move.
It is the same as the grain deal. Russia allowed Ukraine to ship grain on the understanding that the economic restrictions on Russian shipment of grain will also be lifted; that is, a tradeoff. The west did not reciprocate, so that is the end of Ukranian grain. All part of economic war - and make no mistake, Russia is up to it.
Listen to Putin's speech in full and in context. Quoting selectively is propaganda.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
After all the claims that NATO is the most powerful and richest military alliance in the world, it is absolute cowardice not to take up Sir Putin's gentlemanly invitation for a duel. He has said no civilians will be targeted, he will give one hour's notice before Miss Hazel arrives, and the test will be on the neutral ground of Ukraine. The west has no chance of stopping Miss Hazel, but even so, the challenge must be accepted.
In Pushkin's time, people regarded it as a matter of honour not to refuse a duel. But nowadays in the west, there is no concept of honour, and cowardice and duplicity reign. The US incited Ukraine to war against Russia and the EU fell in line, and when their plans went awry, they decided to distance themselves from Ukraine and seek negotiations ! This is a very shameful episode of opportunism and cowardice in western history.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@parthbhatt2648 ' Verna not as some privilege but more like job titles in which anybody can become anybody, But bound by birth.'
You are contradictory, your Brahmamic deviousness catches up. People can be anybody, but bound by birth !
The Indian intellectual Ambedkar denounced the Ramayana because of the abominable story of Rama beheading the untouchable Shambuka because he recited the Vedas. It was above the untouchable's station. So your statement 'Ramayana and Mahabharata don't promote caste discrimination but rather teach the opposite in flawed societies' is a lie. All Hindu texts glorify the Brahmin.
'Who has more wisdom gets more dignity. But it's universal, for example, an educated person is always taken more seriously than an illiterate one. '
The Manu code prescribes pouring molten lead into the ears of the low caste if he hears the Vedas ! Thus, the low caste can never be taken seriously because he will never be allowed education. Hindu society is the only one which promotes learning for a minority, and actively prevents learning of the majority. This Hindu code is the reason India cannot ever become developed like the west, or Russia, or China.
'Inversely if a Brahmin gets the training and becomes a soldier, he'd be a Kshatriya then, nothing wrong with that.'
Yes, Brahmin can become anything and do anything. But the outcaste does not have the same privilege. So no point citing what a Brahmin can do, or citing his privilege.
'And lastly, if you're taking the nazi route, then the actual nazis were Christian then'.
Hindu leaders like Golwalkar wrote praise of Hitler for showing race pride, and said India should mete out the same treatment to Muslims and Christians in India. His followers like Modi are carrying it out. The Hinduism you have today is an imitation of a failed and condemned German model.
You are indulging in Brahmin doublespeak - just like Vivek Ramasamy. But his Brahmanic mentality will get exposed.
1
-
1
-
Victory for the Ukraine is not possible, and the leaders know it. Biden's strategy for Ukraine is to try to prevent it collapsing before elections. If Biden wins, he will delegate Ukraine management to the Europeans, who are useless. He will focus on his next war against China. If Trump wins, that is curtains for Ukraine, he will not even pretend otherwise, and he may also withdraw from NATO.
Hence, don't indulge in wishful thinking, the Ukraine war was lost in 2023. Ukraine cannot retrieve Crimea and the four oblasts, and if it persists, it will lose more.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@yasminesteinbauer8565 The blame game against Germany is done by Poland, Baltics, US and UK. Germany is accused of not being sufficiently militarised. Once Germany was once the bane of Europe and restrictions were put on German militarisation. Hence, it is unfair and opportunistic for those who put curbs on German militarisation to blame Germany for not having military production. Germany learned from its history, and it does not want to have a war with Russia or a war in Europe. Germany did nothing wrong in developing economic relations with Russia. It was beneficial for all - Russia, Germany, and all of Europe. That is not in the US interest. The US is facing challenges from China, India, Russia, the ME and others against its hegemony. Only Europe is under its belt culturally. But even Europe was economically drifting away from the US and becoming part of a giant Eurasian economy which connected Europe, Russia, China and India, leaving out the US.
As some of the European public now suspects US motives on Nordstream and Ukraine, and there is some public opposition growing in Europe to NATO, the US felt the need to deflect suspicion of NATO and US. Put the blame on Ukraine, they have a plausible motive. The problem is everyone doubts they have the technical capacity to blow up Nordstream.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@philipmain5701 Don't put on airs of innocence. James Baker is now irrelevant to you - now. You can lie and cheat, and that is permissible, that is why your 'rules based international order' is not credible. Russia has ended your order and the rest of the world appreciates them.
If Sweden and Finland have military capability, they would not need to join NATO. If they are so capable, why don't they send troops to Ukraine ?
'If you had taken note of article 5 of NATO's constitution you will observe that NATO has never been an invasive threat to Russia '
What is there in Article 5 for Russia to know NATO is not a threat ? It is Russia's perception that decides if it is a threat or not. If the US gets missile and naval bases in Ukraine, it shuts out Russia from the Black Sea. Russia is not going to allow that, and it is ready to fight a nuclear war to stop it. There can be no security in Europe without Russian security. Get it ?
Ukraine is the biggest loser, it is not going to exist. The cost for the west is (1) 9 million refugees that you have to feed and house (2) de-industrialisation of even Germany due to high energy price (3) high defence hike and expenditure on NATO's bureaucracy, which is worse than the EU bureaucracy (4) western economies are squeezed with low living standards leading to riots in France, UK etc. and (5) onset of dedollarisation .
Ukraine is not in NATO, why are you arming it ? When Russia asked for a security guarantee, you could have given it and averted the war. Instead, you allowed the war to happen. And when Ukraine negotiated a settlement in Turkey, Boris Johnson went and blocked it. Why ? So don't pretend innocence, it is nauseating.
And if NATO is such a defensive alliance, what was it doing in Afghanistan ? Bloody liar.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thatgoofyvrguy The turning point of the war was when Russia took time out in the first half of 2023 to build the Surovikin defence line to stem the Ukrainian counter offensive. The Russians even withdrew from the west bank of Kherson as they might have been trapped; it was a politically difficult decision for Putin, but he went with his general and it was the correct decision militarily. The west had been trumpeting the Ukrainian counter offensive for 9 months. So the Russians built a barricade and waited. The counter offensive started later, and the Ukrainians impaled themselves on the Surovikin defence line. They lost a lot of troops and armour. Once the Ukrainians were beaten back, Russia gained the initiative and Ukraine has been on the defensive, notwithstanding Kursk. The Russians have killed off the best men in the Ukrainian army, and the west has run out of weapons, and the west does not have the industrial capacity to ramp up.
The Russians are master chess players. Sometimes if there is an attack, you need to stem it, defend and beat it off; then, you can go on the attack. The decision to withdraw from Kherson, and defend against the counter offensive was brilliant. The Russians were caught by surprise in Kursk but their reaction shows military astuteness. They did not panic, they decided not to draw troops out of Donbass to immediately force the Ukrainians out of Kursk. The west said it was a big humiliation for Putin. He did not show any. The Russians took steps to block Ukraine's advance to capture the Kursk power plant, and the best Ukrainian troops got pinned in Kursk - unable to advance or retreat. It allowed Russia to advance more quickly in the Donbass.
Thus, Russia now sets the negotiation terms. Ukraine has to surrender the rest of Donbass, and agree to neutrality, otherwise Russia will take it by force - and it will take more than Donbass. There is nothing Ukraine or the west can do.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anoriolkoyt Kissinger revealed what Americans think, it is not a stupid comment at all. Japan, S. Korea, Western Europe, Canada, all are vassals of the US. They have to go and die for the US in Afghanistan, and when the US leaves, it does not bother to tell the vassals.
Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Iraq to die for the Americans. Now, the Americans don't want to send troops to Ukraine and die for them. The Americans incited Ukraine to fight Russia, but when the Russians gave Ukraine a good thrashing, the Americans said 'we don't want you in NATO now, because that would mean we would be killed like you by the Russians'.
It is the European vassals who are stupid to follow America and commit economic and military suicide for America.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@carlosbaez7884 You don't know that the US fought Taliban for 20 years, dragging NATO along. After 20 years, the US under Trump negotiated with Taliban in 2021 in Doha (without NATO !) , and as soon Biden came, he withdrew from Kabul. The American troops dashed to the airport as the Taliban have a deadline. The Americans cornered the first flights out of Kabul, and forgot to tell NATO allies that it was leaving !!! Shameless people.
You don't know about this ? Where have you been ? Did you start reading the news on 24 Feb 2022 ?
It says two things about the US and NATO. They will not fight if they face casualties, because they do not want to die. The second is the US uses allies and ditches them when it does not need them - and that includes NATO. That is what we see with Ukraine also, just like Afghanistan. The US financed the Maidan coup in 2014, trained the Ukranian army to fight Russians, provided weapons etc., made them feel they were special and about to be inducted into NATO, but when the Russians put their foot down, the US and NATO watched from the sidelines, said they would not put soldiers or a 'no fly zone', as they don't want to get killed. They gave the Ukranians some arms. The US will fight Russia to the last Ukranian. If the Russians settle it with a tactical nuclear weapon, believe me the US and NATO will shout about war crime, but they will not do anything. I would never trust the US as an ally. Every country that has allied or served the US has been a door mat -whether they are Afghans, Latin Americans, Pakistanis, Arabs, Europeans, Ukranians..... Of course Europeans and Ukranians may think Americans have a special bond for them, but evidence shows despite that, the US is opportunist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@philipmain5701 The last Article of the Budapest memorandum says in the event of a disagreement, all 4 parties (Ukraine, Russia, US and UK) would sit together and resolve it. When Putin sent a letter in Dec. 2021 asking Biden for a security guarantee and a promise not to put missile and naval bases in Ukraine targeting Russia, Biden did not agree to negotiate. After Russia and Ukraine reached an agreement in Turkey, BoJo sabotaged it. It is clear that US, UK and Ukraine did not want to abide by the last Article of the Budapest memorandum.
Russia showed goodwill in allowing German reunification and dissolving Warsaw Pact. If Warsaw Pact was dissolved, NATO should have been dissolved. Instead, the US has sought NATO expansion as it benefits the US military. Russia did not expect this. Russia allowed the US and UK to be a guarantor for Ukraine. Instead, the US and UK conspired with Ukraine to get Ukraine into NATO, which is an anti-Russian military alliance. This was against the spirit of the Budapest Memorandum from Russia's perspective.
Hence the war. Russia has ensured there will be no NATO bases in Ukraine. If Ukraine does not exist, that is the price it has to pay for conspiring against Russia despite Russia giving it independence under favourable terms, even giving away historic Russian lands like Crimea, Kiev and Odessa. If the US wants to reverse the situation, Russia is ready to fight a nuclear war.
What more needs explanation ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nintendokings Have you read the Budapest agreement whose signatories were Russia, US and the UK ? Did you understand it ? Read before you come with disinformation.
Article 2 says weapons can be used against Ukraine in self defence, that is if it threatens the security of the other signatories. Ukraine is not going to threaten US and UK, but it has played the game of allying with US and UK to threaten the security of Russia. Hence, Russia is entitled to take action against Ukraine in self defence, including and up to cancelling Ukraine's independence.
2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
Article 6.The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.
As per article 6, Russia wrote to the US for a security guarantee to the US on 17 Dec. 2021 that US weapons will not be placed in Ukraine threatening Russia. The US refused to agree.
We have an unexpected problem that Ukraine lined up with two of its guarantors to threaten Russia. So end of the Budapest Memorandum.
1
-
@jasonasdecker Ukraine's declaration of independence said it would be a neutral state which would not join any military alliance. Without that commitment, Russia would not have given Ukraine independence.
You are phrasing the Budapest Memorandum to suit your perspective 'Ukraine also promised to give up their nuclear weapons if Russia would respect their territory and UK and the USA promised to defend them if they gave up their nuclear weapons (this treaty was called The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances)'.
This is what article 2 says
2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
It says weapons can be used against Ukraine in self defence - which is what Russia has done. Now you may say Ukraine has not invaded Russia. However, an unexpected and perhaps unforseen situation was created when Ukraine sought to use the two other signatories to threaten Russia through the NATO military alliance. This act of conspiring with NATO powers when considered in light of Russia agreeing to Ukraine's independence according to the neutrality as pledged in Ukraine's declaration of independence, represents an insidious breach of trust and Russia has every right to take action. As far as Russia is concerned, Ukraine's independence is now null and void. Ukraine will be broken up and taken back into Russia. If the other two signatories want to defend Ukraine, Putin asked them to come to the battlefield in Ukraine. Why don't they go ?
Since Ukraine did not respect in spirit the conditions for its independence and embarked instead on the course of Russophobia and Nazism, and conspired with Russia's enemies, Russia is going to demolish them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The comedian beggar has gone begging for more weapons from another useless country, Poland.
Meanwhile Polish farmers are starting a big agitation against the import of Ukrainian wheat, as it is killing them. They demand the imports be stopped. It is proof that Ukraine-solidarity will end the moment the economic pinch gets too much ! The European politicians put on a heroic pose of fighting Russia, but the European public will shout when they lose jobs and livelihoods.
You get a different picture from the western media in the non-western media. The Hindustan Times reports that the real reason for Zelenksy's visit to Poland is to start setting up a western coalition for negotiations. He realises with the fall of Bakhmut, the game is up for Ukraine. The spring offensive is not going to succeed, the Russians have fortified the entire line, they will see it off, and after that, Ukraine and the west have nothing. Ukraine's troops have been massacred, and the west cannot supply enough shells. Zelensky himself said unless the west can supply weapons in quantity, he cannot undertake an offensive. The western media still spins false hopes for its public but the non-west can see what is happening,
The western media have to continue putting on a pose as the west seeks an 'honourable exit' from Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@angusmatheson8906 'Baker had no authority, it was off the record...'
You mean you want something for nothing. Listen son, with Russia either you play straight, or you don't play at all. If you agree to pay 10 roubles, they will not ask for more, or settle for less. If you indulge in your customary mischief and try to cheat afterwards, they will punch you in the face. Get it ?
'russias actions prove that NATO membership is pretty crucial to prevent Pooty from playing soldier'
So has Ukraine got NATO membership after Russia's action ? Biden said in the Vilnius NATO summit in 2023 Ukraine cannot join NATO and there is no road map. Lately, Blinken made statements that Ukraine will join NATO after the war - it is face saving statement to hide defeat. After the war, there will be no more Ukraine to join NATO.
If Ukraine had not announced after the US sponsored coup of 2014 it wanted to join NATO, Ukraine would have had the borders of 1991, including Crimea. The day it announced it wanted to join NATO, Putin took back Crimea. And Ukraine lost 4 more oblasts, and is in the process of losing more.
Then what evidence is your statement of NATO membership being advantageous, based on ? You are a numskull.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@melvynparke6548 Putin did not say it would be a 3 day special operation, I challenge you to send me a link to prove it. It was said by a US general, whose expectation it was. This US general was quoted ad nauseum by the western press and then attributed to Putin. For the west, Ukraine cannot evict the Russians, and that is a defeat. The only solace the west has is to say Russia claimed it will take Ukraine in 3 days. Russia has only stated that it will not allow NATO bases in Ukraine, it will keep going till Ukraine is demilitarised and deNazified, or destroyed altogether, whichever comes first. This includes using everything in their arsenal and even up to nuclear weapons. But they have not set a target date. There is no prospect of Ukraine joining NATO after the war like Zelensky demands - because Ukraine will not exist.
The Russians generally don't advertise much, like say they are going to make an offensive and give a target date. This is unlike the west and Ukraine - which have to do show biz and make believe. The Russians are doers. They took Bakhmut and Mariopol, they did not declare a date, they just kept going. The Ukro Nazis put up stiff resistance in these two places, but the Russians bludgeoned them into submission just like they hammered the German Nazis in Berlin to surrender. Now, the Russians have not announced their next steps after Bakhmut, but my guess is that will go in defensive mode for some time, and beat off Ukraine's counter offensive, kill them and their western equipment, and then come in hot pursuit. The west and Ukraine admit the Russians have dug themselves in Donbass.
After Bakhmut, the Russians have to take Kramotorsk in the Donbass still, and Odessa will be on the list. Kramatorsk is being softened up with air strikes. The Russians have not announced this or set a date, it is my reading.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SK-lt1so Your trumpeting of free societies is opportunistic, western countries have inflicted colonialism, slavery, Nazism Ukraine, invaded countries in modern times (like Iraq). Not so long ago, western media was highlighting the growth of Nazi groups in Ukraine like the Right Sector and Azov batallion, and how white supremacists were teaming up with them, and how it represented a danger to the west (there are BBC, Time videos). Now the same Ukro Nazis in Azovstahl are heroic Ukrainians for you. Most of Europe collaborated with Nazis. Only the Soviet Union had the resolve to crush them. Only Russia has the resolve to crush the Ukro Nazis today.
Europe has plenty of sources of energy ? Like what ? European companies are quietly paying in roubles after Russia made an example of Poland and Bulgaria.
Germany launched invasion of Soviet Union for lebensraum and taking oil fields of Baku. The situation has not changed. Europe does not have many resources. In the era of colonialism, it stole others' resources. That is not possible now. Times have changed, but the Europeans live with their feeling of past domination.
Your belief that Europeans are the best and only customer comes from your vain belief that Europe is the world. Get real, Europe today is a 'once upon a time people'.
Russia has shown NATO is a paper tiger. Indeed, the Afghans exposed that 2 years ago. Why does NATO not put a no fly zone, or send troops to Ukraine ? That is the proof. If for one moment the west believed it had the power, it would have sent troops to Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@darksector1389 Without the Red Army, Europe would be ruled by German Nazis. All of them would collaborate. The combination of Stalin, Red Army and the Soviet Union finished Hitler.
'Russians just have zero sense of strategy, they usually just have many numbers (cannon fodder) to exhaust the enemy. '
But the Russians win. The strategy of taking the industrial area, and the coastal area, and putting the blockade allows them to strangle Ukraine's economy. It is brilliant. The Ukraine that they have left for the moment is dependent on EU aid, and it cannot be reconstructed because missile strikes can happen unexpectedly. They have sapped the EU financially with energy cuts. Russia has started channels for non-dollar trade with non-western countries, with the aim of weakening the dollar. That is the most far-reaching strategy. When the dollar's value decreases because its demand for international trade settlements decreases, US power diminishes, and with that the EU, which is a US dependent, also fades away.
Russian strategy is all encompassing : army, navy, air force, nuclear missiles to neutralise the US, hypersonic missiles (which the US has not got), satellites and satellite knock-out technology, cyber warfare and economic warfare. That is why Russia is formidable.
I see a desperation in the talk and bluster of western leaders. I see that in your infantile response. The west just doesn't know what to do. They cannot admit the US folly of trying to induct Ukraine into NATO. The EU is so weak it cannot challenge the US. They cannot explain why they encouraged Ukraine along the path of confronting Russia and then, their cowardice in leaving Ukraine to fight alone . The west does not even have the intellect to learn from mistakes, as they mire themselves in further wars by encouraging Lithuania to act like Ukraine. They imagine the world is the west, but when they peer outside, the find no one is supporting them, and others support Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Typical American, explaining the US/NATO defeat in Ukraine, as shown in Vilnius. And typical westerner feeding soft questions that do not disturb the US-NATO narrative that they are defeating Russia.
As for her claim that Russia is not as powerful as we thought etc., why has the US then not sent troops to Ukraine, to win decisively and end the war ?
The reason is the Russians will kill Americans on a scale exceeding what they faced in Vietnam. The history of American defeats and hasty exits in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia etc. shows the Americans will not be able to face the casualties.
The reason the US blocked Ukraine's demand for entry into NATO and refused to provide a timeline is because it is afraid that Ukraine will demand Article 5, which would require US to send troops to Ukraine. The US knows the Russians will kill them.
By blocking Ukraine from NATO, the US now recognises Russia's objective - there will be no US bases in Ukraine. Therefore it is a Russian win, a US defeat. The US now knows that Russia is powerful and is ready to fight a nuclear war to prevent US bases in Ukraine, and it has the capacity to incinerate not only Leopard tanks and Bradleys, but all US cities.
So don't believe this ugly lady, she is trying to put on a brave face. The US is afraid to fight Russia. In Vilnius, one Ukrainian activist asked Jake Sullivan why US is blocking Ukraine's entry into NATO, was it because it was afraid of Russia ? She was told to show gratitude to America for the money spent !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cyberfunk3793 Russia withdrew from the western side of Kherson to avoid being encircled. They did not lose soldiers nor were the Ukranians able to engage in hot pursuit across the river. The Ukranians moved into western side of Kherson and Russians shelled them and killed them from across the river.
Contrast with the Ukranians. They are being threatened with encirclement in Bakhmut but they decided to stay. The dilemma for them is if they stay, they will be massacred (which is what is happening) and if they withdraw, they fear the Russians will be in hot pursuit and come after Kramaotorsk and Sloviansk.
Now they Russians have taken time out to fortify the entire line so the chances of Ukraine penetrating again are not there. What the Ukranians managed in the first year they cannot repeat because their best soldiers have been killed, and they are short of shells and the west cannot supply them. The longer it lasts, the advantage tilts to Russia
Russia's economy does not work the same as western economy. They sell energy, wheat, metals steel uranium, gold ... that people need, not financial services. It is the biggest resource economy. Unlike Germany and Europe they have the energy to run their industries. Further, they have not outsourced their manufacturing. So they can make shells and everything else.
Look around, it is people in UK, France, Germany who are on strike and not people in Russia. The euro and pound lost 20% and europe is importing LNG at 5x the price, and they have to pay in dollars.
You are repeating western cliches and wishful thinking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thims1961 Don't twist things. Why did the US push NATO expansion to Ukraine when the Russians said it threatens Russian security ? Russia's naval fleet which is based in Sevastopol would have been shut off from the Black Sea - that was the US aim.
The Budapest Memorandum's last Article says if there is a difference, meetings and negotiations would be conducted between the four to resolve it. When Putin asked for negotiations for a security guarantee, the US and NATO scoffed. Ukraine which since 2014 is a US proxy also kept silent. So Putin went for war to make sure there will be no NATO bases in Ukraine. In 2022, three months after the war started, there were negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in Turkey to end the war, a deal was initialled, but the US sent Boris Johnson to Kiev to urge it to continue fighting. Why ? Continue fighting they did, but from the end of 2023 the west and Ukraine are in a losing position.
Israel's annexation of Jerusalem, West Bank and Golan Heights has been designated illegal by the UN, but the US now accepts it is part of Israel. Hence, cut out your stinking duplicity and pious humbug.
The west incited Ukraine to fight Russia, and the west created Israel. Both are unsustainable and are losing, and western credibility is zero.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@frob-rp4xo [Hajib quipped several times, " where's your source!?" over and over, when Morgan mentioned babies killed in their cribs. Yet, by the date of this interview, there was clear proof, from Many credible sources from all around the world']
Indeed. So what is your evidence ?
''there was clear proof, from Many credible sources ''
Can you name the credible sources ? Piers could not name them. He weakly added Daily Telegraph. It is the newspaper that said Iraq had WMDS. So what is its credibility ?
I invite you to say (1) whether you have seen the 'evidence' yourself and (2) what are the credible sources ? Like Piers, you slyly omitted your credible evidence. You have no evidence but want to believe your prejudices.
Western media has shown it lies when it wants to, it follows a collective script if it feels a western line has to be defended. Not only the Iraq war, in the Ukraine war it was claiming Russia used chemical weapons in Mariopol.
[Mr Hajib, with his aggressive, condescending, arrogance, and demanding answers before the interviewer could answer any of Hajib's questions. This was what people call a "hatchet job"...']
Piers is normally aggressive, condescending, arrogant .... he tried to smear Hijab as controversial right at the opening. It was a sly attempt at character assasination. Why ? Hijab went for his throat thereafter and shook Piers. Aggression should be met with aggression. When Piers was cornered, Hijab stopped the flow and 'asked why are you stuttering' ? And Piers pleaded meekly 'I am not stuttering'.
' START this latest round of fighting, which is atrocities committed by Hamas.'
You have the same attitude as Piers. You pretend the conflict started on 7 Oct. It started in 1917 with the Balfour Declaration. You should be asking 'what did the Israelis do to Palestinians that made them attack them ?
The Jews had a problem with everywhere they lived. There must be a reason. Nobody wanted them in Europe. So they aided them to 'return'. And in Palestine they grab land and want to run an apartheid state.
['I'm curious, what subjective and objective observations brought you to this conclusion?
And your medical or psychiatric experience and education were attained at what accredited medical school and what medical facility?']
My observation is based on your fabrications : citing 'evidence' that you don't have, but that you want to believe, and want to impose on others. That is a psychological disorder. Delusional.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ccahill2322 Yes, I understand 'sticking with the script', and not the news, is the order even in the free world, for the free press. Noam Chomksy said the western media 'manufactures consent'.
In a recent Palestinian-Israeli fighting episode, the BBC was called out for saying Israelis were 'killed'; but Palestinians 'died'. The first implies a destructive action; the second implies no destruction, it was a natural event. Subtle but wilful distortions shape people's minds : Palestinians are fanatics, Israelis are innocents minding their business.
Israel is a creation of the British and French, and afterwards the US is its sustainer. So the western media has to project Israel favourably since it is its chosen one. Criticising Israel will point the finger of guilt on its creators.
The Ukraine war has come due to western backing of NATO expansion. But the western media is not going to question the recklessness of their own governments in seeking NATO expansion. Instead, they turn it into a holy defence of sovereignty. They did not defend Iraq's or Afghanistan's right to sovereignty. That is why the west has lost credibility, and outside the west, people back Russia.
Every statement on the war now starts with 'Russia is losing'. Afterwards, they tell you Bakhmut might fall. And they will conclude still with 'Russia is losing'.
Russia has achieved many goals : (1) Ukraine will not join NATO (2) US is not going to have missile and naval bases (3) the GDP creating part of Ukraine is taken (4) Russia controls the coastal areas and the shipping lanes (5) reconstruction of Ukraine is not possible without Russian consent and (6) Russia has strangled Ukraine's - and Europe's - economies.
The reality is frustrating and the sense of being defeated is humiliating, so people console themselves with the media telling us 'Russia is losing'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TechStuff365 Ukraine is not an innocent victim, you are just ignorant or devious. Russia gifted Novo Rossiya (Crimea, Odessa etc.), to Ukraine during the USSR. All the industries Ukraine had - Antonov plane factory, steel mills, tank factory, basalt fibre factory, educational institutions etc. - were built by the USSR. Before the 1920s, Ukraine was just agricultural. Considering what Russia has given Ukraine, it is galling to see Ukrainians jumping on the US bandwagon to backstab Russia, by seeking to give missile and naval bases to the US. Hence, Russia has decided as a first step to take back NovoRossiya. Russia had been generous to give Ukraine independence, but Ukraine has squandered it, and is clearly unfit for independent statehood. Ukraine has lost what was given in good faith by Russia in 1992, by acting in bad faith and teaming up with the US to threaten Russia. We should not be mourning Ukraine's demise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeraldkozey6095 Russia is not putting out any feelers for negotiations. The west is putting out feelers. The Russian position has hardened.
'I guess it's just putin's desire to slow down Ukrainian offensive and take a breather ...'
I don't know where you got that from. It is a wishful interpretation. The reality is Russia is beating the hell out of Ukraine - they have destroyed the power grid, they have made Kherson unlivable and they are closing in on Bakhmut. It is Ukraine that needs a breather, that is why the west is putting out feelers for negotiations ! But Russia is not going to negotiate, nor is it going to withdraw. They have made that last point clear. If Ukraine wants negotiations, it will be on Russian terms - give up the 4 oblasts and sign up for neutrality. The Ukrainians are begging for Patriots and they themselves say Russia may attack Kiev again.
'Not that it would work though, but he can try.'
Look at Ukraine's position now. Power gone, water supplies struck, shortage of ammunition, 100,000 soldiers dead, no sign Russia will give any respite. Russia can and will bomb them to a wasteland. There is no need for negotiations. Russia should return Ukraine to an agricultural state, as it was before it was industrialised by the Soviet Union. That is the price Ukraine must now pay for scheming with the US to put NATO bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@corvanna4438 At that time, the western generals and politicians acknowledged the heroism of the Soviet Union and the Red Army. No one else could have done what they achieved.
Marshall Zhukov of the Red Army who defended Moscow, broke the siege of Stalingrad and led the assault on Berlin is the greatest general in the history of warfare.
' US and UK both managed a better attrition rate'
Idiot, you attritioned and firebombed Hamburg, Dresden and all cities with over 100,000 civilians. The US followed the same method with two atomic bombs on Japan. You are war criminals, that was your only capability. You would not be able to fight an army of 100,000 Germans.
Vain bravado is a characteristic of Britons with an exaggerated notion of their relevance in the modern world. Today, you are a shameless vassal of the US indulging in exhibitionism to show off the influence and power you crave for but do not have. Look at Starmer going to see Biden, raising the 'special relationship' , in an effort to get the master's permission to strike Russia. You want to strike Russia to show off you have power, but you want the US to save your skin when Russia thrashes you afterwards ! Biden said 'no' because he knows Russia can incinerate Americans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ukraine's goose is cooked. No point fantasizing. The US knows it, that is why it denied Ukraine entry into NATO. If Ukraine was allowed into NATO, then it would demand Article 5, which means the Amercians will have to send troops to Ukraine, which in turns means the Russians will send them back in body bags.
People need to get real. Ukraine does not have the manpower, the west does not have the munitions, and NATO is unwieldy and cannot make decisions quickly. The Russians have both manpower and ammunition and they have a determined leader.
In 2022, Ukraine had some relative successes but from autumn 2022, the Russians started getting the upper hand, and now they cannot be rolled back and Ukraine is weakening. It cannot be reversed by cluster bombs and a few F16s.
Ukraine is a dead rat. The west is trying to put a smile on the dead rat's face for western public consumption, while US politicians plan their exit strategy. Europe has no spine of its own, it will follow the US and ditch Ukraine as well, but it will be burdened with refugees.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
On the price cap, Sir Putin gave the best retort. He cited Milton Friedmann (US Nobel economist, fondly admired by Thatcher and Reagan). Friedman said if the price of tomatoes is $ 2/kg. and the govt. announced a cap of $ 1.80 because people cannot afford it, then next day there will be a shortage of tomatoes. The farmers will reduce the supply to the market, what remains will sky rocket in price, and only those who can afford will buy it. What applies to the tomatoes applies to oil.
Imagine Putin citing Friedmann back to the people who glorified Friedmannian economics ! There is not a single leader in the west who has common sense let alone the sharpness of Putin.
At the moment, the west is thinking it can use London's monopoly of marine insurance to force the price cap. All it will do is create new marine insurance banking elsewhere. Insurance is not high technology. It is a good business opportunity for others to get into end western monopolies.
Insurance blackmail will be like using the west's currency blackmail - others look for settling trade without dollars and euros.
Overall, Putin has single-handedly ended the western run 'rules based international world order' which was rigged in the west's favour. The west created some unwritten rules, they flout it when they want (like Iraq invasion) but demand others obey, otherwise they become enemies for sanctioning. They can threaten others security, no can object on that.
Putin asked in a recent speech about this 'rules based international world order' - was anyone consulted or seen the rules ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cooldued5308 Putin never claimed Ukraine will fall in 3 days. He is far too shrewd to say that. Western media made out that Putin thought it could be taken in 3 days.
Russia never announces what it is going to do in advance. It keeps you guessing. It does it, and then you know.
Europeans are announcing sanctions in advance. Russia has never said it is using gas as a weapon, or it is sanctioning Europe. Putin just says, 'pay in roubles, we shall supply you'.
Putin never said he will use nuclear weapons. He told the west it will faces consequences you have never faced before, if the west put a new fly zone. The west interpreted that he would nuke them !
Now the western media says that Russia is amassing troops in Byelorussia. Will it go for Kiev again ? No one knows.
The west announces all kinds of dumb things in advance - Ukraine reconstruction conference when how much of Ukraine will be independent is not known; it declares Ukraine will be in EU. Likewise, Ukraine announces summer offensive but there is not much to show. Ukraine announces it is applying to join NATO.
Putin is far cleverer and astute than any western politician. You study his speeches and you hear a man who has knowledge. The Americans were saying they will put a price cap on Russian oil. He responded by citing US economist Milton Friedman - if you say the price of tomatoes is high, and the govt. will put a cap on its price, next day there will be a shortage of tomatoes and the price will rocket.
Western politicians do not have the same mental alacrity. They are intellectually lazy and lethargic, vain and conceited, just like their public. When BoJo joked at a G7 summit that they should strip to their shirts to show they are macho like Putin, Putin joked back and told BoJo to be macho like him, first BoJo has to do some exercise, do work and party less !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Touch Crimea and Kiev will receive a tactical nuclear weapon. Blinken has been informed that Russia will use all weapons in its arsenal, that is why he said Ukraine may have to forgo Crimea. And don't come back and say US will fight a nuclear war with Russia after the event, and have all US cities incinerated by hypersonic missiles.
Anyhow, it will not come to that. Earlier, the west gave game changing Himars and Zelensky said he would capture Crimea by Dec 2021. Instead, Russia took out the power grid when the Ukranians bombed the Kerch bridge, and thereafter it took Soledar and demolished Bakhmut.
Ukraine is forced to make an offensive to please its US master. But the Russians have built fortifications and with a few paltry tanks and depleted soldiers with a few weeks training and shortage of ammunition, Ukraine will not be able to make a serious impact. The Russians will see it off, and then come after the Ukrainians.
For the Ukranians, this is the last throw of the die. At best, they can make a dent here or there, but that is not victory, it is a defeat. For after that, the US will cut the money supply.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Why are the British so obsessed with fighting and defeating Russia ? Whether it is Johnson, Truss, Sunak, Starmer, they are all eager warmongers who over estimate Britain's power.
What happens if Ukraine strikes inside Russia with Storm Shadow, and Russia retaliates and sinks a British ship, or lands a Sarmat missile on Britain, and the Americans look the other way ?
It seems that the UK thinks it drives US policy. The UK is merely a useful door mat of the US. Why was France not invited when its missile is the same as Storm Shadow ?
Biden is a lame duck President, he is not in a position to take such a momentous decision which would commit the US to a direct war with Russia.
After the election, if it is Trump, he will end this nonsense, he will not allow US to be run by Ukraine and UK. Even if it is Kamala, she will also slowly distance herself and put Germany and the Europeans to shoulder the responsibility for Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Sasha-zh6tp The view expressed by grahamthomson6969 'that Nato has destroyed the Russians Army without losing a man' reflects the unconscious cynicism and wickedness of many Ukrainian supporters in the west. The deal with Ukraine is 'we give you the weapons, you give the blood and be grateful to us'.
The US thinking at the higher levels was to grab Ukranian wealth and weaken Russia, have regime change in Russia and have an implant like Zelensky in Russia, and thereby have access to Russian resources. Now that Russia has blown that up and it is not achievable, the thinking is 'at least we can use the Ukranians to the last man to weaken Russia to the maximum' before we ditch Ukraine. That is the thinking of those in power in the US.
Indeed in the US political circles, Ukrainian lives aren't human, they don't count in any way at all - any more than Afghans and Iraqis. The US opposed peace negotiations two months into the war because for the Amercians, Ukrainian lives aren't human, they don't count in any way at all, weakening Russia is the objective.
Of course, Ukranian leaders have also taken this line, thinking being important to the US will bring benefits. The South Vietnamese leaders also thought the same.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gtfinancialservice Article 5 says attack on one is an attack on all, but you need to read the fine print. It says each country may deem what is the best response to thwart the attack and act accordingly. That may include the use of armed force - but it does not exclude not using armed force.
"The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.'
Some countries may opt to send army to Lithuania to fight Russia, others may decide to send a few machine guns or just winter boots. The US may decide to send some Stinger missiles, that is all.
The Lithuanians needs to get a good translation. As often happens in English language agreements, they are written by lawyers and crafted with words that make the meaning obscure, and which allows a non-commitment. All of NATO depends on the US. The US may decide it does not want a nuclear war with Russia to save Lithuania.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@olafsigursons Ukraine is more integrated into NATO now than it was before the war ? Really ? Ukraine is not in the form it was in 1992, it has become a lesser Ukraine, having lost the 20% land that generated 90% of its GDP, its ports are seized, and the remaining part is forced into a landlocked state. Even the part that is left at the moment requires 1 trillion to reconstruct, and anyway it cannot be reconstructed without Russian permission. Russia will only allow Ukraine to reconstruct if it accepts neutrality and keeps NATO out; otherwise, Russia will keep striking with missiles here, there and everywhere, and no one will come for reconstruction.
When there is a settlement, Ukraine will have to accept neutrality, and Russia is not going to allow the US and UK to be mediator or guarantor of Ukraine again, as it did in the Budapest Memorandum. The US and UK were sneaky and conspired with Ukraine to get bases there, to threaten Russia.
So how has Ukraine's integration with NATO helped when Ukraine of 1992 has partly disappeared and the bit that exists will not be allowed any normality ? All this has happened due to NATO. Y
Finland joining NATO is of little relevance. First of all, Turkey's parliament has to approve. Secondly, Finland is a weakling. Thirdly, Russia can destroy Finland with a single Sarmat missile. Ukraine getting into NATO is more serious for Russia as the US can have naval bases there. Russia will nuke Ukraine rather than let that happen. Russia is a mighty country, and if you fight it, you will get mauled. I suggest you learn from Ukraine's stupidity and not mess with Russia. Lithuania also thought it could blockade Kaliningrad with NATO backing, but quietly dropped out when Russia threatened a beating.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RichardSmith-ms6hh Yes, they have strength in depth, they have not outsourced their production like the US. The western expectation was sanctions would bring crowds on the streets and overthrow Putin, and they would be able to implant a Zelensky type leader in Moscow who would abide by western wishes, and hand over Russian resources to them. Westerners made deluded interpretations like Russia's GDP is the same size as Italy's. It also matters what is in the GDP - Russia is the biggest wheat producer, they have energy, they are the leader in the nuclear supply field, they produce fertilisers, they produce metals and alloys including titanium and gold, they can launch satellites, they have their own GPS, and they make incredible weapons. They are self sufficient. Italy's GDP is cars, shoes, fashion, tourism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The people who have shot themselves in the foot are the Ukrainians by going after NATO entry with the aim of hosting American missiles. The results : many cities already pulverised (and many more to be pulversied), 4 million refugees, economic losses nearing 700 billion and heading for 1 trillion. After all this, there will be no nato entry, and more land ceded to Russia.
The EU is another big loser that has shot itself in the foot by being serving America than itself. Gas and oil have shot up. Even if it divests from Russian gas, and uses US LNG, that costs 10 times more. So standard of living goes down, and EU goods become uncompetitive. And it has to spend more on defence, which means cut in education and health budgets,
The US has also shot itself in the foot by freezing assets (it is theft of others money) . Russia and China are hastening de-dollarisation. Others like India follow gradually. In case you don't know its effect, it reduces demand for the dollar and its value. Due to the world accepting the dollar as reserve currency and because the Arabs agreed to sell oil ONLY in dollars, hitherto it allowed the US to print money, live in debt and run a war machine. They will not be able to afford that in coming years. The west's advantage was the financial institutions which others accepted. Those are now eroded and will continue to erode as others seek to build alternative methods to trade.
Was all this NATO expansion worth it for the west except for the benefit of a few arms companies ? When you add the above, it is the west that has shot itself in the foot. It hastens its decline. And the west's false pride and emotional response makes you unable to understand that you have shot yourself in the foot, as you imagine your feeble and misguided actions are thwarting the enemy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davetarrant6888 Russia's has enough resources and land. It has land, water, food security, energy security, it makes metals and everything from trains, planes, space ships....
'He is afraid of NATO doing exactly what it is supposed to do which is protect themselves from being invaded by a monster.''
How has NATO proved what you say ? Well what has NATO shown apart from cowardice ? It egged on Ukraine, but it did not dare fight Russia. Anyhow, NATO is really the US. If the US loses interest in future (it occurred when Trump was around), I can guarantee you all the little hens of Europe will be clucking in fear of the Bear. At some stage the US will lose interest in NATO and Europe. Due to the de-dollarisation movement, the US will not be able to afford wars on behalf of NATO.
The Europeans need to realise the reality - you live next to Russia, so you need to get on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davetarrant6888 NATO invaded Afghanistan, there was no UN mandate. Russia has to fear US putting missiles targeting Russia. How did the US react when the USSR out missiles targeting it in Cuba ? The Soviet Union lost 20 million people due to the Nazi invasion, so there is a security concern that is entirely understandable.
What business does the US that lives across the Atlantic have to come and put missiles next to Russia ? NATO expansion was driven by US arms companies.
And if you cannot understand that, then Ukraine and NATO deserve what they get - Ukraine will be pounded till it understands, and NATO cannot change that. Russia is strong, its leader will take steps to ensure its security.
The Bear was sleeping in his den, you go and provoke it, and then you ask 'why not' ? Well, because you will get mauled, and afterwards, blaming the Bear does not help.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bell is one of the British jokers who said in Bakhmut, Russians were paying a huge price and were reduced to fighting with shovels. His type said Russia's losses were heavy in Mariopol; they were heavy in Bakhmut. The Russians had run out missiles due to shortage of electronic parts in month 3 and were scrounging chips from washing machine.
Whenever they are losing, the Ukrainians and their handlers say 'oh, Russia paid a very big price' ! But Ukraine keeps losing little by little. It is irreversible now.
Bell's written articles in Sky seem to be more balanced, but in videos, he comes out like the classic, pompous, obnoxious British idiot with the colonial mindset.
I don't know what it is but the British in particular find being defeated by Russia is more unbearable than the Ukrainians find it. The Ukrainians were ready to settle for a peace deal in Turkey, but the British blocked it. The Ukrainians are being killed to save the British ego.
The west's disorientation can be seen by the way they are running around like beheaded chicken. Zelensky is organising a peace conference in Switzerland. Only his handlers will be attending. Russia is not invited. Zelensky's peace plan involves Russia returning Crimea, Putin's removal, reparations, war trial etc...! He is demanding Russian surrender and he is hoping to rope in the world for it. He and the west are delusional - that is the sure sign of defeat.
By fighting, Ukraine has lost 20% of Ukraine, and Zelensky thinks it can be retaken with his peace conference. Switzerland said it would organise another peace conference afterwards and invite Russia ! The rest of the world is watching western idiocy.
Meanwhile, the Americans want to go to war with China. And they are trying to rope in Zelensky and get him to organise the Asian countries against China !
Russia does not have time for these western jokers; Putin has said Russia is not going to negotiate because the west ran out of weapons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In 1994 Ukraine gave its nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for promises to respect its sovereignty...'
That was only one part of it. There was also the understanding that Ukraine will be neutral and not join any military alliances, Russian or western. Without this understanding, Ukraine would not have got independence. Ukraine had to give up its nukes AND agree to be neutral. Get it ?
After the US initiated coup in 2014 which implanted a US favouring govt., the Ukrainian govt. voted to join NATO, unilaterally breaking a key condition for its independence. That day, Russia took back Crimea. Crimea has Sevastapol port which Russia was leasing from Ukraine, and using as the base for its Black Sea fleet. The moment Ukraine announced it would seek to join NATO, Russia realised the US Seventh fleet will be sailing from Sevastopol, and it would shut Russia off from the Black Sea. Hence, Russia took back Crimea. Had Ukraine not announced it will seek to join NATO, it would be intact, and even have had Crimea.
Ukraine stabbed Russia in the back and decided to gang up with the US against Russia, so Ukraine's independence is terminated. For 3 years, Ukraine had US backing, but US now knows Ukraine cannot win in a fight with Russia, the US wants to leave and hand over its failed Ukraine project to Europe.
Part of Ukraine will be incorporated back into Russia, the western part will be left but turned into a wasteland dependent on EU aid for however long it takes, and the US goes off to its next war project.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tinareeves9899 You exaggerate the importance of Lend Lease. The Red Army destroyed the Germans. FDR/Eisenhower and Churchill knew. Stalin redrew the maps of Germany and Europe, and the Americans and British could not challenge him. Hitler had gone in saying one kick and the Soviet Union would collapse. The Soviet Union's might was only understood after it delivered Germany's Nazis a beating. Likewise, you will only understand Russia's power after it has delivered the Ukro Nazis and their collaborators a beating.
Russia has abundance, but because of that it has had predators throughout history - the French in 1812, The Germans in 1940s. Russia/Soviet Union sorted them out. They won't dare attack Russia again, they know what will happen. Now it is the US that is at its throat. Hence, Russia has to spend a lot to defend itself. But now it is breaking the bones of its latest predators.
You tell me that UK but they still have a larger economy than Russia - again based on a single parameter. As I explained, it depends what that GDP is based on. France and UK cannot fight Russia, they will get mauled. They are in NATO precisely because they are weak.
Russia has everything - food, land and living space, water, energy, metals, strong defence. It can survive even with a totally closed economy. Tell me how many countries have all these ?
I did not say Russia can overtake the US in two years. I said Russia has set off a unstoppable sequence of events that will bring down the dollar in 20 years - and with that the US capacity to print dollars and live beyond its means and run a military complex to enforce its will, be over. Russia sells oil in yuan and roubles, it has rupee trade with India. Russia replaced Mastercard and Visa with its own. Previously, every card transaction in Russia would net 2.5% for the US. That is over. The Chinese also have a concerted plan to replace the dollar. They have launched the gold backed yuan. Russia needs to back the rouble with gold; it can do so as it is a leading gold producer. The Saudis who carried the dollar on their shoulders for 50 years now show signs they are unwilling to do so. Russia has catalysed the realisation in other countries that for a transaction between two countries, there is no need for the currency of a third country which profiteers and steals from them.
Russia has always catalysed great changes in the world country, that is why it is admired.
1
-
@tinareeves9899 I don't believe you for one moment on the significance you attach to lend lease. It is typical US fabrication, it is historical revisionism. You cannot bear the thought that the Red Army defeated Nazi Germany. Neither the British nor the US armies could have conquered Berlin.
[“Most famously, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin raised a toast to the Lend-Lease program at the November 1943 Tehran conference with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.
"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."]
Firstly, Stalin would never have said 'from the Russian point of view'. He was after all the great Marshal of the great Soviet Union.
Secondly, how could Stalin say 'the president and the United States have done for victory in this war', when it was not known in 1943 whether the Soviet Union would be victorious ? In the Tehran and Yalta conferences, the three only agreed to demand Germany's unconditional surrender.
'Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war.'
You can say that after 1945, after the war is won. Stalin could not have said that in 1943.
If you look at videos of the Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam conferences, you can see Stalin is the boss, the alpha male, while Churchill and FDR/Truman were deferential mice.
You are a first class liar. You have no credibility. The US breeds contempt. After the war, the US co-opted Nazi generals like Manstein to write about Nazi victories. Shameless people.
1
-
@tinareeves9899 I called you a liar based on the inconsistencies in what you wrote. Citing US sources does not automatically make it credible. The US said Iraq had WMDs and invaded and destroyed that country. It is a country that has practised invasions and assasinations.
At the time, Stalin did not know what is Nazi Germany, and he might have made a deal to avoid war. You cannot claim that therefore he was a Nazi. Stalin did not have hyper nationalism, race pride, racial superiority etc. as his ideology. Stalin's ideology was the public ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange.
It is an intellectually feeble argument to claim Stalin and Hitler were the same because of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. If your stupid reasoning is correct, Churchill and FDR were also Nazis, because they were allies with Stalin. You are unbelievably dumb.
The Soviet Union had its back against the wall due to opposition of the world's owners of capital, to their revolutionary ideology. There were many, not only in Nazi Germany, that wanted to destroy the Soviet Union.
Stalin saved Europe from the Nazis. Afterwards, he did not arrange a programme of murdering Germans or anyone else to show racial pride.
1
-
1
-
@tinareeves9899 Russia's economy is shrinking , so is yours. Europe is being deindustrialsed. Russia is self sufficient : it has food, water, land, timber, metals, and most important, it has energy and military power. Europe does not have energy. The US does not have much manufacturing left; it is in China. All of Russia's manufacturing is in Russia. There are very countries with all that.
'Nobody wants Russia's assets' - well, if you thought you could get them, you would have invaded it, like Iraq. But Russia will erase you from the world.
Putin is going to redraw Ukraine's map, just like Stalin redrew Germany's and Europe's map. There are no world standards, so what are you talking about ?
'Putin is losing the war' is wishful thinking. Russia has taken the eastern part that used to earn Ukraine's GDP; they blockaded Ukraine's ports; they have destroyed Ukraine's power grid; they are making the remainder of Ukraine a wasteland; no NATO bases will be possible in Ukraine; Europe is flooded with refugees and its being deindustrialised. So how is Russia losing ?
Russia is winning against NATO because no NATO country wants to go to Ukraine and fight and die. No one has the courage. When a Russian missile hit Poland, the US bent over backwards to say it is a Ukranian missile to avoid having to send troops and fight Russia !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ХорошийЧеловек-л9ш Winning is impossible. Russia is too powerful. You should not have got into a fight with Russia. Ukranians overthrew an elected govt. with US support in 2014, and even Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov batallion were involved. From then on, with the US implanted Ukranian govt., Ukranians indulged in militant Russophobia and thought it had US protection. Ukraine hoped to get US missiles stationed in Russia. It was irresponsible foreign policy. It is the first time I have seen a country risk self destruct to get into someone else's good books.
The answer to whether America will take 20-30 million new refugees, is 'no'. You can deduce that from a recent American and NATO misadventure. Americans had installed a puppet govt. in Afghanistan. When the cost became prohibitive, the Americans negotiated with the Taliban, and walked away. NATO (including Ukraine) followed. The Americans took a few refugees and some of their puppet officials. However, the majority of ex-Afghan govt. officials that collaborated with Americans are in trouble with the new govt. You will have a similar outcome in Ukraine. At some stage, the Americans will find Ukraine unaffordable and walk away, as from Afghanistan. The EU nations are all weak, and they will follow suit - as in Afghanistan. Then the Ukranians who collaborated with the US and NATO will be punished by the Russians.
As for the US giving new land for Ukranians, that is not possible in today's world. In 1917, Britain gave Palestine to settle European Jews. They did not give their own land. They will not give their own land, and they have no colonial lands to give to Ukranians.
Hence, the sobre conclusion is that NATO and the US has led Ukraine into great trouble, from which it cannot extricate itself, and so at some stage, NATO and US will walk away. However, Ukranian politicians and Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov battalion are also to blame, for being foolish to mortgage Ukraine's self preservation by serving US interests above Ukraine's own. The way out for Ukraine before 24 Feb. 2022 was to reaffirm and sign a treat of neutrality with Russia. That is all Russia asked. Ukraine's independence declaration had assured Russia that it would be neutral and not join any military alliance. Putin has said he does not object to Ukraine joining EU as it is not a military alliance. The objection is to Ukraine joining NATO allowing Americans the chance to threaten Russia. Since Ukraine forfeited the chance to avert the war by signing a treaty to reaffirm its neutrality, and miscalculated and risked war with Russia, thinking the US would protect it, the only choice remaining now is to negotiate with Russia and agree to neutrality. However, after 24 Feb. 2022, the price has been hiked up. Ukraine will have to agree to neutrality + ceding more land; or keep fighting till Russia takes more land and destroys more, and the west feels Ukraine is unaffordable, and it gets tired and walks away. Russia has had casualties, so they are not going to agree to 2014 borders.
Ukrainians make demands from the rest of world and claiming you are fighting to save freedom for the world. But let us examine Ukraine's record. Ukraine sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan, to invade a sovereign country. Ukraine was not even part of NATO. Why did Ukraine do it ? It wanted to please America so that it could get into NATO. Zelensky supported Israel when it bombarded a weaker unarmed people whose land it seized, and which imprisons the rest. Then what is the case for Ukraine to talk about sovereignty so piously ? I suggest you look at some of the bad deeds of Ukraine.
The best for Ukraine would have been to seek good relations with Russia and EU. That was possible by seeking EU membership without joining NATO. Ukraine would have enjoyed the best of both worlds. However, US machinations and the tendency of Ukranians to rely on foreign help without realising it comes at a cost which may not be in their interest, has made Ukraine squander its independence, and take it on a path to be a failed country. The west will get Ukraine wrecked like Libya and then walk away when they cannot fix it.
You inform 'Most of us nice educated, have 1 or 2 diplomas cuz education here is cheap.' Then why did you not have the knowledge to realise that taking America's help to provoke Russia would bring an end to Ukranian independence and statehood ? Even without education, it is common sense. Hence, despite education, something is defective in Ukranians that you cannot understand geopolitics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
'The UK should create a "no-fly zone" over Ukraine to stop Putin from “fighting another day”, says former defence minister Tobias Elwood.'
When the US could not do it, the UK should do it ? How many aircraft does it have ?
People wonder why the British are the most Russophobic, more than the US, or Poland and Baltics.
The answer lies in their colonial past when they were a global power. In the 1856 Crimean war, Britain, France and Turkey defeated Russia. Thus, ex Defence Minister Ben Wallace said confidently at the start of the Ukraine war that Britain would kick Russia's bottom as they had kicked the Tsar's bottom in 1856. It has not worked out.
The British found it a shock that after 1945, they had to decolonise India and other places. They were broke and could not suppress India any longer. The British had to fight WW 2 as allies with the Soviet Union and they had the consolation they were on the winning side, but they found it unbearable that the Soviet Union replaced them as a superpower at the end of the war !
The British tried to revert to their past colonial mischief in 1956 (so soon after the war) when they embarked on a regime change operation to remove Gamal Abdel Nasser who nationalised the Suez Canal. Their partners were the French and the Israelis - who were equal in colonial wickedness to the British. The British shouted the same as they do today that Nasser had violated their sacred international rules-based order. According to this, Britain and a few others makes the rules, and others have to obey; but the British can flout their rules as per convenience. Plus ca change.
Anyhow, the Soviet Union intervened in 1956 over the Suez. The Soviets asked Britain to withdraw. The Soviets even sent a letter to the British that they would use nukes on Britain if it did not withdraw. Britain turned to the US for help, but Eisenhower was unwilling to send US troops to support another war, so soon after WW 2. He too asked Britain to withdraw. Anthony Eden's govt. had to withdraw from Suez in humiliation.
The British have that Suez humiliation by the Soviets in mind. They would like to get back at Russia ! Tobias Elwood, Boris Johnson, Truss and the British establishment have the colonial era nostalgia imbued in him. The British also have Churchill nostaligia, they say 'don't underestimate us, we showed the Germans what we are'. They have built this narrative about themselves - small but plucky, always winning against the odds. The British won the Crimean war in 1856, but the Russia of today is a superpower with a formidable arsenal. The Russians can kick Britain's head in, and Britain is not going to win against the odds. The Ukraine war has shown the foolhardiness of NATO to think it can fight Russia and win.
Boris Johnson expressed the worry in British (and western minds) when he said in a Daily Telegraph interview that Putin must be defeated, otherwise it would be the end of western hegemony (these are the exact words he used). He cannot say British hegemony any more, but he believes Britain has an important place as part of western hegemony. End of western hegemony means Britain will become even more irrelevant. It is this angst that motivates jokers like Elwood to think that the UK should create a "no-fly zone" over Ukraine to stop Putin from “fighting another day”.
The war in Ukraine is lost, the US realises that, even Ukraine knows that, only the British have not come to terms with it. Even Britain's position in the western order is all mixed up. It is a vassal of the US, but takes pride that it is the most favoured vassal of the US ! Britain left the EU and feels superior to the Europeans - but now wants to lead them against Russia in case the US ditches Europe !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Omega0850 You citing wishful thinking.
'Ukraine will get plenty of economic aid from the west, after the war, plus a lot of investment'.
Just like Iraq and Afghanistan ? The west is being deindustrialised, you don't have money for yourself, what will you give the Ukranian beggar ?
You talk as if the end of the war and the post war settlement will be decided by the west. It will be decided by Russia. Unless Ukraine signs an agreement reaffirming neutrality and no NATO bases, there will be no end of the war. Russia can keep striking Ukraine and no western people will go there for reconstruction as they will be killed. So no point fantasising about rebuilding.
Basically, the west got Ukraine battered by encouraging NATO expansion, you cannot save Ukraine and you want to assuage your conscience by claiming you plan wondrous reconstruction, Ukraine will be in NATO etc. Nothing is possible without Russian permission.
Russia has stolen nothing, instead you stole $ 300 billion from Russia deposits in western banks. That is why the rest of the world is slowly gravitating towards non-dollar trade. They realise western banks and govt's are untrustworthy thieves.
'nobody will want to invest in Russia'. Again 'nobody' for you means the west; but China, India and others have no issues. Europe is becoming irrelevant, so it does not matter. Europe was dependent on Russian gas, and it was not the other way round. So what are you talking about ?
'And since Russia won´t make much money from its oil and gas reserves anymore, the Russian economy is basically doomed. '
Wishful thinking. Russia is pivoting its energy to China and India and Asia. That is where the economic growth is. Europe is shrinking. European companies like BASF are relocating to China. Europe, not Russia, is being de-industrialised. Get real !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nic7048 Ukraine as such is not a threat, it is the US that is a threat to Russia. The US planned to induct Ukraine into NATO to put its missiles there targeting Russia. You will recall Russia asked for a security guarantee, but the US refused. You tell me why the US refused. Then Russia took technical-military measures to make sure Ukraine will not join NATO and host US missiles. So don't be disingenuous and pretend you don't know western mendacity.
When the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, why was NATO kept, and why did it expand to Russia's borders five times when Russia had protested ? US Sec. James Baker had promised that NATO would not move an inch to the east. The Russians were taken for a ride. Ukraine was the last straw. Russia had to take action before Ukraine was inducted, because afterwards, Article 5 would be invoked, and it would require Russia to fight a nuclear war to dislodge the US from Ukraine. Hence, the western narrative that it was an unprovoked attack on an innocent is deceptive humbug.
It is better Russia fights a conventional war now and partitions or takes Ukraine, so a nuclear war is averted. Now it is clear to Ukranians and America that NATO entry will not be tolerated.
Russia was pushed to fight, but once they fight, they don't back down, they will take any casualties needed to defeat their enemy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What is stopping the west from supplying missiles for strikes into Russia ?
The fear is that it will eventually force the Russians to use a nuclear strike on Ukraine. After the Storm Shadow missile strike on the Crimean beach which killed civilians, Russia gave the UK and US a warning, if such strikes continue, Russia would escalate to a nuclear strike on Ukraine, and if the the west wants to escalate further, then to a nuclear war with the west. Maybe a nuclear strike on Lvov next to the Polish border would be a demonstrator. It will surely freak out the Europeans.
They may not go for a nuclear strike on Ukraine straight away. A non-nuclear escalation is also possible : they can equip the Houthis and others in the Gulf to take out US bases in the Middle East, and strike western shipping.
The west knows that the rest of Donbass will go in the next 6 months, Ukraine cannot regain Donbass, and the Russians will eventually regain Kursk.
What choices does the west then have ? The are looking for a way out with negotiations - they plan a second peace conference and they want to invite Russia !
But the question is also what choice does Russia have ? They are not going to give back Donbass. Putin had said after Ukraine walked out of the agreement reached in Turkey due to Boris Johnson's instigation, next time the Russian terms will be stiffer. Indeed, in any future negotiation, he said Ukraine has to accept the new reality - the borders of 2014, let alone 1991, will not return. Nor can Russia accept the western plan expressed by some to negotiate a frozen conflict and put the remainder of Ukraine into NATO. Russia cannot accept that - the war was fought to prevent NATO bases in Ukraine. Thus, the only option I see for Russia is to continue and take all of Ukraine. Western support will wane after the US elections - even if Harris wins. The US will divest and hand the problem to Europe. But there is opposition in Germany to fund Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@williamzk9083 The rejection of western hegemony disguised as the 'rules based international order' by the rest of the world burns deeply in your western soul. Russia, China, India, Brazil, Iran and Muslim countries reject it and that is causing burning.
Here is the proof. In 2022, Boris Johnson said 'we must not let Putin win, as it would end the rules based international order' according to which the west sets the rules, and flouts them when convenient (as in Iraq). In 2024, Boris Johnson said that victory for Putin means end of western hegemony (that is the term he used). He was pleading with Trump not to allow a Russian victory.
Clearly, from Boris Johnson 's words, 'rules based international order' means western hegemony. He knows what is at stake.
You need to get real : Russia has created a new world order with BRICS, it has triggered de-dollarisation, and weakened NATO with a superior arsenal which the west cannot match. The west's main asset was its control of the financial system, and that is undergoing change too, and Russia and China are going to drive it. Ex Soviet states are irrelevant in the global importance of what Russia has done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The title says Putin's comment is a vague threat. It is not vague, it is clear, and the west understands its meaning. The west wants to pretend it is vague, because it is blunt and the west cannot possibly counter.
The west was foolish with reckless NATO expansion and it is reaping the fallout. However, its false pride and arrogance does not allow it to introspect and learn from its mistake, instead it is goaded into actions that make matters worse. If the west arms Ukraine, to try to make it win, Russia may settle it with a tactical nuclear weapon.
Then will NATO dare to attack Russia ? I don't think so - because Putin has demonstrated the Sarmat missile and hypersonic delivery capability - which no one can boast of. The western press says the Sarmat can obliterate an area the size of Britain in a single strike. Hence, he will obliterate the US if it attacks Russia for dropping a tactical nuclear on Ukraine. No one in the west wants to die.
Putin said it is not a boast, Sarmat will be used if the west attacks Russia,. When Putin says he will do something, he does it generally. So when he says the response will be lightning, he is referring to the hypersonic glide system that will deliver Sarmat.
Objectively, the danger of a nuclear weapon use exists for the Ukraine, and not for the west. The west will only receive Sarmat if it attacks Russia when a tactical nuclear weapon is dropped on Ukraine. But then the west will not dare attack Russia precisely because Sarmat will be used.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GBPDAYTRADER 'In a conventional war Nato has superiority over Russia.'
What is your evidence ? Is this the NATO that ran away shambolically from Kabul 2 years ago avoid capture ?
'However if Russia launches a Sarmat or any nuclear attack against a Nato country there would be a nuclear response.'
Not if you are counting in America. If Russia launches a Sarmat at Finland, America would think why should I have my cities destroyed in the same way ?
Russia did not launch an unprovoked attack. Russia gave Ukraine freedom on the condition that it will give up nukes, it will not join a military alliance against Russia, and it would allow Russia to continue to use Sevastopol in the Crimea as a naval base for its Black Sea fleet.
From 2008, America was pushing for Ukraine to enter Ukraine. Their motives (1) sell US arms and replace Soviet arms (2) place missiles in Ukraine threatening Russia and (3) get Ukraine to cancel the agreement on Sevastapol and bake it the base for the US Seventh Fleet. In a 2014, there was coup which was aided by the US (Victoria Nuland) and in which Russophobic Ukro Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Batallion took part. Putin saw Sevastapol agreeent will be cancelled and Russia took action to take back Crimea immediately - that was an altert move.
Ukraine's independence declaration had said it would be a neutral state. After 2014, the Ukro Nazis changed the constitution and said NATO entry is a target. Thereby they had unilaterally reneged the commitment Ukraine had given to Russia not to join any military action. Hence, Ukraine loses its right to be independent. Russia should take it back.
During the Obama period, Biden, Victoria Nuland and such anti-Russian hawks were handling Ukraine. US and NATO troops were training Ukranians in bases near Lvov. Hence, with Biden in place, Russia decided to act on the remainder of Ukraine to quell any attempt to join NATO. Now that target is achieved. There is no way Ukraine will join NATO and the US also knows Russia will fight a nuclear war with USA if Ukraine is inducted in NATO.
Russia had given all these countries freedom, it had shown goodwill. But NATO driven by the US took advantage and did not consider it reciprocal to give Russia security. Western attempts at NATO expansion in Georgia and Ukraine have soured the relations with Russia. Russia has said this is the reddest of red lines and they will fight, whatever the cost, be it nuclear.
The west is now stuck in Ukraine. Russia has taken the industrial heartland, and the coastal areas and it is strangling the Ukranian economy, making it dependent on EU aid. The bit of UKraine not taken yet is hit from time, so reconstruction is not possible. There is no way the west or Ukraine can dislodge what Russia has annexed. That is gone for good.
Ukraine does not have the firepower to roll back the Russians and the NATO that you claim is superior in conventional war does not have the courage to go into Ukraine and get massacred. Both Ukraine and the west have lost it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@angrydoggy9170 On the biolab, I saw Victoria Nuland hesitate and fumble when asked about them in a Congerssional questioning. Guilt, perhaps ?
If the US can do all the things you say and does not need even naval bases, why is the US pushing for Ukraine in NATO ? You live across the Atlantic, why do you go poking your nose into corners of the world and making enemies ?
Your last sentence is contradictory. Naval bases would be of value, but then again you have such superiority why would you bother. Sly one !
Well, if you are so innocent and do not have ulterior motives, why did you not agree to give Russia a security guarantee with a peace treaty when they asked in Dec. 2021 ? It is proof of your innate wickedness.
And why were Victoria Nuland and John McCain doing in Kiev distributing sweets to the crowds for staging a coup in 2014 ? Is it normal for politicians of a foreign country to influence elections in another country and have the people the foreigners favour installed ? Would it be alright for Russian politicians to come to DC and support the crowd assaulting the Capitol so Trump got elected ?
So don't put on airs, you are a smug, duplicitous American liar. The best side effect of this war is that Russia and China are working to end the dollar's monopoly as the currency for international trade settlement. Once that goes, you will not be able to print dollars, live in debt and run your military machine, and talk in the conceited way you do. It will take time, but the direction is set, thanks to Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AaronC123-q9t 'well it had good reason to go into Afghanistan, they were hosting Al-Qaeda and bin Laden'
And who created them ? It was the US. They were good guys to fight the Soviets, but bad guys when they decided to fight the US because it is the lynch pin of Israel, a racial state.
'And Iraq was about defending Kuwait and Israel from Saddam. ...' You skilfully skipped the second Iraq war which was built on lies about WMDs.
'I don't see what the United States does as a problem, we are much better off having them as top dog, they stand up for democracy and human rights as well as keeping dictators in check '
They are happy to work with every dictator in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Chile, Ukraine or wherever as long as they tow the US line. Ukraine is run with Nazi groups like Right Sector, Azov Batallion, Zelensky does not convene his own Parliament, he has shut down opposition parties and TV channels.
'They enjoy being the most powerful nation of course who wouldn't, but all their allies around the world are happy with the situation and enjoy US protection.'
You obviously come from one of the vassal states of Europe that imagines it is a partner and ally of the US, and you enjoy its protection. But you must realise other countries like Russia, China, Iran, India etc. have self respect, and don't under any circumstance agree to be vassals of the US. You obviously don't have self respect, that is why you wrote what you did. But don't imagine Russia and China will agree to live under US protection. They have the capability to destroy every US city if push comes to shove. The US knows that. It is a cowardly nation, it will fight in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Nicaragua - but would not dare fight Russia or China. It will try to fight them with a proxy like Ukraine.
If you are a vassal state of the US in Europe, and you think you can fight Russia, the danger for you is one day the US may withdraw because it cannot afford it, and then you will be left high and dry against Russia. Then you will get the beating of your life for your misbehaviour.
1
-
@AaronC123-q9t The US created Al Qaeda and eventually the latter hit the US. It undermined the US over a long term. The US went and fought for 20 years against Taliban, and then handed over power back to them, and scrambled on planes to get out alive. The US dragged along NATO but when it came to flee, they did not tell the Europeans as they wanted to be on the first flight out. Shameless US. And even more shameless Europeans who are just vassals going out to die for someone else.
The US was selling arms to Saddam at one stage to fight Iran. There are pictures of Rumsfeld with Saddam. They turned against Saddam when he started selling oil in Euros - which would undermine the dollar. There were no WMDs, the reason for the war was to stop selling oil in euros. Saudi Arabia has been subsidising the US since the 1970s by agreeing to sell oil ONLY in dollars. That allowed the US to print dollars, rack up debts, and run a miitary machine. However, that era is ending. Russia has triggered de-dollarisation. China has launched a gold backed yuan. Non-dollar trade settlements are going on between Iran, Russia, China, India. The Saudis are contemplating selling oil to China in yuan. The US cannot invade Russia, China, Iran or India to stop non-dollar trade. Even Saudis realise now the US is exhausted after 2 wars and is not in a position to invade Saudi to stop them selling oil in other currencies.
And look at the vassal states of Europe. A vassal ally cannot be a partner. The vassals states now have to buy LNG from the US at 4x the price - and pay in dollars, instead of euros for Russian gas. The result is the euro lost 20% of its value. The Europeans have to obey and go and die for the US's war in Afghanistan. But the reverse is not true - the Americans are not going to come to Ukraine and die for Europeans. You are just dumb and you have no self respect.
Whatever the governments of China ,Russia or Iran, they have self-respect as they are nobody's vassal. The US cannot use them for assisting its wicked projects, and they do not go and die on behalf of the US. If the US and its 'allies' messes with them, certainly Russia and China can incinerate all your cities, and there is nothing you can do to stop them. That is why the US does not dare send troops to Ukraine. They are shameless cowards, and Europeans are even worse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@petraravn5421 In the disbanding of the Soviet Union, Russia was THE key stakeholder. Ukraine's independence was conditional : give up nukes, join no military alliances against Russia, allow Russian Navy to use Sevastopol in the Crimea. These are written agreements. Ukraine returned the nukes, but reneged on the second condition, which would have led to reneging on the third condition also. Hence, it was bound to be the case that Russia will seek to terminate any Ukranian plan to allow America to threaten Russia through NATO. Further, Ukranians allowed the growth of Nazis. Thus, Ukraine has shown it is not capable of self rule. It has blown the chance for sovereignty that was given, and considering the gravity of what it has done in trying to get America to threaten Russia, Russia is going to take the stiffest action. Russia has all the cards, it will take the eastern industrial part, take the coastal ports, and make Ukraine landlocked. The rump Ukraine will need EU aid to live. The Ukranians imagine reconstruction can be done with Russian money frozen by the Americans and EU. But Russia will not give in so easily. Russia can keep the rump Ukraine disturbed with sporadic missile strikes so no one can come to invest. Ukraine also lives under the possibility of a tactical nuclear strike. Even the most stupid of them will know by now that the Americans will not go and fight a nuclear war with Russia to save Ukraine. The Ukranians also imagine someone will give them a security guarantee. Again, nothing is possible on this without Russian consent. The dilemma is the Ukranians want Americans to be part of the security guarantee, but Russia will not allow that as America created the mischief in Ukraine. Ukraine and its backers have weak cards, that is the reality.
1
-
@MKSense1 The US approach to Ukraine is also based on Return on Investment. They pushed Ukraine to make an ill prepared counter offensive in 2023, it was driven by timeline rather than assessment of possibility of success. Ukraine had to do it by mid year, or the US would have cut aid. The Russians waited and Ukraine's army got decimated, after that the Russians came out. Now to save Ukraine, $ 60 billion is being sent of which 50 billion is for US companies. At the end of the year, Ukraine will be stuck and will need more. Then the Return on Investment will be seen as poor, and money supply will be cut. This is what Ukraine does not understand. Or perhaps Ukrainians are starting to understand, as they are refusing to join the army.
'Many times they buy the competitions ideas or patents as they have more capital. '
They often buy out patents to block the competition rather than develop new products.
'Of course this can't go for ever as the resources are becoming scarce and you did the mistake to teach others to do the same as it happen with China .'
US has 2% of the resources, but consume 20%. That can only be done by taking others resources by war. Hence, the US is engaged in plots to destabilise countries, regime change etc.
It was not a mistake to 'teach China'. That was the natural outcome of US capitalism. The capitalist forever looks to maximise his profits, and cutting labour cost is essential. Thus the US capitalists went for off shoring. The US policy makers also saw it as a way to wean China off the Soviet Union and they encouraged it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Good try by the Austrian Chancellor but really no use. When Russia demanded a security guarantee, that the US would not place missiles in Ukraine targeting it, then this Chancellor and other EU leaders should have stepped forward and given the assurance, and the war would not have started. Instead, all the EU leaders put on airs and said it was Ukraine's sole decision whether to join NATO, and NATO could not reject it. The pretended they were defending a lofty principle. Then the Russians took action to ensure Ukraine will not join NATO. Zelensky has now accepted that Ukraine will not join, and NATO also now knows putting US missiles in Ukraine is not possible. It would have been better if NATO had reached this conclusion before Ukraine got a beating. Now that the Russian operation has started, it cannot be called off, till Russia gets a clear upper hand. If Zelensky cannot be toppled, Russia can occupy the east, take the coastal ports and make Ukraine landlocked, and then agree to negotiate. As for western sanctions, the Austrian chancellor says there is no point beyond a certain point if it hurts us. And he said he is not isolated on this, Hungary and other countries feel the same way.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kingsleykester8167 Russians can come back for Kiev another time. They can take 20% now, blockade Ukraine's economy, and make them negotiate, and if the Ukranians continue to misbehave, they can raze Kiev over a period of time and come back. Zelensky has a big problem - he will be killed by the Ukro Nazis when he has to surrender land.
US was in Afghanistan for 20 years, it dragged NATO countries (and non-NATO countries like Ukraine) into it, and put them in front so Americans did not die. After failing, the US negotiated with Taliban in Doha (without NATO), and ditched and ran without telling NATO. They left millions of dollars worth of new equipment which Taliban sold to China and Russia. That was only 2 years ago. Normally, when a ship sinks, the captain evacuates everyone and comes out last. In Kabul, the Americans evacuated first, and did not tell the rest, because they were so anxious not to get captured by Taliban. Shameless cowards ! That is why people have contempt for Americans. And chicken like you can fight Russia ? Vain bravado. You have to learn to make a hypersonic missile first.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Earlier, the Americans said Putin is Hitler and they want a Nuremberg trial. Now, the war with Russia is lost, so they pretend 'we always knew the Russians are like us and we can get on with them', but Xi Ji Ping is different, he is Mussolini !
Sayers should not invite people who say about another sovereign nation's leader 'kill the bastard'.
Do you hear the Chinese say that about Biden or anyone else ?
How many countries has China invaded compared with the US ?
When you listen to such Americans, you realise how unhinged they are by China's rise. China is outcompeting the US in manufacturing and technology, in military strength, in diplomatic relations with ME, Africa, Russia, Latin America. Their currency is a challenger to the dollar.
China is unstoppable. This interviewer's American desperation and frustration shows in his concluding rant about Xi ''kill the bastard'. He even complains about the Chinese people for not doing America's dirty work and assassinating Xi !
Your channel should be sued for allowing such hate speech.
1
-
1
-
1
-
To understand Ramasamy, you need to know he belongs to the devious Brahmin caste of India. The Brahmins invented the caste system that enslaved the majority of Indians.
In India, the Brahmins argue the caste system should not be politicised, and there should be no affirmative action to support the victims of the caste system. The Brahmins in India also argue that by talking about the caste system, it keeps the caste system alive.
In India, recently a high caste Hindu police guard shot two Muslims in a train dead just because they appeared obviously Muslim. The guard declared his hatred of Muslims will committing the act. But the upper caste Hindus in India said it was a mental health issue, and not due to the Hindu supremacist teaching drummed into Hindus in Modi's India. One should not link the Hindu to his Hindu supremacist ideology as this would inflame sectarian Hindu-Muslim divide. The Muslims are supposed to keep quiet to avoid Hindu racism increasing.
Ramasamy is using the same argument here. On one hand, he swears he is against race crimes, he claims he is race blind, but because of that, he thinks race motivation of others should not be examined even when the killer declared his motivation for the crime was race. Americans need to learn what Brahmins are and the damage they have done to India, and beware falling for Ramasamy.
1
-
1
-
@GF_MF It is not Russia, but it is not the single market and customs union either that has landed the EU and UK in this mess. It is the US, which through NATO controls EU and the UK. Both EU and UK have mentally accepted to be subordinates of the US. NATO expansion is driven by the US for the benefit of Lockheed et alia. and as suboridnates, EU and UK have to go along.
The US's help to Europe after WW 2 has made Europeans timid and they bow to the US. It is like the US has a blank cheque to control Europe permanently due to the help they gave 70 years ago. In the case of the UK, it believes that the US will make it a special beneficiary, over and above the Europeans. Hence, the UK regards the Europeans as a hindrance - although 40% of the UK's trade was with the EU, and loss in that trade has not been plugged by an alternative.
By analogy, the UK and EU look down on Russia, although 60-70% of their energy comes from Russia. Putting sanctions has not allowed them to find an alternative to plug the gap.
Till the EU - and the UK also - develops independent thinking, and says they will decide who their friends are and who they will trade with (regardless of what Americans think), the Europeans and British have to jump over the cliff like lemmings because the US thinks that is needed. This crisis has shown countries like India, China, Iran etc. do not follow anyone's order except their own. That is true sovereignty. The Europeans and British are only partially sovereign.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@steveprocter6241 The US was deluded into thinking it could put bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia, and the Russians would not stop it. You thought your weapons would enable Ukraine to win and you thought that financial sanctions will make Russia fold. Those were delusions. Now your proxy is trying to stave off defeat, and the US has surrendered to Russia's wish and declared Ukraine cannot be in NATO. The US now understands it cannot get bases. Russia is also ending the US imperial game by promoting de-dollarisation. The US used its military power to force Arab nations to sell oil in dollars ONLY. It could print dollars and live in debt. As Putin said, the US was extracting a tribute from the rest of the world, like all imperial powers. But Russia has started the end of dollar hegemony. In fact, that is more significant than the Ukraine war and Ukraine's borders.
The US has been living an imperialist life bringing regime change to put governments subservient to it by invading them (Iraq, Afghanistan), threatening them (Pakistan), assassinating leaders (Iran, Chile...) or though financing coups (Ukraine, etc.). But in Ukraine, it got a blow back it did not anticipate.
As for fascists, Nazi groups like Right Sector and Azov Battalion took part in Ukraine's coup. They wear Nazi tattoos. US politicians like tThe Jewess Victoria Nuland and John McCain were handing out biscuits to the crowd in which these Nazi groups took part. So what are you talking about ? Shameless person.
Russia has said one of the targets of its special military operation is de-Nazification of Ukraine. The Red Army de-Nazified Germany and the Russian army will de-Nazify Ukraine. The Russians beat the hell out of the Azov Batallion in Mariopol. You remember ? That is the Russians for you.
1
-
1
-
@steveprocter6241 Now you are putting on a brave front. 'Ukraine is neither winning nor losing at this very moment.'
Ukraine was supposed to put up a spring offensive and reach Crimea. That was what was touted by Ukraine and its handlers. Now 3 months have passed and Ukraine cannot reach the first line of defence.
In fact, in Sept. 2022, Zelensky said Ukraine will take Crimea by Dec 2022 because 'that is where it started, that is where it will end'.
If Ukraine is not winning, it is losing because time is running out for Ukraine - time is not running out for Russia. Ukraine's manpower is severely attritioned in this offensive, it is difficult to build another army and train them in the west. The west is not able to supply enough ammunitions in time. This will get worse next year. Further, two US contestants, Trump and Ramasamy have publicly said they will ditch Ukraine. Ukraine will not last without US support. The rest of NATO does not count.
We do not know what will be Ukraine's borders, but it is certain the Ukraine of 1991 is not coming back. Also, in the Vilnius NATO summit, the US surrendered and agreed to Russia's demand that Ukraine will not join NATO. So what battle of ideas has Ukraine won ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
First of all, the US itself has proved it does not have the fighting capability. It can fight against weaker people like Iraq and Afghanistan, but there too from the air with no opposition; and even there, the US had to withdraw without success. In Afghanistan, after 20 years the US returned Taliban to power just to get out. And now Iraq trades and moves with Iran, which hates the US for overthrowing the govt. of Mossadegh in 1956 and foisting the Shah on it.
The US cannot fight a superior power like Russia or China. That is why the US refused to send troops to Ukraine. It knows the Russians would massacre the Americans, and all hell would break lose in the US when the bodybags come. The US can fight only through a proxy. Even that strategy is failing in Ukraine, Africa, etc.
Further, the US does not have the military technology to fight Russia and China. In the last 30 years, you developed technology to fight Afghan wedding parties. You are still at the stage of testing hypersonic missiles - four tests have failed. Russia has them, and soon they will put them in their super quiet Yasen submarines that will patrol both east and west coast 24 h a day. China and Korea have hypersonics. The US's defence industry is corrupt and their aim is to make profit, their aim is not to support a national need. There in lies the difference between Russia (or China) and the US. The Russians can produce and innovate while a national war is ongoing. They are number one now in drone and missile technology, with battle tested performance.
You mock the 'pompus, woke, little tin pot, soyboy European militaries' - as if you are different ! That description fits you too. You are afraid to fight Russia and China.
So don't put on airs and pretend the US is something exceptional. That was 70 years ago.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@terryroxburgh3276 'NATO fights for the US, the US fights when it benefits them.'
Aptly out. It can be proved with two instances.
The US wanted to fight in Afghanistan, and most of the rest of NATO were dragged along (except Turkey). After 20 years, the US under Trump negotiated with the Taliban in Doha without other NATO members, then under Biden it exited Kabul without informing the NATO 'partners' ! The Americans did it secretly so they could catch the first flights out before Taliban deadline.
Long ago, Kissinger said the US will not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany and Europe. That stand has not changed.
Project 'Ukraine in NATO' was created by the US. The US under Victoria Nuland organised the coup in 2014 which brought Russophobic nationalists to power, who wanted to join NATO. Merkel and Sarkozy were against NATO expansion to Ukraine as they feared it would lead to war. Nuland was caught saying 'F... the Europeans'.
Now as the US realises its 'project Ukraine' is lost, and Ukraine cannot be in NATO without fighting a nuclear war, the US will abandon Ukraine. The Trump camp says that openly - it is a European war, it has nothing to do with us. Even Harris will get rid of Blinken, get a new team who will tell her to ask the Europeans to take over responsibility for Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@siddharthreddiar3353 Do you have something hypersonic like the Oreshnik, and Sarmat missiles ? If you got into a fight with Russia, you won't last unless the Americans come in to save your skin. Ukrainians can at last fight, they have the same DNA as the Russians. Britain's army in past wars used Indian troops, hardy Gurkhas, Pathans and Sikhs. They don't have that anymore.
In 1956, Britain, France and Israel invaded Egypt after Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal. The Soviet Union asked them to get out. 10 Downing Street was sent a letter saying Britain would be nuked unless it pulled out of Suez. The British looked at the Americans for help, but Eisenhower told the Brits to climb down, or else they were on their own against the Soviets. The British climbed down and the Suez debacle was a burning embarrasment for Anthony Eden's government. Since then, the British realised they did not have the power to go on colonial adventures on their own, so they always went as partners in American invasions. But inside their minds, the debacle of1956 inflicted by the Soviets burns in them, that is why they are so stridently anti-Russian; to such an extent, they went and signed a 100 year agreement with Ukraine to check Russia !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When it is pointed out that the Russians are not going to blow up a pipeline they built and it is easier for them to turn off the tap, the westerners who want to deflect the blame on to Russia give the ingenious explanation of Russia doing it to avoid law suits and huge penalties in European courts against Gazprom for breach of supply contract !
But then cannot the Russians sue European banks for seizing their money and demand large penalties ?
It is like the west claiming Russia is shelling its own nuclear plant !
Or that the Russians used a missile against a POW camp holding Azov Nazis and killing 50 of them. If it wanted to do that, Russia could have shot 50 of them with a bullet, it would be a lot of expensive and would not have destroyed a building.
This is the western alliance, the upholder of the rule of international law. The US did blew up the pipeline, and the Europeans are so weak they dare not say so, although they very well know who did it. The west's credibility takes a further hit in the eyes of the non-west. The non-west see a cynical US and cowardly Europeans. The non-west - Iran, South America, Africa, Arabs, Afghans - have all suffered and know how Americans are. It is the first time Europeans are suffering due to America, but it has not seeped into their understanding.
1
-
1
-
1
-
You are as immature as Zelenksy. I remember when Zelensky got some Himars and fired them in Sept. 2022, on the bridge, he said Ukraine will take Crimea by Dec. 2023. He said 'that is where it started, that is where it will end'.
A few months, he was in Vilnius begging for NATO entry. He was denied and told to be grateful and that NATO is not Amazon. Ukraine is in a desperate position, and you imagine a few F16s will change the outcome.
Now, that has failed, you have pushed it to 2024, after Ukraine gets F 16s. The record shows none of the game changers have worked . Russia has destroyed the Javelins, drones, Himars, Bradleys, Leopards, Patriots, Storm Shadows. They have the capability of destroying the F 16s. The Russians have plenty of time to prepare.
If Ukraine puts one foot in Crimea, it will receive a nuclear strike. Blinken has been told.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheNerdReich Zelensky and British intelligence and media were saying in 2022 that Russia is running out of missiles, they cannot get chips, they are using washing machine chips. The British intelligence even said the Russians were reduced to fighting in Bakhmut with shovels.
Here we are in 2024, Russia has an unimaginable and awesome arsenal. They fired a missile at Dnipro that went at 10x speed of sound, and no Patriot can stop that. From thousands of kms, it reached in 15 minutes. If placed in a Russian submarine patrolling the two US coasts, all US cities will be reached in less than a second.
That is why Zelensky is howling and NATO is going to hold an emergency meeting. The missile that struck Dniepro had a conventional tip, but it can hold a nuclear tip. Ukraine is not releasing info on the damage it caused.
The implication is that if western targets are selected, the west cannot stop any of the new Russian missiles. Russia has tested its hypersonic delivery system on Ukraine, so if the west escalates, it is ready, start with conventional and go to nuclear if necessary. The US is trying to downplay it and say Russia is short of these missiles.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
All those upbeat projections about Ukrainian summer offensive and victory are over I think. The Ukrainian clown who said it started in Crimea and will end in Crimea by December must now know the reality. Russia cannot be dislodged by Ukraine teaming up with US. If Ukraine wants to survive, it has to hand over Donbass and Odessa and keep NATO out. Otherwise, the remainder of Ukraine will be made a wasteland.
The BBC reporter still talks about Russia being 'not able to afford another defeat'. Wars are not settled by advances and retreats here and there, but by the trends. The trend is Russia has overwhelming power, it is not only destroying the Ukrainian military, but also Ukraine's power infrastructure, it has already destroyed Ukraine's economy, and has even checked the economies of Ukraine's handlers. That is why the BBC's mood is now sombre.
Russia will get Bakhmut eventually. When the BBC reporter says attritional advance, that is an admission the inevitable cannot be averted.
When the Russians fight, they hunker down and fight hard on multiple levels : military fight with all sorts of weapons, including dangling the nuclear sword when needed, energy, food, financial, cyber. They have planned it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@terminalimpact2771 Your type has been saying the same for the last 5 months. Russians have lost all officers and generals, they have no ammunition left, Putin has cancer and he will be overthrown, rouble will be rubble etc.
But Russia has taken Kherson, the Ukro Nazi HQ Mariopol is captured and the hard core Nazis are in captivity, the Russians have taken Severodonetsk, Lyscychank, Siversk, they are bearing down on Bakhmut, they have substantial control of Zaphrozia, they are assaulting Kharkov, they have made Ukraine landlocked, so what are you talking about ? Ukraine as it existed in 1992 (when it became independent) does not exist anymore and will not exist again. US hopes of Ukraine being in NATO are definitely ended.
The Russian economy took a hit? How about the Ukranian ? And what about the Europeans who will be freezing soon ?
You are defeated and so you are delusional. From your bleating, it is apparent that the westerner's false pride is punctured.
The difference between the west and Russia is you are all mouth and no trousers; Russia does not talk, it just does. The world respects doers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Off-Grid-World With all due respect, you are out of touch with reality like the British ruling class.
Ex defence minister Ben Wallace said at the start of the war that Britain will kick Putin's bottom just like the British did in the Crimean war. That was in 1856. Can Britain do that in 2024 ?
But in 1945, Britain became a 'has-been' and the Soviet Union emerged as a superpower. You should recall the Suez crisis of 1956 when the British thought like you that 'You can't go ruling the world almost for a few hundred years then suddenly forget how to conduct yourself in a strategic manner to implement what's available to help you logistically and militarily', and decided to invade Egypt with France and Israel, citing violation of the 'international rules based order' because Egypt nationalised the Suez canal. At that time, the Soviet Union cracked the whip and actually sent a letter to Britain to withdraw or be nuked. Eisenhower chose to look the other way and decided the US did no want to fight the Soviet Union to save these three criminal nations. Britain had to withdraw, and it was a massive humiliation of Anthony Eden.
So don't get carried away with delusions. Russia is a power, Britain is nobody. If you mess with the bear, it will paw you, and don't expect the Americans will intervene; they will look the other way like Eisenhower, and all the other attached forces from different countries who are aligned with you will not be able to save you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@karolean8342 Russia's war is not one of acquisition of territory. It is a message to the US it will have no naval and missile bases in Ukraine. Territory taken or converted to wasteland is collateral. The main purpose is the first. Now the US knows it cannot have bases in Ukraine, because Russia will fight a nuclear war to stop it if needed. Ukraine is not going to join NATO. It is not going to exist.
Finland is an irrelevant country. Sweden has blocked itself by alienating Turkey.
The most far reaching consequence is Russia has ended the western run global order. It has catalysed de-dollarisation. The US invaded Iraq and destroyed Libya because they started selling oil in euros. If the dollar's value goes, the US would not be able to finance wars and impose its diktats on other countries. Now the de-dollarisation process cannot be stopped. Russia is not Iraq or Libya, it has the capacity to turn the US into a wasteland. China has gold backed currency, the yuan.
When Boris Johnson said so emphatically Putin must not be allowed to win, he understood the seriousness of the impact : it would end the western 'rules based international order' which allowed western domination. The de-dollarisation movement cannot be stopped as Russia, China, India are backing it; so are Arabs, South Americans and Africans. Hence, Russia has achieved a major and far reaching effect that ends western domination, and how much of Ukraine it takes is minor. De-dollarisation is a matter of time, a slow process, but which has picked up momentum and cannot be stopped. The US and its vassals cannot invade other countries to force the use of dollars.
What Russia has achieved has profound consequences for the west which goes way beyond how many cities in Ukraine Russia took. Your catalogue misses the most important outcome of what Russia has achieved. But then you are a small minded westerner smarting from Russia's punch.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nigelgarrett7970 The British were claiming Challengers are invincible. The Americans said the same about Abrams. All because they could fight in Iraq against opposition that did not have the latest. But when the Challengers, Leopards and Abrams came out in Ukraine, Russia destroyed them. The Ukrainian counter offensive failed despite these, cluster bombs, Himars. True or not ?
'....just that they are better than the Soviet and Russian ones'
That is a conviction born out of conceit. Where is the evidence ? Russia destroyed all types of your equipment. Your equipment is junk, NATO has not fought a war that it has won, nor have the British, French or Americans. The way NATO ran away from Kabul proves you are cowards, and you cannot fight. The Russians have combined arms warfare capability that no one else has. That is tanks, drones, missiles, thermobaric weapons, hypersonic missiles, electronic jamming all working together. They have unused capability in anti-satellite destruction and nuclear weapons, so they hold the nuclear sword above you.
And the Russians can fight - you saw in Bakhmut, and how they torched the Ukro Nazis in Mariopol. The collective west cannot match Russia. You may recall the Red Army beat Germany into a pulp. Like that the Russians can beat NATO into a pulp. Britain can be finished with a single hypersonic Sarmat missile.
If for a moment you really believed your weapons were better and you thought you could win, you would have sent troops to Ukraine. But you know you will be killed on a scale you did not experience before.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Give me a break ! Ukraine ain't going to force Russia out of Donbass and Crimea.
When Himars were given, Zelensky and his handlers said Ukraine will capture Crimea by Dec. 2022. Ukraine did attack the Kerch bridge and threaten Crimea. That bought massive Russian retaliation. Russia destroyed the power grid and kept Ukraine mending it. No time for Crimea. The Russians withdrew from Kherson city, let the Ukranians take it, and shelled them from the across the river, so Ukraine could not go further with the Kherson offensive. After that Russia, ramped up the attack in Donbass. Soledar fell, Bakhmut is on the verge of falling. Once that falls, Russia will go after Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. Odessa is a region that must return to Russia.
Ukraine has lost a lot of manpower in Soledar and Bakhmut. Russia has ramped up its manpower. The Himars did not make much effect, so now it is tanks. But they are too little too late and they are a haphazard collection. The west is not able to ramp up production.
And finally, Russia can force unconditional surrender any time with a tactical nuclear weapon on Kiev.
There is no way the Ukraine of 2014 will return, let alone the Ukraine of 1991. The battle in the south and east is lost and the west knows it. Now the question is whether Ukraine can stave off losing central Ukraine.
The Ukranians have been dumb, sacrificing their country for fighting for an American interest to have naval bases. The Americans are unwilling to die, but Ukranians are will to die for an American goal. Who does that ? Unbelievable stupidity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The blame game has started and that is a sign of looming defeat. But one cannot blame Zelensky alone - although as the front public figure, he will be held responsible. He is a mere puppet, his handler is the US. The US is the cause for Ukraine's catastrophe. The Ukrainians should say this. Ukraine was in trouble when it took US money and staged a coup in 2014. The US and its vassals in Europe pushed to get Ukraine into NATO. The US wanted naval and missile bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia. When Russia punched Ukraine and its handlers in 2022, initially the Russian offensive did not click, and Ukraine did much better, well beyond expectation. There was euphoria in Ukraine and amongst its handlers. They declared Russia was weak and incompetent, and would be beaten. But in 2023, the tide turned. Russia got its act together and Ukraine's progress had plateaued. In 2023, both Ukraine and its handlers were put on the back foot. The casualties took a toll on Ukraine's manpower. And the west could not ramp up production of hardware; and they had to grapple with the hit to their economies. Russia had the stamina to continue.
The Ukranians should fix the blame on the US and NATO, ask them to get out, and negotiate and repair relations with Russia. Going with the US will compound the disaster. At some stage, the US will walk away and not take responsibility and Ukraine will be in a weaker position.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There was an article in a Chinese paper which summed it up : the US instigated the crisis but the greatest damage is to Europe, the most important stakeholder (apart from Ukraine).
Europe has little influence on controlling the fall out.
For the US, the long term damage is de-dollarisation of the world economy. As the dollar becomes less important, the US becomes less important. For Europe, the effect is immediate : de-industrialisation. BASF has announced downsizing in Europe and shifting production - to China !
The Europeans are dumb lemmings committing economic suicide under the belief the US is a partner with 'shared values'. It is scarcely believable they don't have the capacity for independent thinking. You speak to people from Germany, Britain, Poland etc., you will find they don't have the courage to pinpoint the US, they think it is Putin only.
The Europeans are very afraid to speak against the US. If you meet Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Turks etc., they have no hesitation to say the US is the instigator and the solution is for Europe to assert itself against the US. They have faced US duplicity and mischief before, so they know.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@beane6426 'With respect to the Iraq War, and the US invasion, the justification for that action was Iraq’s violations of UN resolutions, most notably Resolutions 687 and 1441, the later of which was an acknowledgement from the UN General Assembly that Iraq was in breach of the terms it had agreed to after Desert Storm. '
You are carefully skirting the second Iraq War, in which Blair and Bush lied there were WMDs and went in without any UN permission. The US cynically called it "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Blair and Bush are war criminals and were not tried.
'Russia just wanted Ukrainian territory so they invaded. '
It is not as simple as that. When Russia made Ukraine independent, it was under some understanding - Ukraine had to return nukes, agree to be neutral and not join any military alliance against Russia. Ukraine did the first but after the 2014 coup funded by the US, it changed its constitution and said it would seek to join NATO. Therefore Ukraine reneged on the understanding with Russia, and therefore Russia decided to terminate Ukraine's independence to the extent of modifying its borders. Ukraine teamed up with the US to threaten to exclude Russia's access to the Black Sea, hence the Russian action is entirely justified.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sir Putin must be quaking at the thought of the almighty British army coming to Ukraine !
The British have this WW 2 itch of 'standing up to evil' - when they themselves have been evil stoking wars (Iraq, look at their colonial history). Plus they have a hangover of the Crimean war of 1856 when Britain, France and Turkey defeated Russia. But the Soviet Union since 1945, and the Russia of 2024 is not the same, it is an awesome superpower with an incredible arsenal. Like Stalin who led the Soviet Union during the critical war against the Nazis, Russia is led today by an iron willed leader. Britain has puny leaders like BoJo, Truss, Sunak, Starmer....
The British and Americans organised the ill fated Ukrainian counter offensive of 2023. They were behind the harebrained Kursk offensive, which has speeded up the downfall of Donbass. The British have an insatiable appetite for wicked adventures because they are desperate for relevance. It is a once-upon-a-time power that cannot come to terms with its loss of status. So it teams up with the US, claiming a special relationship. When the US is washing its hands off Ukraine, it is silly for the British to imagine they can change the outcome in Ukraine by sending a few thousand troops.
Believe me, one Kinzhal or Oreshnik strike will send them packing. The Swedes became as outraged as the British with Russia, they sent trainers to train Ukrainians in electronic warfare. The Swedes were training them in a military academy in Poltava, till a single Kinzhal killed 50 of them. They could not detect the Kinzhal let alone jam it ! After that episode, the Swedes withdrew quietly. The same will happen to the British.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wertiopo Westerners don't generally know much history, for them the problem starts in Feb 2022 when Russia started the operation to clear out the Ukro Nazis.
Westerners come out with statements about NATO is a defensive alliance, and Ukraine has a sovereign right to join NATO etc.
They don't want to know about the fostering of Ukro Nazi anti-Russian nationalists by the US. The US under Victoria Nuland created the coup of 2014, which overthrew the elected government. Thereafter, Ukraine has an implanted govt. which favours the US. Implanted governments do not have sovereignty.
Western Ukraine always had Nazi leanings as it is the home of Bandera, the fountainhead of Ukrainian fascism. Bandera and his followers tried to side with the German Nazis. They carried out a pogrom against Poles (the Poles forget, and embrace the same Ukro Nazis now). After 2014, there are now statues and roads in Ukraine named after Bandera. The Right Sector and Azov Batallion wear Nazi tattoos.
This style of ethnic nationalism in a country which has two major communities (Ukranians are the majority, but Russians are a highly significant minority) was bound to create break up of the country. The US and the west have endorsed this Ukro Nazi fascism and led to break up of the country.
Earlier around 2010, BBC and others were reporting on the dangers of Ukro Nazis because 'white nationalists' from the west were flocking to Ukraine for training, and threatening to bring violence to their home countries. Western 'White nationalists' were attracted to Ukraine because the founder of the Azov Batallion, Andrei Biletski had said his objective was to save the white race from the untermenschen. At one stage, the US had banned Azov as a terrorist group. Now the US and west are supporting them as great freedom fighters fighting for democracy, and saving the west. This is how duplicitous and immoral the west is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ferrariguy8278 After lecturing the world on the need for free markets, and demanding everyone to grant them, now you want to roll them back.
If the free market meant giving you right to sell your products without hindrance of taxes, you would be happy. But no country will allow that. Then your capitalist found a way to get access to the markets abroad - shift production there. Then the locals make them there, some of them can afford to buy the products, and the rest of the products you can export back to the US. Meanwhile, the American loses his factory jobs, and he survives on service jobs, which can range from McDonald's to Facebook. The ones who cannot enter any jobs were given loans to buy houses and live as before, so there were also contended - till the bubble collapsed.
Manufacturing was hollowed out by your capitalist, so don't blame China. Meanwhile you spend trillions for wars against Muslims, and now you have found a war against Russia, that will keep you worked up for some more time. Now you direct your frustrations at Mexicans, Muslims, immigrants, Russia, China....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is amusing to read the confusion and division in NATO and the western ranks over what tanks to send. It has descended to recriminations, which will lead to bitterness. Germany is required to commit national economic suicide to please America's lust for NATO expansion. All the useless nations of Europe like Poland badmouth Germany. The conceited British who disdained the EU and left it, now want to show they lead Europe against Russia !
Westerners keep claiming that NATO is the most powerful and richest alliance in the world. It is actually an unwieldy body controlled by the US and run with US interests first. After seeing the debacle in Afghanistan, where the captain ran away without telling the subordinates, it was clear NATO is a useless organisation. Such an organisation will never dare fight mighty Russia with troops on the ground as its members are fearful of death.
Russia makes decisions quickly and moves, while NATO will need many meetings. By the time they decide on tanks, Bakhmut will fall, and after that Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. NATO has sent many game changers, but Ukraine is against the ropes and is being pummeled. Now, NATO is running out of ideas. As for the much vaunted Article 5, should Russia have to attack Europe (as it nearly did when Lithuania tried to blockade Kaliningrad), the Americans will chicken out from a fight, and the rest of the Europeans will squeal and squawk but will not be able to fight Russia.
It was foolhardy of NATO to push expansion and take on mighty Russia.
1
-
Everyone has commented on Piers bias, which he covers up by saying he is giving Palestinians a chance to present the other side of the story, and he also says he condemned the Iraq war. Those don't prove he is not biased.
The Palestinian has to condemn the attack on 7 Oct. and he cannot point out that the occupied has the right to attack the occupier. What did the Jews do in the Warsaw Ghetto ? They tried to arm themselves and attack the Germans. Did anyone ask the Jews to condemn attacking their oppressors ?
The bias also comes out in the tone of his interviews with the Ambassador, Mohd. Hijab, and Bassem Yousef.
However, Mohd. Hijab nailed Piers in the opening when he introduced him as 'controversial'. Right at the opening, Piers tries to discredit the invitee - he would not do that to a Jew. Hijab spotted this and asked why he introduced him as controversial. Piers said 'because you are'. 'So are you, and so was the Israeli ambassador', shot back Hijab. Hijab reduced Piers to a confused moron and then asked 'Why are you stuttering ?' To which Piers replied meekly 'I am not stuttering' !
If you want to see the best demolition job of Piers, see the interview with Hijab. Hijab right from the beginning made Piers the accused !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jBgGY2Ww9Q
Piers would not dare to be accusative to the Jew. There is a reason for that. The Jews will raise a stink about anti-Semitism and run Piers out of business.
Hence, Piers is a shameless appeaser of the Jews. He has to be for his business to be lucrative. He will never be able to ask an Israeli ambassador to condemn Israeli land grabbing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'Their entire economy is worth less than that of Italy. Or, about the same as Belgium + Netherlands.'
That is a simplistic and immature analysis. It depends what is in the economy of Italy or Belgium + Netherlands.
Russia produces oil and gas; metals and alloys (even now Boeing uses the titanium Russia produces); it produces gold; it is the biggest producer of wheat; it has control of the entire nuclear supply chain (the US did not sanction this); it makes hypersonic missiles (even the US cannot make it); it makes submarines, ICBMs, drones, thermobaric weapons; it launches its own satellites, it has its own GPS; it has expertise in cyber and electronic warfare.
Can Italy, Belgium + Netherlands, do the above ? Idiot !
'And yes, they will run out of equipment, its happening already as we can see with their use of motorcycles, Chinese 'golf carts' etc. '
In Bakhmut, British intelligence said Russia had run out of guns and their soldiers were fighting with shovels. In 2022, they said they had run out of chips, and were using washing machine chips. Biden had said in the first month the rouble will be rubble.
Did any of that happen ? Idiot !
You have lost the war and you are mired in your delusions. If Russia was not a power, and you thought you could win, you would have sent troops to Ukraine. But a single hypersonic Sarmat missile will wipe out Italy, Belgium, Netherlands in the blink of an eye. And the US will look the other way. So don't fool yourself.
1
-
@Polygarden It is not even worse for Russia. Russia is bigger than all the countries of Europe combined, and it has many resources. Russia is self sufficient. - besides oil and gas, it controls the nuclear fuel supply chain, it mines gold and diamonds, it is the largest wheat and fertiliser producer, it produces metals like titanium and other alloys (Boeing buys titanium from Russia).
Russia launches its own satellites, it has its own GPS, it makes planes, it makes arms, it has set up alternative banking channels. No one in Europe is capable of this. Russia has not outsourced its manufacturing.
'The Netherlands, Belgium and other European powers are managing to produce industrial goods which Russia is depending on.'
Russia does not depend on minor countries like Netherlands, Belgium...Can you launch a satellite, have your own GPS, can you make titanium ? The French and the US cannot run their nuclear power plants without Russian input. Netherlands, Belgium are unimportant vassals of the US.
You pretend alternative energy is replacing fossil fuels. No one is coming off oil and gas soon. That includes US and Norway.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidg3944 Shaking the hand is the gentlemanly thing to do when surrendering. The British (Times Radio) are wasting their time thinking they can make Ukraine fight on when America has chucked in the towel. The EU has also toned down support of Ukraine and belief that Ukraine can win,
The British are delusional and one needs to analyse why. The British think they are in the time of the Crimean War of 1856 when the British, French and Turks jointly defeated Russia. But since then, in 1956, the Soviet Union forced Britain to abandon its Suez invasion of Egypt at the pain of a nuke strike. The British went to the Americans for help, Eisenhower turned it down.
There is no one in Europe singly or collectively who can defeat Russia. The British, French and Germans could fight Russia up to WW 2, but after 1945, Russia graduated to a superpower status due to Stalin's determination. Russia built an incredible arsenal. The Americans do not want to fight a direct war with Russia because they know they will be annihilated. They will fight proxy wars.
In this scenario, why does Times Radio not accept the reality ? Britain is not a power in the same league as Russia. If there are negotiations, it will be between Russia and US, and Britain and EU will not be even invited, despite your chest beating about the support you have given Ukraine. If there are no negotiations and Russia chose to fight on, Britain is not in a position to stem a Russian advance.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Osama-g1l In the aftermath of the stabbings of 3 girls after the concert, Robinson was amongst the people who falsely made the accusation that Muslims did it, and based on messages by people of his ilk including Farage, his mindless followers attacked a mosque first; after it came out that a Welsh Christian did the stabbings, his thugs turned instead on a Holiday Inn housing asylum seekers and tried to set it on fire, then they indulged in attacks on the police. If you look at the number of arrests and convictions of violent 'protestors', only 3 were Muslims, the rest, about 695 were Robinson types. Get it ?
'And This is very relevant: what do you think about islam?'
It is more relevant to ask why Britain went and invaded Islamic countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, bombed Libya and created Israel. You created war in their countries, so you have refugees. You have to live with them - in Britain and abroad. Muslims had lived in Britain for a very long time, and problems only came after Britain invaded their countries. Even Britain is fighting for Israel and creating more refugees who will come to Britain. You have to take them.
1
-
As usual, Israelis are pretending innocence, and claiming they always wanted peace, but could not find anyone to talk to. It is like their claim that Palestine was a land without people for a people without land. And as usual western media sucking up to such people and giving them a platform.
The Israelis have a colonial, apartheid mentality, they always had it, and they have institutionalised it. It is a creation of Britain and it is carried now by the US.
Anyhow, all their humbug and western backing cannot save Israel now. There are no more quick six day wars to win. Israel cannot win a multi-front battle of attrition, the technology gap has narrowed and Israel's opponents can and will fight an open ended war. 500,000 Israelis with dual nationalities have left, and more will go in a prolonged war. The IDF soldiers are psychologically unprepared for a war of attrition, and I read their morale is low now. Unlike Palestinians and Hezbollah who are used to hardship. They belong to the land, they do not have dual citizenship, they cannot run away.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Putin has defeated the west, and such is the anguish caused to the British, that they imagine if only Churchill was here, he would defeat Putin !
I wonder why the British in particular feel rankled by Russia so much. The reason is at the end of WW 2, Britain's position on the world stage ended and the Soviet Union took its place as the superpower. Further, in the Suez crisis in 1956 when Britain teamed with France (another ex-power) and Israel and invaded Egypt, the Soviet Union made them withdraw by threatening to strike London and Paris with nukes. Eisenhower looked the other way and asked Britain and France to withdraw. Anthony Eden's govt. was humiliated. Since then, the British are itching for a fight with Russia. The problem is they do not have the power, they try to ride on America's coat tails.
Britain's navy is unfit, it has one submarine in the sea, the Trident flopped two times, and the Challengers were destroyed as soon as they were deployed in Ukraine. It can hardly raise 30,000 troops. It cannot call up Indian soldiers. In contrast, a single Sarmat missile can take out Britain and with a hypersonic missile, it will be in a blink of an eye. What would Churchill have done ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jackneuman5108 Russia is prevailing because Ukraine has lost 20% of the land that produced 90% of its GDP. Further, the Russians block Ukraine's access to the Black Sea. Ukraine has to ship wheat through Poland and now Polish farmers have blocked that. Russia has destroyed Ukraine's power grid. They have taken Soledar and Bakhmut. They have fortified the lines.
Russian economy is going down ? You said that in the first month. Biden said rouble will be rubble. None of that happened. Instead, Russia floored western economies. Germany is being de-industrialised. Workers in France, Britain and Germany are on strike due to inflation. No one is on strike in Russia because they cannot afford heating. Russia's economy is essentially self sufficient. Also, they have found alternative trade partners.
Your 'modern gear flowing in to Ukraine' will make no difference. You said Himars were game changers. Now the western media which said Himars were game changers say the Russians jammed the GPS and the Himars are not hitting targets. The Russians have destroyed one Patriot and damaged one out of a battery of three; this is slowly being admitted.
The western media, Stoltenberg and all the rest of the gang, said that the west cannot produce enough artillery shells to meet Ukraine's consumption. NATO has admitted it cannot ramp up production. The Russians can and have. They fired 7 shells at the Ukro Nazis in Bakhmut compared with one the Ukranians fired. Against the Patriots and tanks, they will keep attacking them with drones and the like, till the west cannot supply enough Patriot missiles. This is their tactic. It will be like the artillery shells. The Russians can turn Ukraine into a wasteland which is permanently dependent on EU aid. They will not allow any reconstruction.
As for demographics, what about Ukraine ? 30% of its population is refugees. Ukraine has lost a lot of men in Bakhmut to no avail.
The war is lost for the west. You know the saying 'Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall and fell down and all the Kinf's Men and Horses could not put him back again'. That is Ukraine's situation. The Ukraine of 2014 is not coming back, still less the Ukraine of 1991. It is gone for good. If they continue, they will lose more.
Anyhow, the west must continue out of false pride. Defeat is painful to accept. This Ukranian counter offensive is the last desperate throw of the die. It has not taken off even. Once it peters out, the US will move on to China and tell Ukraine to accept the reality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russia killed the Ukranian counter offensive even before it could start !
The NATO planners wanted Ukraine to punch through Russian defences and follow with a blitzkrieg to the Azov Sea. The Russians would get dazed and run away or get captured.
Instead, the Bandera army lost a lot of soldiers, and those superior western wonder weapons. This is even without getting near the first Russian line. The west could not deny this because the Russians released videos of Bradleys and Leopards burning, and the Ukranians soldiers getting blown up by mines.
Now we are told the Bandera army is doing probing attacks all along the front, identifying Russia's weak spots, and wearing the Russians down and fixing them. The Russians will lose their concentration and Ukraine will overwhelm them, that is the new theory.
The western expectation was Ukraine will perform like in 2022. However, in 2023, Ukraine has only lost - they lost the power grid, then Soledar, then Bakhmut. The west has not come to terms with the reality. Perhaps the US generals know.
But the US politicians are unable to accept their reality as they staked their reputations on a western win. Ukraine will be ordered to do a big suicide mission before the NATO summit. When that flops as well, the US will ask Ukraine to negotiate. The US has better things to do - fight with China next.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Anders is at last being realistic - this is his first admission that the war is lost for the west ! He cannot go on about Ukrainian victory in Kursk.
Anders is right that for Russia it is not a war for land. But he is not right that the war for Russia is for political control. Russia's number one motivation is security : it cannot allow US missile and naval bases in Ukraine. The US ambition was to cut off Russia's access to the Black Sea. Sevastopol in the Crimea is the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet, and if Russia had not retaken Crimea, the US 7th Fleet would be sailing from it.
He proposes another type of devious western argument that if Ukraine joined the west, it would become prosperous and Russia did not want that. First of all, it is an assumption joining the west would make Ukraine prosperous. Ukraine was in the hands of oligarchs, mostly Jews, who sucked out its wealth - like Ihor Kolomvosky, who financed Zelensky (all Jews). And on the other side, you had Jews like Victoria Nuland, Black Rock, Blinken etc.
Earlier Putin said he had no objection to Ukraine joining the EU, as that is an economic alliance, but NATO is a military alliance directed against Russia. Now Russia will not allow Ukraine to join the EU as lately the EU has acted like NATO. Hence, it is s devious argument Anders makes that Russia's aim is to prevent Ukraine joining the west and becoming prosperous - that is a typical western self image of superiority. It is like Bush saying the Muslims did not like America's freedoms, so they struck it; whereas it is related to US support of Israel. Russia wants to be prosperous, it has no objection to Ukraine being prosperous. But the problem is the US wanted to put missile and naval bases to threaten Russia's prosperity. That is is not on.
Anyhow, despite Anders belief that the war is to prevent Ukraine from becoming prosperous, he now knows that the Russians will win. Ukraine has to cede what it lost and it cannot be in NATO - that is the starting Russian line now for negotiations. Earlier, Russia only asked Ukraine to be neutral. Now it cannot join NATO and it has to cede land. If it does not agree, Russia is in a position to continue and take more and decapitate Ukraine. And the west cannot stop it. Trump knows the US does not have the money and arms. And the Europeans cannot fight Russia.
Ukraine is only a pawn. Boris Johnson stated that if Russia won it will end the rules based international order which was a fig leaf for western hegemony. Since Boris and Anders and their ilk now realise that Russia has won, the most important Russian achievement is they ended western hegemony. The rest of the world salutes the Russians.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NerickovaNoha If Ukraine cannot join NATO, it has to cede 20% land at least and maybe more, and there is no security guarantee, but you mean to say Ukraine is winning ?
Russia is unable to fulfil its strategic objectives ? Russia's strategic objective was no US bases in Ukraine. The US has agreed on that. Further, Russia has achieved the longer aim of dividing NATO, with the US regarding NATO and Europe as a burden. In contrast, Ukraine joining NATO was your sacred cow. That is not possible now, so that is a strategic defeat for you. Get it, numskull ?
Russia's economy is destroyed ? Biden said the rouble will be rubble in 2022. Russia has a self sufficient economy, more or less. It did not outsource production like the US. Western predictions of collapse did not occur, and you are mouthing vain wishes out of the pain of defeat. Look at Europe's economy - see German de-industrialisation.
Europe is mobilising you say ? You will never be able to produce 155 mm shells in quantity because of high labour costs. Anyhow, none of you have the courage to die, how can cowards win wars ? Europe is mobilising for the return of fascism - AfD in Germany, Le Pen in France, far right will grow as the economic pinch deepens. The European Union will break up - the US and Russia want it.
I suggest you swallow your false pride and accept defeat.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ironknee6879 There are no alternative facts. Putin declared the aim of the special military operation is demilitarisation and deNazification of Ukraine. I wrote [ Russia fought this war to prevent NATO bases in Ukraine. That is non-negotiable. They will not allow NATO in Ukraine and they are ready to fight a nuclear war]. That is consistent with what Putin said. There are no alternative facts, I am basing myself on what Sir Putin said.
I wrote 'The Russians are winning, they cannot be evicted from Donbass and Crimea. '
The western media acknowledge Ukraine's counter offensive is going 'slower than expected' (= flop). The Ukranians cannot even reach the first defence line and they had massive casualties and loss of equipment. At best they have 3 months to make a breakthrough this year. The Russians have done the right step, they have fortified their eastern oblasts. That is not an alternative fact, the Ukranians themselves say it.
Hence, Russia is winning. In 2022, Ukraine had some wins, but in 2023, Ukraine has not had a single gain : they lost Bakhmut and Soledar, they are unable to recapture the 4 oblasts, their manpower is whittled down, and the shoddy western arms have been burnt. Russia destroyed Ukraine's power grid and has now started destroying the ports in response to the strike on the Kerch bridge. Next year, the west is not going to put money for another offensive.
The acknowledgement that Ukraine cannot win was in Vilnius, where the US barred Ukraine's entry in NATO and gave them no road map. That is the fact. That fits with the Russian aim : no NATO bases in Ukraine.
The only alternative facts are in the minds of the Slava Ukraine brigade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nwhite3080 Keep that pretence of 'democratic policies ['that no matter the size you still get you say and we listen and respect and incorporate within the plan moving forward'], to yourself.
If the US tells NATO, 'you need to come to Afghanistan and die for us', all the useless small countries of Europe oblige. But if the reverse occurred, then the US would not be willing to step forward and die for the Europeans. For example, in the war situation that the US created in Ukraine by the attempted NATO expansion, the US is not willing to come and die for 'democratic Ukraine'.
When the US decided to negotiate with Taliban in Doha under Trump, and cut and run from Kabul under Biden, it did not consult other NATO 'allies' like UK, let alone the even more useless ones like Latvia. The Americans took the first flights out and left. The UK MPs were offended, but what can a vassal do ?
You need to understand the vassal is not equal to the master. This talk about 'allies', 'partners', 'shared values' is humbug.
You will soon find Ukraine will be asked by the US to negotiate and cede land after being thrown under the bus. Latvia and others will not have a say. The US will decide. And Lativia and the rest will accept.
You claim 'no matter the size you still get you say and we listen and respect and incorporate within the plan moving forward'. The Europeans cannot even dare to say who blew up Nordstream even though they know very well who did it. You don't have a say against the US.
Russian foreign minister Lavrov after the UN vote asked some African countries why they voted against Russia. The Africans asked the US what they will get in return. The US told them, 'you will not be punished'. It is the US slogan 'you are with us or against us'.
There are sovereign countries like Russia, China, India, Iran who do not want to be vassals. All one can say of the Europeans is they are vassals of the US, but they are happy vassals with delusions that they are equal 'partners'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chrisallen9949 Don't be pretentious, get real. It is not Latvia or anyone in the EU or UK who decides what NATO will do. It is the US who decides. If the US says 'come and die for us in Afghanistan', Latvia and the others will obey. The reverse is not true. If Latvia misbehaves like Ukraine with Russia, don't assume the US will come and die for Latvia. Article 5 is written in an ambiguous way. It says that it is for each member state to decide what to in case of attack against one country - you can send medical aid, arms, or troops, or stay out. There is nothing binding on the members. Kissinger said long ago that the US will not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to save Germany. It is the same now.
The US decided Europe should not get cheap Russian gas paid in euros. Europe has to buy LNG from the US at 4x the price, paid in dollars. When the US blew up Nordstream 2, Germany, Denmark and Sweden did not have the guts to say so.
European countries are vassal states of the US. Democracy is a fig leaf, it is used for minor policies.
Some years back Putin said there are only 4 truly sovereign states : Russia, US, China and India.
Hence, it is no point taking the weakest and most useless countries like Latvia and Poland and taking them as leaders of the 'free world'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kerrytheclown Don't speak like a simpleton. There is a history and context, the problem did not start when Russia attacked Ukraine. Just because of Russian attack in Feb 2022, you cannot argue NATO is not culpable.
NATO, that is the US, is culpable as it sought NATO expansion for the benefit of US arms companies, to a position where it threatened Russia. Russia had warned the US many times. In Dec. 2021, Russia sent the US a proposal for a security arrangement for Russia.
If Ukraine joined NATO, then the US would have missile bases close to Russia, and naval bases shutting out Russia from the Black Sea. Russia is not going to allow that, it is ready to fight a nuclear war to stop the US.
Just imagine if Russia worked with Mexico to create a govt. that would allow Russia to have missile and naval bases, with the intention of promoting Mexico to reclaim Texas and California. The US would invade Mexico to pre-empt it.
Ukraine being a poor country has got nothing to do with it. Mexico is also a poor country.
Are you dumb, or you think you can be wicked and act self righteous and innocent ?
The US was devious after James Baker told Gorbachov that NATO would not expand one inch to the east. Russia is using the military mode as it has had enough of US duplicity, and it is not going to back down.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@b1daly1 The real blame is the US and its subordinates in Europe. The US financed and supported a coup d'etat in Ukraine against an elected government, it aided groups that are Nazi like Right Sector and Azov Batallion, to stoke anti Russian nationalism. The purpose was to get hold of naval bases in Ukraine. Russia asked for a security guarantee, the US declined, so Russia stopped US machinations in Ukraine.
The US has a despicable record overthrowing governments in Latin America, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and installing puppets who it can control. That might have worked in those countries, but if you try that with Russia, they will maul.
The US sent troops to Iraq to evict Saddam from Kuwait (although the US encouraged Saddam to invade Kuwait and sold arms), so if Russia has robbed Ukraine of its vital areas, why does the US not send troops to Ukraine ?
The reason is the US and its European allies do not have the courage to fight Russia. In that case, why did you encourage Ukraine to think it could get into NATO ? The US is shameless and has let Ukraine down.
1
-
@JackSparrow-vv2uq Your thesis is built on the assumption Russia will pull out. Russia is not pulling out. It will take a part in the east, the industrial part, and control the coastal part. The rest they will bomb to smithereems.
Where did you get the notion that 'Erdogan told him to pound sand and he meekly came back into the agreement to not look more like a weak fool'. If you are referring to the agreement to allow grain shipment, that was not Erdogan. The President of the African Union visited Putin (he ignored the EU) and asked for relief on grain shipment. Putin agreed, Erdogan and UN were intermediaries. Russia at one time reconsidered stopping it, because there was news that the grain was going to Europe.
The damage to Ukraine some weeks back was $ 700 billion, it will cross $1 trillion and it will keep mounting. Russia can keep going, you will find it hard to continue with handouts to Ukraine. Seizing 300 billion is irrelevant, it is not enough. Besides, there is no way Europeans and US can enter for reconstruction, as Russia can keep the war open. If a few of you get killed, you will run away.
You have led Ukraine up the wrong path. The Ukraine of 1991 is not returning. In what form it remains will be decided by Russia, and not you. Russia has changed the western run world order for good. Only Russia could do it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I would suggest to the British not to waste their time and money, because the war in Ukraine is lost already. Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall, and fell down and all the King's men and horses could not put him back again. That is Ukraine's condition.
Ukraine cannot push out Russia. NATO acknowledges that it cannot produce enough artillery shells like Russia. Likewise, all the tanks and Patriots will suffer from the same problem - the west cannot supply enough shells and missiles. Already, Russia has destroyed a Patriot battery, and the west is admitting it in drips. So how do you expect Ukraine to conduct a counter offensive now that the Russians have fortified their lines ?
Russia will never allow US bases in NATO. They are ready to use WMDs for that, and there is nothing Britain or US can do after that. And no Typhoon jets will not stop them ! In May 2022, Britain said it had given Ukraine Harpoon missiles, they said it would lift Russia's blockade of the Black Sea.
Anyhow, Russia will achieve its objective without WMDs. Ukraine cannot host NATO bases.
Tobias Ellwod, Wallace etc. are of the old colonial school who are nostalgic for the days that Britain was a world power. Johnson said 'we should not allow Putin to win' as it would spell the end of the 'rules based international order'. He believes Britain created this order - although Britain violated it in Suez, Iraq etc.
Truss was also quite militantly anti-Russian. Defence Minister Wallace said at the start of the war that Britain kicked the Tsar's backside in the Crimean War of 1856, and Britain it would do it again ! The British ministers live firmly in the past. In 1945, Britain and France's power ended, and the US and Soviet Union became the superpowers. The Soviet Union became a formidable power due to Stalin, with their nuclear and missile technology. The British have not come to terms with that.
Russia has also won the economic war which Tobias indirectly admits when he says the inflation is due to energy shortage, and it is killing western economies. This was created when the west put sanctions, and stopped Russia from using dollars and euros. Then the Russians cut off the gas. In this situation, Britain cannot afford to gift more arms to Ukraine and keep the war going.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Joker Anders has put a face-saving video saying 'we do not know what Trump will do'. Nothing to worry about !
Let us face the reality. NATO expansion into Ukraine was a US project. The US engineered the coup in 2014 in which Ukro Nazis groups like Azov Batallion and Right Sector were thrust to power, thanks to the machination of that wicked neocon Jew Victoria Nuland (wife of neocon Jew Robert Kagan, an architect of the Iraq war).
The Ukraine project has failed, the US does what it always does, just withdraw and hand over the debris to others. Supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes was supporting Ukraine till Biden was in place. The EU is not blameless, it too ganged up with the US against Russia, putting sanctions, thieving Russian assets and sending military equipment to Ukraine.
But Russia defeated the collective west. At the end of the day, Russia had the capacity to stay on for as long as it takes to ensure there will be no NATO bases in Ukraine, and the US and the west did not have the capacity.
So the blame game has started. Trump says it is a European problem, they should handle it. The Europeans say that the US wanted NATO expansion, it should not be our problem. Ukraine thinks it is the west that is to blame.
But it is Europe's problem. Long ago de Gaulle had warned if there is war in Europe, Europe faces the worst consequences because at the end of the day, the Americans do not live in Europe, and the British live on an island. The US and UK will be the inciters of wars, but they don't want the consequences.
The Europeans need to come to their senses. At the end of the day, they share the continent with Russia. None of the Europeans individually or collectively can beat Russia. UK, France and Germany were powers - in the past, not now. Russia in contrast is too awesome. No one has the manpower, raw courage and the arsenal Russia has.
The Israel project is going to be another defeat for the collective west. Israel is the last outpost of western colonialism, hence the western support. But it is unsustainable. The Ukraine and Israel projects spell the doom of the collective west and western colonialism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Jews were a problem for the Europeans. Ferdinand and Isabella killed 200,000 Jews. Napoleon killed 400,000 Jews. Hitler killed 6 million Jews. To get rid of the Jews from Europe, Britain created a state for them in a populated land, as if it was a humane solution. Britain did not want to give its land, it just re-settled the Jews in someone else's land. When all this is considered, the Europeans were the most vicious to the Jews. The Jews lived amongst Muslims. The Jews had refuge from Christian Europe in Muslim Spain.
After creation of Israel by the west which did not want the Jews, we have the strange phenomenon that the Jews fight with Muslims using western support. But it is unsustainable. Demography is against the Jews, time is against them. They either accept the two state solution which is a compromise, or they go back to where they came from, or they face continuous war. Israel in its present form can never be a normal state. The west continues to defend its folly and lost causes like Israel out of false pride.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bonnie7898 Are you still putting on airs about NATO's innocence ?
NATO is run for US interests - for its arms lobby and for its govt. which seeks to grab resources.
If Russia had not taken action in 2014 and 2022, the US would have made Ukraine part of NATO. The US staged a coup in Ukraine in 2014. That is a corrupt action with scant respect for democracy. Hence, Ukraine's corruption is not the reason the US is not letting Ukraine in.
Ukraine is at war and cannot be let into NATO. Russia said in Dec. 2022, it would undertake a military-technical action if a security guarantee for Russia was not given. The US could have negotiated and prevented the war. But it did not. When the Turks arranged negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, and the making of a deal was on the horizon, Biden send BoJo to scupper it. Why ?
Why send Ukraine to war promising NATO entry, and prevent it from a negotiated settlement to end the war, and when the war leads to defeat, tell Ukraine it cannot enter NATO because it is at war, and it should be grateful ?!!
Now that you realise Ukraine cannot win, you are washing your hands off and putting on an air of innocence. You want to say that the US is not the culprit for Ukraine's plight.
The US is the principal thug but it always wears a suit and acts like a gentleman, and pretends it is on 'the right side of history'. That is what you are doing - a thug posing as innocent. The rest of the world knows the US and has got stronger to rebuff it - not only the Russians, the Chinese and the Africans and the Arabs are pushing back.
1
-
johnnyhjohns3817 Indeed, the west's position is a comedy. It sent Ukraine to fight Russia and promised Ukraine European and western status, and when defeat stared, the US threw Ukraine under the bus, and said NATO entry is not possible (due to corruption !), and Ukraine needs to be grateful, and NATO is not Amazon. Then the blame game started. Ukraine said the west should be grateful as it was sacrificing to save western civilisation. Poland and Ukraine had a spat.
Meanwhile, the west did not find supporters to boycott Russia, de-dollarisation has kicked off, and Africans, Arabs, Latin America, China and India are distancing themselves from the west.
Comic, isn't it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Why does any Palestinian be asked to condemn October 7 ? Has Sky ever asked any Israeli to condemn the land grabbing settlers on the West Bank, and the attempts to desecrate the Dome of the Rock ?
It is not as if everything started on 7 Oct. and the Jews have not done anything criminal before. In 1948, Israeli terrorist groups like Irgun and Stern Gang ethnically cleansed villages like Deir Yassin. Israel was built that way - and is sustained that way. So if the Palestinians strike back, that is natural.
Australians may identify with Israel because it is a settler colony - like Australia. Grab the land from the aborgines, and then settle it, and say it is your own. The aborgines were too feeble to resist.
Likewise, Israel was built. The Palestinians and Arabs were weaker, but not so weak, that Israel could grab the land and live in peace thereafter. The Palestinians are able to fight an open ended war of attrition, so Israelis cannot settle like Australians and make their landgrab a fait accompli.
The Palestinian won't be like aborgines, they have the weight of the entire Muslim world behind them, so they will fight on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TG-cs1rm 'we should help migrate more nationalist indians to canada'
You know what he means by that ? He means Hindu fascists who are beating up Sikhs, Muslims and Christians in India. He thinks that Hindus have seized control of UK through Sunak, who boasts about his Hinduness.
Indians, specifically the Hindus, are now a bigger threat to Canada and western countries than Russians and Chinese. The Russians and Chinese do not migrate in large numbers to other countries. Western countries need to wake up to an India run by Hindu fascists, using the cloak of a democratic system. The Hindus of today are not the same peaceable ones as the time of Nehru, Gandhi etc. In 2014, there was a sea change in India when Modi, a avowed Hindu Nazi (he belongs to a party whose members have praised Hitler) took power. Hindu militancy was in government and it spread its tentacles where new generation Hindus have settled. The Hindu who wrote the comment reflects that.
In Britain, the same new generation of Hindu migrants created a riot in Leicester by attacking Muslims of Pakistani origin.
Modi and his Hindu extremists are persecuting and killing minorities (Sikhs, Muslims and Christians) and this will create a massive refugee problem for the west. The western countries need to realise the danger and put India in its place. The Chinese have put Modi in his place with a border scuffle. The west needs to do the same.
You are right to say that Canada should reduce immigration from India. Hindus especially should be screened to see if they support the Hindu Nazi group the RSS. The US and western countries should do the same.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'Christiane Amanpour presses Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov on the Russian invasion and whether they are achieving their objectives in Ukraine'
What is there to press about. It is clear the objectives that Russia stated are being met :
(1) Ukraine will not join NATO; Zelensky has said as much. That was the top objective.
(2) NATO will have also abandoned any dreams of Ukraine in NATO . It now knows Ukraine in NATO means nuclear war. Russia is ready for nuclear war, NATO is not.
(3) Denazification of Ukraine was an objective. The HQ of the Nazi Azov Regiment is Marioupol. They are on their last legs, some have surrendered, and the rest are being smoked out.
(3) Ukraine will not be able to get back Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea. In fact, it will have to give up more territory.
(4) Ukraine will become a land locked country.
(5) No peace settlement will be possible without Russian permission, and unless Ukraine signs up for neutrality.
The above is clear. It is the result of the west's reckless NATO expansion. The capture of Kiev and regime change were never declared as an objective, although the attack on Kiev implied that. Certainly, it would have had led to a quick finish. That indeed was thwarted. One can say the Russian army did not perform like the legendary Red Army. But still Ukraine has lost a lot, and NATO could do nothing. Ukraine is not viable as a country.
The broader picture remains Russia has met its key objectives : Ukraine will not join NATO and there is no possibility of putting US missiles in Ukraine against Russia.
They may return to Kiev after the eastern operation. And finally, Kiev can be subjected to a tactical nuclear weapon, and the west cannot stop that as they don't want to die for Ukraine.
It is actually Zelensky who is trapped : he cannot stop more of his country being decimated; he has lost more land and more is about to be lost; and now he cannot ask for negotiations as he has annoyed Russia even more.
So what is it that the patronising Amanpour does not understand ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Western media analysis are hardly objective : they typically have 1-3 'experts' all trying to play up Ukraine (they tell us all the time Ukrainians are high on motivation, and filled with the latest technology), and they downplay Russia (low on motivation, low on technology). They have no Russian analyst or anyone who might say 'Ukraine is losing and they cannot turn it around'.
The reality is Russia has taken 20% of Ukraine and they control the shipping lanes. They forget Russian airstrikes do a lot of damage and they will continue with them. Typically, they report Ukrainian claims of how many Russians they have killed, but nothing about how many Ukrainian soldiers have been killed. Russia can and will use the ultimate weapon, the tactical nuclear if needed. They have got Ukraine by the scruff of the neck and they will not let it go.
There is also economic warfare - they have strangled Ukraine's economy and made it impossible for Ukraine to export from its ports, and they have pinched the western economies with the gas. Russia has both the staying power militarily and economically. If the Ukrainian offensive has made no progress by winter, western support will dwindle. The Ukrainains, Russians and westerners know that. Such issues are not analysed. Ukraine is desperate to claim it is pushing the Russians back, otherwise funding will dry up.
The west has got into this mess because of its arrogance and incapacity to think rationally. Russia will outplay the west because it calculates and is determined. There is no western leader with Putin's determination and calculative mind. The western leaders are all mouth and no trousers. After all, Zelenksy is their model !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@futte8024 The US is NATO. The rest take orders. If the US says 'come to Afghanistan, can any of the European subordinates say we won't ?' If the US says 'we cannot put a no fly zone over Ukraine', do you think the rest will go ahead and set up a 'no fly zone' ? When Putin sent the letter on 18 Dec. 2021 asking for a written security guarantee, he sent it to Biden and Blinken, not to Stoltenberg. They did not bother with Stoltenberg as he is only the show boy European head of NATO, but the decision is made only by the US.
When the US negotiated the Afghan exit with Taliban in Doha, NATO was not invited - even thought NATO members and de facto NATO members like Ukraine were dying for the US mission in Afghanistan. When the US exited Kabul, they ran to the airport to catch the first flights out before the Taliban closed in, and they did not bother to tell their NATO allies ! Then what are you talking about 'The US is not NATO' ?
And what security guarantee should be given? That was the subject of the letter sent to Biden. Russia asked not to put missile bases in Ukraine and other NATO countries. That should have been negotiated.
Zelinsky trusted Putin? He was a bloody fool, discounting American and British intelligence stating war was inevitable. He should know Putin does what he says he will do.
'And maybe if your prediction is correct, the "remaining part" of Ukraine will become NATO member.....'
That would not be possible. Putin said recently he does not see issue with Ukraine joining the EU. Russia is not going to let the Ukraine that remains join NATO - because Russia fought the war in the first place to prevent NATO making nests in Ukraine. In fact, Russia will not allow reconstruction in the Ukraine that remains, they can keep making long distance missile strikes till the left over Ukraine agrees to sign back on neutrality. The future is bleak for Ukraine, I am sure Zelensky knows it. All the strong cards are with Russia. In fact, eventually when there is a settlement, the meetings will be between Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and UN. I cannot see how EU, US, UK can join the negotiations as guarantors for Ukraine, when these are the very people who incited Ukrainians against Russia.
1
-
@futte8024 Alright, you explained NATO going into Afghanistan as an Article 5 job, following an attack on a NATO member.
Now you skipped why the (1) in US negotiated with Taliban in Doha for withdrawing from Afghanistan, without NATO and (2) when the actual withdrawal came, the US did not consult or announce the withdrawal date, and scrambled to the airport to take the first flights ?
Based on the above, the obvious conclusion is US is NATO.
When Merkel and Sarkozy opposed NATO expansion to Ukraine in 2008 (fearing war), the US envoy in Kiev Victoria Nuland was taped saying 'F..k the EU'. The US decides what NATO should do in Ukraine.
The Europeans are door mats - I agree the US has commanded this Europeans servitude not by force.
About Zelensky you ask : 'But then tell what should he have done? Russian was going to make war in his nation anyway. '
He should have reaffirmed that Ukraine will honour the neutrality it inscribed in its declaration of independence, and not allow the US to have missile and naval bases. That would have stopped the war from starting. But he could not do that, because the US would not allow him. The ruling apparatus in Ukraine are US implants from 2014.
As for Putin, indeed BEFORE the war, the movements of equipment and personnel were exercises. Those exercises are preparational. They can continue into war - or not into war. The outcome of the exercises depended on Ukraine reaffirning the commitment to neutrality that it cited in its independence declaration, and the US giving a security guarantee. Ukraine refused to distance itself from NATO and the US refused to give the written security guarantee Russia asked, hence the exercises became a technical-military operation (which Russia promised would be the outcome if Ukraine and the US did not agree). Hence, how is it a case of Putin being untrustworthy ? You were unwilling to understanding what was said clearly, and you thought it was a bluff.
The Russians are clear in what they say, and they follow it up with action. It is the western mind that is confused. In the case of Lithuania and Kaliningrad, Russia warned it is breaking the agreement that gave Lithuania independence, and at some stage Russia will cancel Lithuania's independence. They are not like the EU and NATO where 30 nations have to debate 3 times in Parliament what to do. Before you know, they will have seized Lithuania. The EU finally pressurised Lithuania to back down on the attempted blockade of Kaliningrad. By now the EU understands that Russia has the power and determination to execute, and Article 5 of NATO will not stop them as blockade of Kaliningrad is declaration of war on a Russian territory.
1
-
@futte8024 Well, it is good that you recognise that the USA is the biggest player in NATO which is an indirect admission that the US controls NATO for the benefit of US arms companies and US interests, and it cynically dismisses European concerns. I mentioned that Merkel and Sarkozy opposed induction of Ukraine into NATO in 2008. Merkel had said it would lead to war. But the US over rode that. The US envoy to Kiev, Victoria Nuland, had shown US thinking when she said 'F..k the EU'.
'The Ukrainian war has told us different. So our government and Parliament now doubled our defence budgets for the future and through a referendum we decided to fully enter the Defence collaboration of EU. It is not the US who dictate this. It is completely out own decision.'
You are talking like Lithuania saying it was implementing EU sanctions. Lithuania is independent only nominally, and it is the same with Germany. It may be your parliament that decided to expand defence spending, but the dictation came from outside pressure. Germany had to be seen to be doing it. Nobody in Germany had the guts to say, 'we don't want to put sanctions on Russia, Germany's and the EU's prosperity depends on trade with Russia, we would rather Ukraine join the EU but not NATO, and we would prefer to reassure Russians that their security will not be threatened. Does anyone in the German parliament have the courage to say that ?'
It does not matter what Germany decided on defence budgets, the fact is Europe has no coherent capability, whatever you spend. Here are the constraint a to European defence set up independent of Americans.
You are creating a parallel organisation to NATO. That will not work.
Look at the various units in Europe.
The key players are : UK, Germany and France.
The UK stands outside the EU, it will be always a bedfellow of the Americans. de Gaulle opposed bringing UK into Europe saying it will bring the Americans through the backdoor. After Brexit, it badmouths France and Germany.
Germany is constrained by its Nazi past. Germany cannot raise its voice against the US because the US helped Germany with the Marshall aid and the Berlin airlift. There are neo Nazis lurking under the surface in Germany, and if Germany militarises, in 20-30 years, you could have these types putting Germany above Europe - which will cause alarm in the rest of Europe.
France cannot be a leader although it has long recognised the Anglo Saxon manipulation of Europe (it is implict in de Gaulle's comment). France is more pre-occupied fighting with its Muslims over the veil - that is more important to them. It also has xenophobes like Le Pen.
Then you have the smaller western European countries of little significance like Netherlands, Nordic countries. You also have Spain, Portugal and Italy who don't add up to anything.
Finally, you have the weakest link the Eastern Europeans. These are people with an inferiority complex, nursing a grievance against Russia. This includes Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland etc...They will cut their noses to spite Russia. In E. Europe also, there are neo Nazis - in Ukraine, in Poland. Orban in Hungary uses the language of Nazis. The US exploits these countries to keep its grip on Europe.
Thus, there are rivalries between Europeans (as throughout its history), so creating a force to combat Russia without the US is difficult. There in lies Europe's difficulty. It is the biggest loser of the war created by the US's NATO expansion.
Europe has a population of about 750 million and about 50 countries. Asia has a population of about 2.5-3 billion but fewer countries. The number of countries with different languages means Europe does not have a single capital and political decision centre. Countries with strong defence have a single capital and political centre (like Russia, the US, China, India).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@armandoruiz8758 You are absolutely right. The US and its allies got away with invasions of IRAQ, YEMEN, AFGHANISTAN, SYRIA, PALESTINE, KOSVO, SERBIA, YOGOSLAVIA, KOREA, VIETNAM because they did not fear of attacks on their soil. But even there, there was one attack on US soil, the first one, but it was by non-state actors. It disoriented the US and the west. With Russia, it is strong militarily - and to my surprise even economywise.
The west is used to bullying and invading others, but that is out of the question against Russia. They thought they could win by sanctions because they controlled the financial institutions and the banking systems . They did not realise that Russia could function outside their financial control and the sanctions would hurt them more than Russia. The west is on a suicidal path economywise but unable to back down out of false pride. Europe is going to be de-industrialised and the US dollar's hegemony is going to be chipped away. The rest of the world gains. Was NATO expansion worth it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bluebandites These 'insane losses' are western claims designed to make you feel Russia's achievement is futile. Have you gone and counted Russia's casualties ? Or you just blindly believe what British and US intelligence say ? British intelligence has put out preposterous nonsense like Russians ran out of missiles, they are using chips from washing machines, their infantry ran out of shells and they had to fight with shovels in Bakhmut, their morale is very low etc. If they lie on these, surely they will lie on casualties as well.
Look at the reality. The west says Ukraine lost 30,000 and Russia lost 500,000. Russia fires 10x shell as Ukraine - according to Zelensky. Who is likely to have more casualties ? Ukraine does not have manpower to fight at the front, but Russia has. Ukraine is forcibly taking people off the streets and sending them without too much training to the front. Ukrainian forces are now disobeying orders and some have surrendered.
Russia's purpose was not to gain land per se; they have plenty of land. Their objectives are security driven. They want to make it clear to the US it cannot have naval bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia (Russia is ready to fight a nuclear war if needed to prevent US bases in Ukraine), to de-Nazify Ukraine (kill off Azov Batallion, Right Sector and other Ukro Nazi groups) and to demilitarise Ukraine (it will not have army and military production again).
To achieve these goals, they have to attack Ukraine as Ukraine after the US led coup of 2014 was not voluntarily agreeing to the neutrality it committed itself at the time of independence. Russia then has to enforce neutrality. To do that, it has to occupy Ukraine just like the Red Army had to occupy Germany to evict Hitler and Nazism, and enforced demilitarisation of Germany. In the case of Germany, the Soviets did not annex it. In the case of Ukraine, as some of the areas have Russian population and were built by Russia historically (like Crimea, Donbass, Odessa, Kharkhov and Kiev), these will have to be returned to Russia. Putin has to honour the sacrifices of the Russian soldiers who take these places, so he cannot return them even if Ukraine is de-Nazified and demilitarised. These Russian areas were gifted to Ukraine in 1992, out of goodwill, under the understanding Ukraine will be a neutral state and not part of any military alliance. Ukraine under US incitement reneged on neutrality, it walked away from the peace negotiations and compromise in Turkey, under US and UK tutelage, so it cannot complain if it does not exist anymore. They chose their destiny.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@scoobydoobers23 So your hope is they will run out of Soviet equipment and men, and then Ukraine will turn the tide.
That sounds like British intelligence to me.
They had said in 2022 that Russia had run out of men, in any case they were untrained and unmotivated, and they were fighting with shovels. Zelensky said the same.
But one by one Maripol, Severodonetsk, Siversk, Bakmuth, Avdivka have fallen, and Pokrovsk is next. The same unmotivated soldiers with shovels managed it, and Ukraine + NATO are losing.
Maths is kicking in - for Ukraine. Ukraine does not have enough men, many were slaughtered in Bakhmut and the 2023 counter offensive, and many are being killed in Kursk. The west does not have enough Patriots, so Lvov and Poltava and others are being struck, and there is no power. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@seanniemeyer5437 'why would the USA put military bases in Ukraine? '
Why does the US put bases everywhere in the world ? In Mid East countries, in Africa, in Japan, in Philippines, in Europe ? Are you a numskull who cannot understand why the US does it ? The US does this so it can control those countries.
The US now knows it cannot have bases in Ukraine. The US thought it could, but it knows now that Russia is prepared to fight the US in Ukraine - and that will turn nuclear and US cities will also be incinerated. Get it ?
Putin said it is better to stop US plans in Ukraine now, because after Ukraine gets into NATO, he price would be even higher for Russia as it would have to fight a nuclear war to dislodge the US from Ukraine. By blocking the US now, before it could start its nefarious plan, Russia has averted a nuclear war - because the Americans will think that Russia has shown it will fight a war, and if we enter Ukraine we shall have to fight Russians, and it will turn into a nuclear war which will incinerate our cities (incinerating Russian cities is no consolation). The US will think incinerating Russian cities is no consolation for having is own cities incinerated, and Ukraine is not worth that price. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Blablablae I have no Hinduphobia. There is a certain amount of contempt for all this Hindu supremacy when you have nothing really, and you invented something as abhorrent as the caste system. Good you acknowledge India has the menace of casteism. What improvements are going on ? A better caste system ?
'Modi's development policies includes PM Jan Dhan yojana (financial inclusion), Jan awas Yojana (residential program), digital India, smart City plan, skill development, Clean India Drive & many more laws.'
Hmm - clean India ? Where ? I have seen Indians urinating in public spaces in cities.
'India has seen tremendous growth in infrastructure, science, economics, defence sector.'
I know an Indian medical doctor who had to include cow welfare to get a project.
'The BBC video about Gujarat riots showed the half reality. '
What is the other half of the reality ? Why did the govt. ban its viewing and prevent university students showing it ?
'An uneducated tea seller can reach the prime height in his career & run a nation successfully while facing the instable economy, illiteracy, global politics, China & Pakistan's invasive attacks time & again is the testament of his work. '
His access to power was through the Gujarat riot route. You know that. You half acknowledge it. He or his minions still stoke Hindu mob violence at election time - see Manipur etc. A leader who has done a lot of development does not need to do that. See Dr. Singh, Cambridge educated, urbane, achiever without show off.
Modi's support is solely based on stoking the base instincts of Hindu. There are Hindus who are intelligent enough to reject that, but you are not.
'As a proud hindu (just like UK's PM) we follow our religion/Dharm wholeheartedly which leads us to the path of righteousness.'
Anyone who supports a murderer and hatemonger and says he is righteous is stating a falsehood. Is that your religion ? For followers of murderers and rapists. Sunak is also condemnable for extolling such a person. In UK, it is not possible to instigate a riot and get elected. Sunak is a devious Hindu, following rules in UK, and extolling murderers in India due to loyalty to Hindu dharma.
'The brewing hatred among Hindu & muslim communities in India is a result of decades-old divide & rule policy of wicked Britishers which we are still facing.'
The British are not there, and you enthusiastically follow native monsters who brew hatred between communities. How come ?
'We stand against mob lynching, riots, attacks etc & hope to make our society more inclusive.'
You are lying. If you were against mob lynching, riots, attacks etc., you would not support Modi.
The end of your letter shows I got on your nerves - because I showed exactly why India is third world and will remain so. It will never shed its diabolical caste system, or penchant for mob violence. The British tried to stamp out thugees and dacoits but that is your essential character.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theTeknoViking 'You need to understand, NATO would never attack Russia, it is a DEFENSE coalition. '
The same NATO with 30 allies went and attacked Afghanistan just because US said. Even Ukraine which was not part of NATO sent 5000 troops (hence, Ukraine cannot complain now if Russia gives it a beating).
'But now, especially after being threatened by Russia, it is more than 70%. I myself was certainly not for a NATO membership.'
Russia did not threaten Finland or Sweden. In past history, the Swedes invaded Russia and got defeated in Poltava. Finland joined Nazi Germany to siege Leningrad. You made up that you felt threatened, and now you want to bring Americans in to put missiles to threaten Russia - you are playing the same idiotic game as Ukraine and the result will be the same. Sweden and Finland will become first-strike nuclear targets for Russia; that is your own choice.
'So what if Ukraine wanted to join NATO? They are free to do what they want, as a sovereign nation.'
If Ukraine joins NATO, the US would put missiles targeting Russia. Russia is not going to allow that. They should not allow it.
Ukraine is not free to do what it wants. Sovereignty does not give the right to invite another power to put their missiles to threaten a neighbouring country. If you do that, and the neighbour is powerful, you invite a beating. That would be the case whether it is Ukraine or Finland. It is playing with fire. Besides Ukraine's independence was based on conditional sovereignty. In its declaration of independence of 1994, Ukraine had promised to be a neutral country which would not join any military alliance. After 2014, Ukraine unilaterally reneged on this agreement. Hence, Russia is right to take military-technical action. Ukraine has squandered its independence and is going to be broken up, part of it will return to Russia. Ukraine has turned into a failed country incapable of self rule.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
These Ukranian politicians use extremist language about Russians wanting to genocide Ukranians. All Putin asked was for Ukraine to remain neutral as promised in its independence declaration and not to give US bases in Ukraine to threaten Russia. The Ukranians could have easily averted the war by agreeing to this. Instead, the Ukrainian politicnas sided with the Americans, and thought they could defeat the Russians using America. That has backfired - as many of us saw would be the result.
This Ukranian govt. is an implant of the US, made by the coup they engineered in 2014. The coup brought in Ukro Nazis like Right Sector and Azov Batallion, and an upsurge in an anti-Russian Ukranian ethno-nationalism. This is a civil war in which the west took sides, backing the new Ukranian ethno-nationalism against Russians.
The Russians gave Ukraine independence in good faith. They did not imagine the Ukrainians would stab Russia in the back by seeking to give US missile and naval bases in Ukraine to target Russia. For a while, the Ukranians and their handlers thought they were going to win. They prevented the Russians from taking Kiev. The Ukranians sank a ship and had the odd success here and there. They were crowing about it. But the trend is the Russians are over powering them.
Russia was too soft and did not obliterate the Ukranians power system before launching the attack on Kiev. The US did that in Iraq. However, the Ukranians got carried away attacking the Kerch Bridge and Crimea, so they invited the Day of Judgement.
The Ukranians have no choice but to surrender, give up Donbass and sign up for neutrality. Ukraine of 1991 and even 2014 is gone for good, and more will go if they do not sue for peace. Ukraine's financiers will run out of money. Already, in the US, some Republicans are questioning giving Ukraine a blank cheque. Once the US loses interest and is not able to bankroll Ukraine, then Ukraine will find itself abandoned like Iraq and Afghanistan. It will be another victim of US geopolitics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Deathadder90 'here has been only one country that has used Article 5 to call for aid since the inception of NATO The US of A.'
Good observation ! When Europe calls for Article 5, the US will bend over backwards to obstruct. They don't want to fight and get killed.
When a missile fell on Poland and killed 3, the Ukranians and Poles shouted hoarsely about a Russian attack on NATO, and they called hopefully for Article 5. The US within hours, and with no investigation, declared it was the debris of an Ukranian missile that went astray !
The US and Europe encouraged Lithuania to put a rail blockade on Kaliningrad. When a Russian deputy said Lithuania's independence needs to be reconsidered, NATO asked Lithuania to back off - the US did not want to get into a situation where Lithuania will ask for Article 5 !
Likewise, in the NATO summit in Vilnius, Biden blocked Ukraine's request for immediate entry into NATO, much to the mortification of Zelensky. Moreover, Biden was unprepared to give a timeline. He knows if Ukraine is admitted, it will ask for Article 5, which means US has to send troops.
Kissinger had said long ago that the US will not fight a nuclear war with the Soviet Union to defend Germany. The same is the case now : the US will not fight Russia to save Europe.
It is best for the Europeans to develop some intellect, and not take orders from the US. They should also keep out that Trojan horse, Britain.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hailarwotanaz5848 Earlier, your concern was Ukranian lives. Now it is Russian lives. You are squirming and switching from topic to topic, such is the burning inside you.
Russia has to fight this war NOW to prevent NATO from putting missiles in Ukraine targeting Russia. Russia takes its security seriously. You don't understand Russia if you don't know that it lost 27 million due to Nazi Germany; and it faced a similar attack by Napoleon the previous century. Russia's enemy today is the US, but Russia will not allow the US to threaten Russia. Russia had to take this action now so that millions of Russians do not have to die in future. If Ukraine had joined NATO and Article 5 was invoked, then Russia would have to fight a nuclear war to remove the American missiles; hence, it had to take action now to kill Ukraine now, and with it US plans.
On Ukranian lives, I asked you why NATO did not send troops like it sent to Afghanistan. You are silent - because you know NATO's cowardice. If you do not have the guts to fight for Ukraine, should you be encouraging them to fight a hopeless war in which Russia will mince them in the end ? NATO should have agreed to give Russia the security gaurantee it asked. Why did you not do that ?
I know you cannot answer these questions, but you will look for a diversion, to preserve your face.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ObiWanShinobi917 Most pathetic face saving lies to save yourself from the charge of cowardice. So your explanation of why Americans are not going into Ukraine to fight, to save the Ukranians from a nuclear attack ! Did you explain that to Ukranians ? Some of the US military veterans perished in that collection centre in Lvov. A few of them were captured and were begging for the US govt. to save them.
'But make no mistake, if we wanted to, we could kick out the Russian airforce in a day, completely decimate Russian supply lines in a week with our Navy and Airforce/artillery, and firebomb the Russian forces currently fighting Ukrainians into smoldering piles of ash.'
Aren't you the cowards who ran away from Kabul only 18 month ago, without telling the other 30 NATO allies who went unwillingly to Afghanistan ? The US troops cornered the first flights out of Kabul because they were afraid of capture by the Taliban. Normally, when a ship sinks, the captain evacuates the others, and goes last. But the captain of NATO evacuated first and did not bother to tell the rest ! Americans are shameful cowards. If you ran from Taliban, you will run from Russians. The Europeans are making a mistake so soon after trusting their security with the Americans.
In WW 2, the western forces and the Red Army were advancing on Berlin. It was agreed the Red Army would go for Berlin as only they could fight and take the casualties. The British general Montgomery suggested to Eisenhower who was in charge of the overall western forces, to attempt a dash to Berlin. Eisenhower ruled against it because he said the Red Army would then fight the western troops. He knew the fighting ability of US forces and the Red Army.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheArgieH You are being selective.
Ukraine was given security guarantee for giving up nuclear weapons. However, there was another requirement, that Ukraine would be neutral and would not join any military alliance. There was only one military alliance by that time - Warsaw Pact was gone, only NATO existed and it was threatening Russua. Ukraine's independence declaration stated it would be neutral. Ukraine unilaterally reneged on neutrality, it started flirting with Nazi style nationalism (Azov Batallion and Right Sector) and Russophobia, and it was encouraged by the US to join NATO. Joining the EU would have been acceptable, but joining NATO had the intention of positioning American weapons against Russia. If Ukraine joined NATO, then it could terminate the agreement that allowed Russia to continue to use Sevasatopol in the Crimea as the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet. Hence, when the US aided coup was staged in 2014, Russia moved in quickly to take Crimea. Your selective amnesia shows you are either ignorant or a deliberate liar.
Russia had to take the pre-emptive step to stop America putting missiles in Ukraine. It has done the correct thing to eliminate the Ukro Nazis of the Azov Regiment in Azov stahl plant. Now Russian strategy is to take the industrial area, and the coastal area and strangle the Ukranian economy. That is working. Ukraine has lost more land, and it is not coming back. Ukraine was given a fair chance to be an independent country, but unfortunately it did not have the capability to manage two ethnic communities fairly, it allowed Russophobia against a powerful neighbour, it was foolish to fall for the machinations of the US. Hence, it joins the list of failed countries that cannot govern itself. Russia will break it up, it will reabsorb part of it into Russia, and neuter the remaining.
At least now the Ukranians should come to terms with the reality. Neither the US nor UK can guarantee its security. Without good relations with Russia, Ukraine will not survive.
1
-
@TheArgieH The 'alternative' explanations are the real ones. The current western one is for manufacturing consent to cover western and US complicity for inciting Ukraine to confront Russia. Ukraine wants to be classified as European and get NATO entrance, and they thought the best way to get acceptance is to show Russophobia. Ukrainian politicians have learnt all the cliches of the west : defence of the free world, rules based international order etc. Ukraine was not part of NATO but sent 5000 troops to Afghanistan. Why ? It hoped that would win US favour for NATO entrance. When the Israelis make pre-emptive strike at unarmed Palestinians, Zelensky said it is legitimate right of self defence. If Ukranians could invade another sovereign nation, Afghanistan, then they should not complain if someone else does the same to them. Then why can't he accept it is legitimate for Russia to make a pre-emptive strike at Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO and putting US missiles against Russia ?
The push for expanding NATO eastwards game in the 1990s from US arms companies which lobbied US politicians. The aim was for sales whereby Soviet equipment from Warsaw Pact days would be replaced by US ones. US politicians then made that policy. This was planned from 1997. In the 1990s, former US diplomat George Kennan who framed the US policies against the Soviet Union, warned NATO expansion will bring war with Russia.
See New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
If you are unsure of what is Ukro Nazism, read up about Stepan Bandera - western Ukraine already had such traits from the 1930s. From 2010 onwards, such groups have grown in Ukarine. Read up about Right Sector and the Azov Battalion. The Azov Battalion was founded by Andrei Biletski and his stated aim was saving the white race from the untermenschen, that is everyone else. White supremacists from America and Europe flocked to Ukraine to take training from Right Sector and the Azov Battalion. They worse Nazi emblems and regalia, they even ran indoctrination groups for Ukranian children. 5-10 years back, BBC and other reported the growth of neo-Nazis in Ukraine and the attraction to western white supremacists. These videos are still on Youtube. The US govt. listed the Azov Batallion as a terrorist group.
Inside A White Supremacist Militia in Ukraine
1,201,102 views
Jan 8, 2021
TIME Correspondent, Simon Shuster, travels to Ukraine in the summer of 2019 to investigate white supremacists militias that are recruiting people to join their fight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy910FG46C4
The Azov Batallion got inducted in the Ukranian army as the Azov regiment. Ukraine has blurred the lines and has absorbed and regularised neo Nazis as nationalists.
Since Russia took action against these Ukro Nazis, the west has become sympathetic or at least ignores the background of some of these Russophobic militants with their Nazi tattoos and outlook. The western media now presents the Azov regiment (which they themselves once derided as a threat to democracy) as Ukranian heroes for resisting in Mariupol. But the Azov regiment has been captured, and some of them will face trial in Russia.
In summary, Ukranians have brought this upon themselves, by falling for American ploys. Russia will break up Ukraine, absorb part of it, and keep the remainder destabilised. All the strong cards are with Russia. The US and the west continue pumping up Ukraine to avoid loss of face. Basically, there is a tendency not to accept fault. The west has a self-virtuous image of itself. This is not shared by the rest of the world (China, India, Arabs, Africans, Latin America), but for the narcisstic west, the world is just the west.
1
-
1
-
@hailarwotanaz5848 You are just as irrelevant as Zelensky because you speak like him. You think in 2 to 3 months, Russia will not be able to survive ? Well, the west said the rouble will collapse, Russia will default, they will not be able to sustain it etc. Now you have the sixth round of sanctions, and Ukraine has lost 20% of land. That 20% land is worth more than 20%. It is the industrial heartland and the coastal belt, and Russia can now strangle Ukraine's economy. And the coming winter, the EU faces the energy squeeze. Now, I see a little tone of moderation in western expectations, as the US says with the latest arms, it hopes to strengthen nothing more than Ukraine's negotiating position. Of course, it is a loss of face for you to accept the reality that Russia is prevailing and the west's client state Ukraine is getting cornered, and you do not have the guts to send troops.
You still have not explained why the west has not put a 'no fly zone' if NATO is more powerful than Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
For the neutral onlooker, watching Times Now which is full of pompous colonial type British frothing at the mouth against Russia, and reading the comments below, one can see the fury arising from the sensation of defeat. For Russia has ended the so called 'rules based international order', which Boris Johnson was so anxious about. This is a duplicitous western construct whereby they invade Iraq, Afghanistan, support Israel, and enforce by military means (or by financial coercion) regime change on anyone going against them, while posing as very upright people. Russia has ended the fraudulent western 'rules based international order' and the west cannot restore it. The new global order will have Russia, China, India, Middle East, Africa etc.. The west will not be able to dominate as it has done. That is the underlying cause for the rage against Putin ! The west can join the others, it cannot enforce its selfish will on others anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FishandHunt Good fellow, the Red Army took 4 years to get to Berlin. Once the Nazi army surrendered in Stalingrad, Germany's goose was cooked, and thereafter, there was only one direction - German retreat. It was the Red Army, and not your bloody Yanks, Brits and Australians who reached Berlin. When the Russians fight, they fight hard. They are not trained to be cowards like you. As Stalin said, one has to be a brave man to be a coward in the Red Army. The Ukranians should know because a good section of them fought in the Red Army honourably. But there was Ukro Nazi element, who were followers of Stephan Bandera. The Germans employed such Ukrainians as concentration camp guards. The Ukro Nazis are embedded in the Azov Battle. The Russian army slaughtered the Azov Batallion in Mariopol.
After the failure of the Ukranian counter offensive, the Russians are on the move, like after Stalingrad. And the Ukranians are on the retreat. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TomGodson95 'The US is in way more debt than the UK but they manage to find a way...'.
The way the US manages to do is by printing dollars but avoiding inflation....They print dollars to pay for the interest.
And that was done by forcing the Saudis and Gulf oil producers to sell oil only in dollars - that kept up demand and value of the dollar, as big oil consumers like China and India had to buy oil in dollars. They could get dollars only by selling goods and services cheaply to the US. Thus the US had the best of all worlds : they could print dollars, import goods and services cheaply, and run massive deficits without inflation. A military machine was built to wage war on anyone who tried to undermine this system - like Saddam when he started selling oil in euros and Gadaffi who talked about setting up an Islamic dinar to sell oil.
However, the world order has changed and the US is unable to maintain it by force any longer. The sanctioning of Russia and seizing its dollar deposits forced Russia to de-dollarise trade. China had set up a gold backed currency back in 2018 - the yuan. It was given a boost by America sanctioning Russia. Besides China using it for trade settlements, Russia is also using the yuan. The weaponising of the dollar has led to several countries to jump on the band wagon of de-dollarisation. The arrival of BRICS means there is sufficient production in other countries compared with 70 years ago, so that if the west bars exports of goods, there are others who can fill in. For example, when European car makers left Russia, the Chinese could enter and fill in the gap; the Europeans lost market share in Russia which they will never recover. Previous efforts at de-dollarisation were stopped by the US with war and regime change operations. However, the the main drivers of de-dollarisation today are China, Russia, India, Iran, and not the weak Arabs. The US cannot invade Russia and China and induce regime change as they did in Iraq, Libya etc.
Trump's realises the gravity of de-dollarisation. His announced solution to de-dollarisation is to impose tariffs (so far, he has not chosen war). However, the others like BRICS can trade between themselves, and the US will be starved of cheap goods. If the US puts tariffs on textiles coming from China, India, Bangladesh etc., the US textile industry will not revive as it is completely gone; all that will happen is Americans won't have cheap clothes. Tariffs will accelerate de-dollarisation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russia has got Ukraine by the scruff of the neck. They have taken the area of Ukraine that creates most of its GDP, they have blockaded its access to the sea, they have strangled Ukraine's economy, the govt. is reliant on western aid and is printing notes, so it faces hyperinflation. Russia is going to conduct referenda, and the west and Ukraine cannot stop them. The nuclear sword dangles over Ukraine. Dreams of US military bases in Ukraine have been ended for good. Russia can keep striking Ukraine by air from all angles, Ukraine will not be allowed to settle down, and reconstruction would be impossible. Is that failing ? Western propaganda comes from frustration about their inability to get their way. Russia has also strangled Europe's economy making it difficult for Europe to subsidise Ukraine indefinitely. The EU is set for break up, with Hungary, Italy and far right advancing.
It took Russia 4 years to snuff out the Chechen insurrection which was also financed by the US, but finally they re-integrated Chechenya and rebuilt Grozny. Ukraine will also take years, but Russia will not let it go.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jack727dave5 'If one failed offensive ended the war Russia wouldn’t be in Ukraine right now.'
The meaning of the last part of your sentence and its connection to the first part is not clear.
But if your intention is to say that one failed offensive does not mean Ukraine has lost, you have to weigh on future prospects for Ukraine.
Can Ukraine launch another offensive in 2024 ? Russia has massacred Ukraine's army, and the conscripts now have average age of 43 years. The west does not have artillery shells and Russia has destroyed western tanks and Bradleys. Seeing the failure of the counter offensive, the west does not want to send money and weapons.
Then what is Ukraine's chance in 2024 ?
When the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, the Red Army lost many battles, but eventually they turned it around. The Soviet Union had the manpower, the arms production and iron willed leader like Stalin, to turn it round. Ukraine does not have the manpower, enough arms production, and its leader is a dependent on the US. If the US does not provide money and arms, it is not possible for Ukraine to come back in 2024.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JamesK1963 It appears to you US has spent its money, and you blame the Europeans of being free loaders. Yes, the US has paid the most for NATO - but it does so to have complete control of NATO's command structure and dictate all policies. NATO was expanded on the demand of US arms companies like Lockheed (see New York Times articles in 1997 and 1998). And also the wicked Jewish neocons that run your country like Nuland and Blinken. You handed your country to arms lobby and the Jewish lobby. That finally led to war.
And when project Ukraine got stuck, the US withdraws and puts on pious airs and asks Europe to step up. Thus, Europe has to take in 10 million refugees and subsidise Ukraine for as long as it takes. Meanwhile, Europe has no energy, it has to now buy American LNG for 4x the price. And Europe is de-industrialising, as energy intensive EU companies are relocating to US or China.
Thus, the US has done well out of NATO, you have earned much more than you invested. Its defence companies made tonnes of money selling arms to Poland and all such countries, and US is now going to make money from oil and gas to Europe. But you are killing the patient from whom you are extracting money. So don't put on pious airs about how much you have done, and lecture the Europeans.
I am a critic of the Ukrainians and Europeans as well - for being dumb and mortgaging their futures to the US under some illusory belief in 'shared western values'. The US is a predatory ally and the Europeans do not have the intellect to realise it. The Europeans are shameless dependents who were riding the US to get a share of its imperialist loot. And the Ukrainians stabbed Russia in the back after it gave Ukraine independence. All three are now drowning. That is the way wickedness ends. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DisinterestedParty I see the desperation arising from the fact that Putin poked the west in the eye. Recently, westerner commentators are distancing themselves with their stories about how Russia is losing as they face up to the reality and see Donbas is going under, and Severodonetsk is surrounded on 3 sides.
The west was saying in the first week the rouble will collapse. It is currently the strongest performing currency. 10-20 companies are now paying for gas in roubles. The economic bite is on the west also. Russia is self sufficient - it has living space, it has water and food security, it has energy security, and it has defence security - so it does not need to trade. None of the useless countries of Europe have the complete set of things needed for independence. They have living space, water security, partial food security - but not energy security or defence security. For defence, all the useless European countries are dependent on the US.
Putin correctly pointed out there are only 4 countries that are truly sovereign - Russia, the US, India and China. The European countries are pawns under the hand of the US.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4gleImeWmE&lc=Ugy40XaQqeiwob1iKl54AaABAg.9bQGtTJ2vsg9bSxO5IsuPG
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JezenThomas Fico went there to get help for energy supplies, and he offered if negotiations take place, to host it in Slovakia. What is the basis of your claim that Putin brought Fico over for negotiations ?
You are seeking to spin your weak position and say the opposite. Putin and Lavrov have stated their entry positions for negotiations : Ukraine has to surrender remaining areas of Donbass AND it cannot join NATO.
The US position as noted in a paper by Kellogg is to freeze the conflict at the present line of contact, and relegate Ukraine's desire to join NATO to 10-20 years from now.
Russia has rejected this outright. It is not seeking to freeze the conflict or have another Minsk agreement as they know the west is buying time to arm Ukraine. If the US does not agree, Russia will not negotiate, as it is in a position to take the rest of Donbass by force, and advance to the Dnieper and eye Odessa. It has the capability to drive out the Ukrainians from Kursk.
Ukraine has the choice of accepting Russian terms (give up all of Donbass and NATO), or Russia will take more by force.
Get real, Ukraine is not in a position to reverse the situation, that is why America is ready to abandon it. After the failure of Ukraine's 2023 summer offensive, Ukraine has been on the defensive, and it cannot reverse it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So Fareed, you realised the west is failing in Ukraine just now ? Until now, you were one of the cheer leaders, acting with typical western arrogance.
Now you know the facts. The west cannot fight a direct military war with Russia and win. If for one moment the west thought that it could win militarily, it would have sent troops to Ukraine.
The west was confident that it could win an economic war against Russia. It froze Russia's euro and dollar deposits, and then prevented Russian payments in these currencies and predicted the rouble will be rubble. They did not realise that Russia could wage economic warfare. For energy is more valuable than currency. The west like Fareed Zakaria looked down on the Russian economy and claimed it was hollow, and it would go under. But it is the west's economy that is on the line to go under !
Finally, Fareed's stand is supply more weapons to Ukraine. Well the west is doing that, but the Ukranians are crying it is only 10% of their needs. He is asking the west to break the blockade of Odessa. How ? Putin has invited the west to come to the battlefield and fight. If the west intervenes, a western ship might be sunk. No one has the stomach for that. If a couple of western mercenaries are caught, the west's nerves fail.
The reality is the Ukranian goose is cooked and the west is defeated,, and all these suggestions by the likes of Fareed are feeble attempts to save face.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
These smug western analysts console themselves that it is a strategic defeat for Russia. How ?
Why don't these people debate if attempted NATO expansion to Ukraine is a strategic victory for Ukraine and the west ?
Ukraine has lost 25% land, its economy is strangled, it says it needs 750 billion to reconstruct (as of now), it has a huge number of deaths, 8 million are refugees....
As for the west, it has to house refugees, subsidise Ukraine, pay for its arms, spend more on NATO defence (which means cuts in health and education), and have inflation and bankrupt businesses. Further, Putin has set in motion the use of non-dollar currencies that erode the power of the dollar and hence the west. It is his greatest achievement.
In light of the above, what do these western minds have to claim as strategic success ? Only two more weaklings' desire to join NATO. This is trumpeted as a fearsome blow to Putin ! This is how pathetic the west is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It starts with the usual claim of superiority - our missiles are more accurate than theirs.
But with those inaccurate missiles, somehow Russia took out the power grid and Ukraine's ports, and all the lousy western equipment like Leopards, Bradleys, Himars, Storm Shadows and Patriots.
Let NATO be dragged into full war. The Poles, Baltics, and others are itching to fight Russia. What is the problem ? NATO has accurate weapons.
All this fear mongering is to hide western impotence. When push comes to shove, no one in NATO, least of all the US, wants to fight Russia - because they know they will be killed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jackvermont88 So after all that pretentious moralising, you go back to your original colours. The chance for a peace settlement without war was there in Dec. 2022. The US as the sponsor of Ukraine should have gone the extra mile to negotiate with Russia and offer it the security it asked for, in return for Ukraine's independence.
The US declined. Why ? The US wanted to use Ukrainians as a proxy to fight Russia and the US armament industry was going to profit. So where is your conscience there ? It is pure cynicism. The Ukrainians also foolishly chose to believe that they could jointly fight Russia.
Once the war starts, Russia has to pursue it to the end - one goes into a war to win, and Russia will do exactly that, it will attack Ukraine as much as needed (and not beyond) to force it to accept its terms. If Ukraine does not accept, it will be turned into a waste land.
Russia only wanted Ukraine to agree to neutrality as in its independence declaration. Ukraine declined and chose to fight. Then if you lose, you have to cede land, and the Ukrainians have to accept the victor's terms. The same way as the German Nazis had to accept loss of land and rearrangement of borders. Get it ?
Yes, goals change as the war progresses. That is natural. When you get an advantage, you cash it. After spending so much effort, Russia is not going to give back land. Why should they ? That is the price for Ukranian misbehaviour.
Ukranians have to decide whether to continue and risk losing more land or not. In the first month of the war, negotiations were conducted, but the US scuppered it, by sending Johnson.
'trying to block export of Ukrainian grain'..... the west initiated economic warfare. This is part of it. The west seized Russia's money and tried to stop it from trading, and the Ukranians were demanding sanctions. So Russia stopped Ukraine's trade and also waged war on the western economy. You started the economic warfare, and Ukraine cheered, so why are you complaining ?
'starting constant nuclear threats'.... that is what is keeping you from creating more mischief in Ukraine. What are nuclear weapons for ? Why has the US sat with Russia and agreed to give up nuclear weapons ?
Finland and Sweden are not the same. If the US gets naval bases in Ukraine, that would block the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Russia is not going to allow it. Get it ? Even if it means nuclear war.
'And after all this so called "special operation" is a complete disaster for russians and will be even worse.'
You have been saying this because it is a complete disaster for Ukraine - and for the west.
'What makes me wonder how come republican supporter sympathize and even support this garbage country...'
The Republican's enemy is Biden and Democrats, they don't mind losing to Russia as long as it shows Biden in a poor light. The US is internally divided and is a hotbed of 'white nationalism' and economic decline. Putin has ended the western 'rules based international order' for good. He has set in motion the increased use of other currencies for trade.
Even Biden now recognises Ukraine cannot win against Russia and Russia has won the economic warfare. The US is now telling Ukraine to start thinking of negotiations ! Defeat is staring you in the eyes, why don't you accept reality and stop pining for Reagan ? See the article :
The Guardian
US says Zelensky risks allies’ ‘Ukraine fatigue’ if he rejects Russia talks – report
Ukraine’s position with allies is wearing thin as fears grow over economic effect of protracted war, officials tell newspaper
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/06/us-says-zelenskiy-risks-allies-ukraine-fatigue-if-he-rejects-russia-talks-report
1
-
1
-
1
-
ProjectsBlack I am not sure if the vast majority of Europe are opposed to whats going on with the USA.
The vast majority in Europe is brainwashed by the constant propaganda of state and media. It is told it is an unprovoked aggression and Putin must fail, otherwise, he will come and get the rest of us, and it is implied we must make whatever sacrifices for this. Europeans are willing to be subordinate to America. They are told otherwise it will be subordination to Russia. Subordination to America is palatable because it is not apparent that it is subordination. The average European does not understand that Russia launched the invasion due to persistent NATO expansion. They don't know that America is the driver for the NATO expansion. US armaments firms lobbied the US govt. since 1997 to expand NATO eastwards as they saw the new countries will replace Soviet arms with US arms. This is described in the New York Times already in 1997 and 1998.
See New York Times, 29 June 1997 ‘Arms Makers See Bonanza In Selling NATO Expansion’ and 30 March 1998 ‘ARMS CONTRACTORS SPEND TO PROMOTE AN EXPANDED NATO’.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/29/world/arms-makers-see-bonanza-in-selling-nato-expansion.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/30/world/arms-contractors-spend-to-promote-an-expanded-nato.html
'War is good business': How US weapons makers profit in Ukraine
165,269 views
Apr 28, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mgirj9upfRk
The Europeans are so unintelligent and uninformed that they have forgotten how the US drew NATO to Afghanistan for 20 years, then negotiated with Taliban without NATO, and then exited from Kabul without informing NATO ! That was 2 years ago, and NATO countries were humiliated, but they have forgotten what the US does, and are into blind belief in NATO - see Finland and Sweden queue up.
Europe's defence is in the hands of the US. As long as that is the case, the US will exploit Europe's dependence. The US will sell its expensive LNG, agri products, and also its armaments to Europe, and keep them dependent. The US doesn't have to invade in the case of Europe, because they have voluntary surrender. The US wants to confront China (good luck to fight Russia and China at the same time), and will make the Europeans join them. The Europeans will not have an independent policy on China or Russia. They are not like countries like India who look after their own interest. Putin had noted that there are only 4 sovereign countries who make independent policies : Russia, the US, China and India. The rest are subservient to someone else. Europe is dependent and subordinate to America. Of course, it would be against European pride to admit they are subordinate, they think they are co-equals with America to maintain 'the international order'.
It is unlikely Europe can make its own security arrangement. Asking Germany to rearm is dicey because you don't know when their next bout of Nazism will come - it is in the German character. The French are not reliable. The British stand outside Europe and prefer to go with the US. The eastern Europeans are the most militantly Russophobic, but are the most useless. People like the Poles think they have become someone in the world because they are in the EU. They are not net contributors, they sponge off the EU. They don't realise they can be provocative against Russia only while American support lasts. The Finns and Swedes are another useless pair, needlessly looking to tangle with Russia. Between the Europeans, there is rivalry, and it will come out more. All these countries have neo-Nazi groups and these will come to the fore as their economies shrink.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MarkM001 I did not intend to scare you. I merely intended to invite you not to fool yourself. You need to recognise the reality.
The reality is Ukraine has lost, it cannot push out Russia with Himars or any other western support, it has to cede territory in any future settlement, it cannot join NATO, and the US will not get any missile and naval bases in Ukraine. That much is certain.
The reality is Russia has proved it is more powerful than 30 weaklings + 1 superpower.
I cannot forecast what will happen to any Ukraine that is left over; who will give Ukraine the security guarantee it seeks (Russia will not allow any NATO member again), and who will fund its reconstruction (Russia will reconstruct the areas it incorporates back into Russia). Those factors will become clearer in due course.
I can forecast that Russia will bring Europe to its knees this winter, and Europe will have to lift sanctions if it does not want to be de-industrialised. Europe can of course continue with its false pride and delusions that it has the economic power to defeat Russia.
I can also say weaklings like Finland and Sweden will not make any difference to the outcome in Ukraine. Europe cannot threaten Russia's security without getting mauled by the bear. Lithuania tried to impose a blockade on Kaliningrad for 2 weeks, but Russia threatened it with a beating, and the EU asked Lithuania to back off. Europe got scared ? You tell me why they backed off on Kalinigrad after attempting a blockade, if they were not scared. Russia has out a blockade of the Ukrainian ports, and it will not back off because Harpoon missiles were supplied or one battleship was sunk. They are not scared, they do not flinch, they do what has to be done, one way or another.
Those are the stark realities.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@somawathiwijeshingha301 Even the conflict beween Russia and Ukraine was instigated by America. They sponsored a coup in Ukraine in 2014, backing anti-Russian, neo Nazi, hence pro-American, factions.
It is the American habit to instigate conflict everywhere. They disguise it by claiming it is to promote democratic values. In reality, they just want some one pro-west, even the most undemocratic people are fine. You will find in most of their client states, there are various dictators. 4 months back in Pakistan, the US intervened and used the army and opposition to oust Imran Khan. His fault : buying wheat from Russia. The US told the Pakistani ambassador take corrective actions or else....
Ukraine wants to be a client state, and Zelensky is a US hero because he promotes clienthood. He is no democrat, because he closed Russian language TV stations, and arrested politicians who favour close ties with Russia.
The problem for America is that Russia and China are not client states and they have the capacity to punch America on the nose. So the only option against them is for America to build an alliance of subordinate states like the EU.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is time for Ukraine to surrender. It cannot fight Russia and win. The US is getting ready to drop Ukraine. In Vilnius, the US surrendered to Russia when it vetoed Ukraine's entry into NATO, and refused to give a time map. The US would not have done that if it believed Ukraine can win. The US conceded a key Russian demand. Two US Presidential candidates, Trump and Ramasamy, have declared they will get rid of Ukraine and have a settlement with Russia. The rest of the Europeans show bravado but are weak in the face of Russia and cannot change the outcome of the war, which is defeat for Ukraine. When the US gives up, the Europeans will change the narrative and follow suit.
As the BBC reporter now admits, Russia is resurgent and will go after Kharkov oblast. In the south, Ukraine cannot break through, although western media is trying to project hopeful news. Ukraine can launch some drone attacks on Russia but they are pin pricks.
The US has been duplicitous promising Ukraine support for however long it takes, and Ukraine has been foolish to believe that Ukraine would gain European status and western benefits by antagonising Russia. Due to Ukraine's folly, it has lost the country that was given in 1991 and it has become a failed state. It was foolish to think Ukraine could afford to antagonise a superpower neighbour, using the support of another superpower from across the Atlantic. Ukraine was given independence without any bloodshed by Russia in an orderly manner, in all good faith, and trust. Therefore Ukraine should have maintained good relations with Russia and not sought to have US missile and naval bases in Ukraine. That was backstabbing Russia and Ukraine now has to pay the price. It will soon find the US is a fair weather friend.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lewis123417 'Pmsl russias GDP is barely bigger than that of Italy'
This is based on one dimensional wishful thinking. What matters also is what is in the GDP and how self sufficient a country us. Russia's economy produces oil and gas, it is the largest wheat exporter, it mines diamonds, gold, it makes steel, titanium, aircraft, it is the leading country in the nuclear fuel supply chain, it can launch satellites and destroy them as well, it has its own GPS, it makes incredible weapons like no one else, its industries are not out sourced. Russia is self sufficient in energy, materials, land, water. What is in Italy's GDP : some cars, shoes, fashion, tourism. Italy is dependent on others, it is a vassal of the US.
Biden thought the same as you, and said rouble will be rubble. Instead Russia has withstood economic and military warfare of the collective west - and defeated you. The world can see that. That is the reason you are burning inside.
The world has changed, but you haven't. That is why you come up with immature statements like Russia's economy is the same as Italy's. So can Italy fight Russia, when the combined west fought and could not win ? Numskull !
All the industrial production is not concentrated in western countries anymore like 70 years ago, so Russia can trade with others and get anything it wants. European car makers were forced to leave Russia, but China moved in. They make cheaper and better cars. The European car makers lost market share and it is not coming back. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joestalin2375 Let us face it, Stalin was more wily than FDR/Truman or Churchill. Without Stalin, Hitler could not be rolled back. It was the Red Army that destroyed 80% of the Germany army. Churchill went to Moscow to beg Stalin to stay the course and beat Germany.
Stalin had industrialised the Soviet Union in just 10 years. He said unless it was done, the west would destroy the Soviet Union.
In any case, how would they destroy Stalin ? You are writing revisionist wishful history.
As the Red Army was zooming in on Berlin British General Montgomery whispered into Eisenhower 'why don't we attempt to get Berlin ?'. Eisenhower declined as he said the Red Army was unstoppable, it will fight the Americans.
Videos of the Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam between Stalin, Churchill and FDR/Truman show from the body language who was the boss.
In the Potsdam conference, Truman mentioned to Stalin the US had tested a new weapon. Stalin detected the tone of blackmail, and told Truman he knew. Stalin had his spies in the Manhattan project and within 4 years, Soviet scientists tested the atomic bomb. After Stalin, the Soviets started the space technology with Sputnik.
There is no rolling back Russia. It has the nukes and the delivery system. And today you know which country has a real leader. So no point indulging in wishful thinking. The very fact you write such drivel shows you know Russia is unbeatable and will win.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@freko106 Your comment on Jo is not off the mark. But your comment on Zelensky as a ''true leader'' is off the mark. Yes, Z deserves credit for standing his ground, but not for being foolish to think he could get use Russophobia, hiding behind the hope of NATO entry and parking US missiles in Ukraine, to threaten Russia. That is a foreign policy disaster for Ukraine. Ukraine does not have the luxury to take a militantly anti-Russian stand to get into the western camp. Russia decided to nip the threat of the US using Ukraine to threaten Russia with missiles. At the end of the day, even if Russia could not capture Kiev and overthrow him, it still has the capacity to reduce Ukraine to rubble. Afterwards, Russia can wage a continuous low intensity war and not allow Ukraine to be rebuilt. Ukraine will end up balkanised, with some areas under Russian control, some areas under Ukranian control, which would need continuous supply of EU money to maintain. Zelensky and his pro western faction is responsible for getting Ukraine destroyed. The west is also responsible for encouraging Ukraine to cross Russia's red line, and then refusing to go and fight for Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Kkdgju 'I don't know what Ukraine seeks to achieve...'
Unfortunately, Ukraine has a US implanted government. Wherever that happens, it is a disaster for that country.
'So why are we encouraging it...'
For that, you have to understand US, British and western psychology. I refer you to Boris Johnson's vociferous statements. At the very beginning of the war, he said that 'we cannot allow Putin to win, as it will mean the end of the international 'rules based order'. By which he meant the order whereby US and UK can invade countries, enforce regime change, use Israel to threaten others, seize bank assets etc. He felt suicidal at the thought that that order was being defied.
Very recently, he went so far as to say, 'if Ukraine is allowed to lose, that would end western hegemony'.
Hence, the reason the west is supporting Ukraine is to maintain 'the rules based international order', known to the non-western world as western hegemony (openly admitted by Boris Johnson).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Expelling a Russian official is a feeble 'retaliation' after Russia did nuclear drills, and called the British ambassador and told that Russia will strike British assets abroad in UK ! This in turn was in response to the Lord Cameron's provocative statement that Ukraine will be allowed to hit targets in Russia with British missiles. After Russia's nuclear sabre rattling and conveyance to the British ambassador that Russia does not bluff and will execute what it says, and after the British realised they will be on their own and the US would not come to the rescue, Cameron quietly pulled down his provocative tweet. The British media are not publicising the warning Russia issued. In fact, they quietly changed tone. Earlier, they had been boasting the Storm Shadows would be used to bring the Kerch bridge down, but now they are not saying that. Russia might take down London Bridge !
No one messes with Russia. The Russians don't bluff, what they say they will do, they will do. That is why Britain backed down. And France also did.
Of course, the Brits will be burning inside, so they will turn up the propaganda war because they know they cannot win in a fight with Russia. That is what Times Radio does. It is a vent hole for British frustration.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Don't make immature comparisons. Russia will not allow US bases in Ukraine. It is ready to fight a nuclear war to stop it. Now the Americans understand it.
After the flop of the Ukrainian counter offensive, the Americans also now understand that Ukraine cannot evict the Russians. If the US lets Ukraine into NATO, it will ask for Article 5, and the Americans will have to send troops to Ukraine. In which case the Russians will kill Americans on a scale bigger than they faced in Vietnam. Judging from America's hasty exits from Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia etc., the Americans are cowards, they cannot take casualties. Russia has the capacity to incinerate all American cities.
In effect, Russia has met its objective : in Vilnius, effectively America was forced to give up on having bases in Ukraine. It is an American defeat, but they will not admit it, they will blame Ukraine and say it does not have democracy and it is corrupt.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I guess the bloody Germans who got rid of 6 million Jews have to show off their support for Israel to run its apartheid state. That is their morality. They had to indulge in anti-Russian activities after Russia allowed German re-unification, and they are paying the price - Russia is de-industrialising Germany.
'Israel’s top military official Maj. Gen. Rafi Milo has said that the slow rate of rocket fire from Hamas indicates that it is preparing for a long war. '
So the Israelis know they are going to face a long of war of attrition. Those 6 day wars and quick victories don't exist anymore. The Hezbollah is opening a front and the conflict also spills to the West Bank. Good luck with a three front war !
As for the west, after their debacle with their surrogate in Ukraine, in which German tanks were burnt on arrival, they face another debacle backing their surrogate Israel.
The Arabs need to decouple from the US and Germans and the other Europeans and set up an alliance with Russia. In 1956, when the Israelis, French and British invaded Egypt because Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal, citing it was a breach of international order, it was the Soviet Union that stepped in and forced the three colonialists to get out. The Soviet Union threatened to use nuclear weapons on these three countries, and Eisenhower did not want to fight with the Soviet Union, so the US too asked the Israelis, French and British to get out.
Had the Gulf Arabs developed ties with the Soviet Union then, they would have been in a better position today. But it is not too late, they should ally with Russia and China. The US will always back Israel's apartheid state till it becomes unsustainable. They should not be taken in by the Abraham Accord, it will be like the Oslo accord. The Israelis would use it to buy time to take West Bank land. It is like the Minsk accord with Russia, Angela Merkel said it was to buy time to arm Ukraine.
Israel faces a three front war, if the war is extended, it would be beyond the west's capacity to maintain Israel - as they are finding with Ukraine. The US's economy and power is not the same as before. It is under duress, being based on debt, gross inequality, polarisation. China quietly overtakes the US while the US is stuck in Ukraine and Israel 'for as long as it takes'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@callsigndd9ls897 You over estimate the west.
If the US had no ulterior design in Ukraine, why did finance a coup in which Ukro Nazis took over ? That is corruption. 3 US companies own 35% of Ukraine's agricultural land. If the US has no military interest as you pretend, it could have agreed to a security guarantee that Russia asked for. But it declined. WHY ? Why did the US blow up Nordstream 2 ?
The fact is Putin has ended single handedly the western 'rules based international order', that allowed the west to practise neo colonialism, overthrow governments in Latin America, Arab countries, invade Iraq and Afghanistan.
'Besides selling gas, oil, coal and ores to Western countries, Russia is an economic dwarf....
But the dwarf has the power to de-industrialise Europe. That is what he is doing, Glass factories, alumninium and steel factories are shutting in France and Germany. With that auto industry and Airbus are affected.
As for the US, Russia has catalysed and speeded up non-dollar based trade between countries. The US invaded Iraq to stop Saddam selling oil in euros - because it knows that would end the US standard of living. Now Russia is doing the same, and the US cannot stop them. Further unlike Saddam's time, there are many countries now willing to enter into trade deals with rouble, yuan and other currencies.
So the western world order is over, it ain't coming back. Africa, India, China, Arabs, Iran, Turkey, Latin America are not listening to the west.
''Always remember that Hitler and Stalin were "friends" once too, and after that Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt were "friends". Such friendships can end very quickly if one of the friends has only a personal interest in their own power.''
I know. What is the point ? Give that advice to Zelensky. He should know friendship with Biden may end any time, and the Europeans are irrelevant.
1
-
@botondtoth8263 Russia had protested NATO expansion many times, and it was ignored. There were five waves of NATO expansion. Russia drew the line on Ukraine. Russia asked the US for a security guarantee in Dec, 2021, but the US only wanted to meet to discuss other matters. Russia said the US has stalled for years, they wanted a quick response to the subject at hand, Ukraine.
Angela Merkel and Sarkozy had opposed NATO expansion in 2008, but the US due to the machinations of Victoria Nuland ignored them. NATO is the US, the Europeans do not count. The US has corrupt business interests in Ukraine, so it has ulterior motives. The Ukrainians and Europeans are pawns (willing pawns of course).
Putin has taken action. The significance goes beyond Ukraine. In effect, Putin has ended the western 'rules based international order', the neo-colonial order which the west had constructed to control the world even after the end of the colonial era. This order is not coming back.
1
-
1
-
@callsigndd9ls897 Putin does not want to occupy any ex-Soviet republics, unless they misbehave and threaten Russia like Ukraine and Lithuania. Ukraine is being a taught the lesson of their lives. Litthuania tried to blockade Kaliningrad, till Russia said it will cancel its independence.
Why should I not claim about US bases and naval bases in Ukraine ? US has established such bases all over the world. Sevastapol in Crimea was the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet and was under lease from Ukraine under a friendly agreement since independence. If Ukraine joined NATO , that could be withdrawn and the US Seventh Fleet would be sailing from Sevastopol. When the US sponsored coup take place, and Ukro Nazi nationalists took over in 2014, Putin swiftly moved to take Crimea. Still the US has plans with Odessa and other places. Under Trump, the US was not interested in military expansion. But under Biden, whose family has shady businesses with Ukraine, there were other motives.
You are an ignorant semi-literate person. You do not understand in geopolitics not everything is stated explicitly, the opponents intentions need to be deduced. The Russians are chess masters, they think ahead. Sir Putin is a master strategist, and he is multi dimensional, he is not driven by emotion like you.
1
-
1
-
@botondtoth8263 The Americans do not need to share borders to instigate coups and wars in South America, so what is your point ? They got Allende over thrown in Chile and replaced with Pinochet. Like that, they instigated a coup in Ukraine and got a govt. they wanted. They pulled it off without military intervention, so it is acceptable to you. In some cases they manage that, in other cases they invade to bring regime change. They invaded Iraq, using a false flag about WMDs.
The Europeans are not so nice and innocent as you pretend. The colonised countries of Asia and Africa know this. The Russians also know. The Nazis invaded the Soviet Union and 20 million died. In 1812, the French under Napoleon invaded. Swedes, Poles invaded before that. But Russia defeated all of them, and due to Stalin, the Soviet Union became a superpower.
Now all the Europeans are weaklings, so they allied with America and became its doormats. America plays off Eastern Europe against Western Europe, and instigates tensions with Russia by NATO expansions. The tensions become the raison d'etre for the American footprint in Europe. Lately, America has become a predatory ally. See how they blew up Nordstream 2 to make sure Germany cannot go back to Russia, and Europe becomes dependent on US LNG. See how shameless and helpless the Europeans are that they cannot hold America to account. People who do not have sovereignty themselves want to fight for Ukraine's holy sovereignty.
'I personally wish that the EU leaders started to set up a potent common military and a more integrated common foreign policy'.
The Europeans are never going to be united and be anything of substance in the future. No one in Europe likes or trusts Germany due to their past. Poland is asking for 1 trillion compensation from Germany. The French are self centred. The British think they are superior to the Europeans. The Scandinivians are posers, and think they have high standards. The Eastern Europeans have an inferiority complex. Poland and Lithuania talk as if they are superpowers because they are accepted in NATO. This hopeless lot are not a match for Russia.
The EU Commission is an unelected body. Ursula von Leyen talks like a German Nazi about Ukranians being part of our European family, and not merely the human family (meaning Afghans and Iraqis who we made refugees are not part of our family). The EU's Foreign Minister Bourell is an old fashioned colonialist type who said Europe is a garden and the rest of the world is a jungle, and the jungle will invade us. That is another statement of 'white man's burden'. The era of colonial rule is over, but still another two generations of Europeans like von Leyen, Bourell, Johsnon, Macron etc. have the hangovers of that era. It will take one more generation of Europeans to realise they are not relevant anymore. Putin has ended their 'international rules based order' for good. He will de-industrialise Europe. The Americans are predatory allies out for themselves, and Europeans are pawns.
The Europeans need to develop independent intellects to realise that having good relations with Russia is better than being America's door mats.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamessimpson5634 Russia will not allow Ukraine to be a base for US missile and naval encampments to target Russia. Ukraine was functioning as a normal country till it became a vassal of the US.
Crimea, Odessa, Kharkhov etc. were Russian and built by Russians, these areas were attached to Ukraine when the Soviet Union was formed; and when it was disbanded, these areas were given to Ukraine by Russia (Russia showed goodwill and did not make an issue of returning them to Russia).
When Ukraine started falling into the web of US intrigue, it stabbed Russia in the back, by seeking to give US missile and naval bases to target Russia. For this perfidy, Russia has terminated Ukraine.
Ukraine became a failed state due to its own decisions. It thought with US aid, it could fight and defeat Russia. But it has found it cannot defeat Russia. Whether it likes it or not Crimea is gone, 4 more oblasts are gone, and more is going. The US will walk away after the elections, and the useless Europeans cannot fight against Russia. The only choice for Ukraine is unconditional surrender. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therealhakunamatata8539 The US has 36 trillion debt. The US has been living by printing the dollar - the US had an arrangement with the Gulf states to use ONLY the dollar for the international oil trade. This was maintained by military force. When Saddam and Gaddafi tried de-dollarisation (Saddam sold oil in euros, and Gaddafi floated a gold dinar), the US invaded and assassinated them. But that era is coming to an end, ironically because of the sanctions and Putin pushing for de-dollarisation. China is also pushing for de-dollarisation and the US cannot invade these countries to remove Putin and Xi. US has shifted its productive capacity overseas to China. Russia on the other hand has all its productive capacity at home, that is why it could produce everything for the war effort. It has water, land, nuclear power, metals, energy, minerals, it is the largest producer of wheat.
The decline is evident in the rise of 'white nationalism' and racial tensions in the US. The whites are disoriented by the US's decline. Trump is a symptom of the decline. And he will be coming back again, because of enraged whites looking for someone to arrest the decline.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@varyolla435 Wishful thinking, what was done before cannot be repeated because the Russians have learnt from it. The element of surprise is gone.
The rules have not changed due to technology. As in the Red Army's Operation Bagration, to succeed you need to keep the enemy guessing, apply the force at a point AND have the arms and manpower to follow through without respite. Ukraine does not have the latter two. Further, there is no element of surprise. The Russians have already started the campaign to destroy stockpiles. There are only one or two points the Ukranians are going to try to breakthrough.
The Ukranians might advance and then get trapped. They are putting 60,000. They need 3x that to overcome. If that was not the case, the counter offensive would not be delayed. The Russians will hold the Ukrainians off, inflict heavy casualties and once the Bandera army runs out of steam, they will go in hot pursuit.
The Ukrainians do not have high hopes, but the Americans are pressurising them to show results. Otherwise, it is a waste of money.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ross is a typical American liar, who is partial to Israel. I don't know how such a person with a biased perspective was involved in framing the Oslo accord. It is not Hamas that sabotaged the peace process. The Oslo accord was flouted by the Israelis because it let its Jewish fundamentalists to take land in the West Bank. Recently, these Jewish Nazis have assaulted the Al Aqsa Mosque with the aim of demolishing it. This has become the Israeli govt's policy. This is the reason the attack of 6 Oct. was launched and it has legitimacy in the eyes of the Muslim world. It was called Al Aqsa operation.
Israel itself built Hamas when Netanayhu financed it to undermine the Palestinian Authority. The ex PM Ehud Olmert has said this in an interview.
From the Palestinian perspective, the civilians in Israel work for the IDF. The Israeli children will grow up and be settlers who kill their children. So from their experience, there is no distinction between the IDF and civilian. The whole of Israeli society is militarised.
People see Hamas is defending the Al Aqsa mosque and that reverbates round the Muslim world. Ross talks about Saudi-Israeli deal and reconstruction of the West Bank as part of the deal. It will not happen. Israel has put 500,000 settlers in the West Bank to make the seizure of land into a fait accompli. They have taken all of Jersualem and the US accepts that. The Jewish fascists want to demolish the Al Aqsa mosque. So what is Ross talking about Palestinians flouting accords and missing opportunities ? That is a typical Israeli line - bring settlers and take land, if the Palestinians fight back, say they are spoilers who missed the golden opportunity for peace with Israel.
People like Ross have used the Oslo accords to buy time for Israel to make settlements in the West Bank (like the Americans and Europeans used the Minsk accords to buy time for arming the Ukrainians to fight Russia). Thus Saudi Arabia should tear up the Abrahamic accord and Egypt the Camp David Accord. The Palestinians and Arabs got nothing while Israeli expansionism continued at high speed. The Saudis should be very careful of allowing Jews into Saudi. They once lived in Medina and they will be salivating for that.
The Jews' greed is insatiable, so much so, that they will drive themselves to extinction. That is their history. It will be a long struggle for the Palestinians, but they have shown remarkable endurance over 70 years, and in the end they will prevail. Israel's demography is on a downwards spiral and it is totally dependent on the west. There are no 6 day wars to win, they will not be able to win a three front war, and the US does not have the economy to support Israel indefinitely. Israel has become a corrupt state and running an apartheid state is not sustainable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Indeed, Russia had no choice as he said on Ukraine. Sweden and Finland are not the same threat to Russia as Ukraine. Ukraine was starting to discriminate against Russian Ukranians. There were neo-Nazis actively promoting Russophobia. The US plan was to put missiles in Ukraine, and get the Ukranians to give them Sevasatopol, ousting Russia's Black Sea Fleet from its HQ.
Russia has stopped the US plans in Ukraine. Well done Russia ! Ukraine got smashed, but it is tough luck, it was their own decision to base nationalism on Russophobia.
As for Kremenchuk, Russia targeted a missile depot next to a supermarket and the fire spread. I can believe that. The Ukranians can cry and the west can make some temporary propaganda.
Ukraine and the west were given a chance to avoid the war by returning to the neutrality that was in Ukraine's declaration of independence, and by giving the security guarantee that Russia asked. Both declined, so Ukraine and the west have to pay the price of their folly. Why are they complaining ? When Russia goes for war, it has to follow through, it cannot take half measures, it has to to fight its enemies, Ukraine and the west, to win. And it is doing that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@clarkthompson8094 Russia is stronger than all your 30 puny nations of Europe and the US. If for a moment NATO thought they could win, they would have sent troops to Ukraine. It has withstood all military and economic pressures to guard its security. It warned if NATO crosses a red line in Ukraine, they will put their foot down.
China, India, all other countries apart from the western gang are trading with Russia. Flights go from Turkey and Dubai to Russia. Fly Dubai flies to 11 destinations in Russia.
'Yes, the west has oil and gas. The US is a major producer.' If the US has oil and LNG why are they giving Europe at more than 4x the price ? Why does not Europe ask its partner the US to cap the price ?
Why is Biden going to Saudi for oil ? Anyway Saudi gave him a slap on the face - not only did they not increase, they decreased the output. The EU said it would apply a price cap to Qatar's LNG. Qatar said they will sell elsewhere. They know the US is a spent force and cannot threaten them after their debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq. The countries like Russia, China, Iran and India never took orders from you. The countries that took orders like Turkey, Saudi and Qatar do not listen to you anymore. Only the servile Europeans are in the US camp because they are a bunch of weaklings.
Sir Putin has ended your western 'international order' and it is not coming back. Sir Putin has also ended your financial blackmail. People now have started looking for non-dollar settlements.
What Sir Putin has achieved is momentous.
'Putin is threatening to starve Africa now too. ' Sir Putin gave Ukraine a generous licence during a war to sell wheat. But Ukraine misbehaved. Most of the wheat was going to Europe. You don't give a damn about Africans. They have seen your duplicity. During Covid, you did not help them. But you gave all money to Ukraine. That is why the Africans are not siding with you.
1
-
@clarkthompson8094 'Russia is not stronger than NATO, including the US and all of Europe. Not even close.'
If NATO for one moment believed it was stronger than Russia, then it would have sent troops to Ukraine. NATO is not as delusional as you !
None of you individually or collectively will dare fight directly against Russia; you will only fight with proxies. If it was Iraq and Afghanistan, you would do it. Get it ?
'Russia's GDP is about the samevas Spain, or Mexico or Indonesia.'
This is a typical western single metric assessment based on GDP. Russia can launch satellites, knock out satellites, match US for cyber warfare, has hypersonic missiles which the US does not have, can Spain, or Mexico or Indonesia do these things ? Russian people are educated, they have health care.
'Russia has nuclear weapons. That is what scares away its enemies.'
Indeed. What is wrong with having them ? You also have them. If you are peaceful, you give them up first and set an example. If Russia did not have nuclear weapons, you would do the mischief you habitually do against countries outside the west, to Russia. The point of having nuclear weapons is to scare away enemies - that is why you have them. Then what is your point ?
'Russia does not give anyone a license to sell grain. Russia steals grain and threatens to sink civilisn ships.'
Russia is at war against NATO in Ukraine. In war, all aspects are targeted to bring an end to the war quickly. The US and UK targeted all industries, power structures, dams etc. in Germany during WW 2. In fact, they firebombed and use nuclear weapons on civilians. So don't moralise. Russia will decide whether Ukraine will be allowed to export. Ukraine can only export when it signs up for restoration of neutrality as promised in its Declaration of Independence. What you going to do about it ?
Russia is indeed stronger than all of Europe plus the US. They have even proved that in the economic war. They have forced Europe into de-industrialisation and catalysed de-dollarisation. Those are the trends. In a war, Churchill said it is not a battle that decides, it is the trends. The trend is that Russia has ended the western 'rules based order' which was a pretence for western neo-colonialism. This is not coming back as other nations assert themselves and ignore you. That is a clear trend for which the rest of the world thanks Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@peterreidy1011 Your reply is whataboutism. You cannot dispute my comment about BBC and Lloyd Austin, so you compare with Lavrov.
My comparison was not with Lavrov, my comparison was between the present tone of BBC and Lloyd Austin, compared with the same people some weeks back. Every time the west gives a new weapon like Himars, it is a game changer; Ukraine hits a bridge or captures a village here or there, there is a flush of optimism and gleeful shouts in the west, and we are made to believe that Ukraine will get not only Kherson but Crimea before December. But after a few weeks, the Russians strike with new ferocity, then there is despondency. Doubts creep in. That is evident in Llyod Austin's and BBC's tone. The reality is Ukraine is being hit hard and they do not have the capability of getting back Donbass let alone Crimea. Russia is softening them up striking at the power and water supply to hit them hard in winter.
The Russians do not speak much. They keep you guessing, they do and tell you afterwards. Zelensky will tell you in summer about the Kherson summer offensive and now it is November. It is not going to happen. The Ukrainians mounted a surprise attack on less defended Kharkov region and succeeded. But that surprise attack is a one-off and not a game changer. Time is not on the side of the Ukranians.
Ukraine can only plod on due to western financial support. The west is financially stretched. It initiated economic warfare on Russia by seizing its money. The west used its control of SWIFT to block Russian trade; that has backfired as Russia turned the tables and floored the west's economy with an energy cut, and found alternative ways to trade. If Ukraine cannot produce the projected victory, then there will be voices raised in the west asking whether the money given is for a losing cause Already the Republicans have stated they cannot give a blank cheque to Ukraine. Ukraine needs massive western financial support to continue, Russia can self sustain. Russia has damaged Ukraine's critical supply line - the west's wealth generating industries.
You do not need Lavrov to tell you that. Try using your intelligence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1