Comments by "PNH 6000" (@PNH-sf4jz) on "How the war can destabilize Russia" video.

  1. Politically disengaged or Putinically engaged.
    3
  2. A few more thoughts that you may consider. Alternatively, the Russians have massive underground or 'in the side of mountain' caches, like other countries, such as Iran are said to have, of military and air-force weapons that they have accumulated over the previous recent years, and can bring out at the "last minute" and spring a very unpleasant surprise. While I do not believe that is necessarily so, I believe that at least some attention must be given to the possibility, so that if the trap is sprung by the Russians, the Ukrainian military will be adequately prepared. I most certainly hope that the Russians are reduced now, to using older, almost antiquated weapons and transport, such as T55s and T54s. However, I find it difficult to believe that Russia would have allowed their weapon stocks to be reduced to that level. That is particularly so, when the one area that the Russians should be least concerned about is the defensive alliance of countries in NATO. Surely, simple logic would not have allowed them to rely, as a last resort, on their nuclear weapons. That should be especially so, given that, if any of the Russian nuclear weapons were to be fired, Russian targets will receive a barrage by conventional weapons, that will annihilate the targets at which they would be fired. That would occur before the US, the UK, France, Germany or any other country fired any nuclear weapons. As I was thinking about the possibility of Russia ending up requesting NATO for assistance in their defence, another possibility occurred to me. Such a situation could occur if, ten years ago, Russia decided that taking Ukraine was an all or nothing gambit. They realised that the oil and gas was only going to be a profitable market commodity for a limited number of years, given the push to "go green". So with an ever decreasing income, ageing manufacturing capacity and limited sea ports for distribution of their products, the acquisition of Ukraine, with it resources and the means of distributing products by sea, might have seemed to be a way of solving their dilemma. This situation would mean that they could attempt to take Ukraine and, if unsuccessful, could throw themselves on the mercy of what they refer to as "the west" and I prefer to call the "free world". In the situation that I have outlined, the Russians could step right up to the point of using nuclear weapons. They would know that there would be no chance of other countries striking their territory. They would also feel safe and assured that no nuclear weapons would be fired unless they did so pre-emptively. At the point where they saw that their weapons had been exhausted and their bluff, in terms of a nuclear weapons attack, had been "called", they would then have to concede defeat and rely on the "free world" for their protection. The Russians would also know that the "free world" would not want to see the uncontrolled collapse of the Russian Federation. The "free world" would then, in some ways, feel bound by their own concerns to support Russia. This could be accomplished by something akin to the "Marshall Plan" that was instituted following the second world war. In this way, the "free world" also has a positive outcome. However, during that time, Ukraine will have had to endure the agonies of war.
    2
  3. A few more thoughts on a similar theme to yours, Tord Steiro. It is possible that the Russians have massive underground or 'in the side of mountain' caches, like other countries, such as Iran are said to have, of military and air-force weapons that they have accumulated over the previous recent years, and can bring out at the "last minute" and spring a very unpleasant surprise. While I do not believe that is necessarily so, I believe that at least some attention must be given to the possibility, so that if the trap is sprung by the Russians, the Ukrainian military will be adequately prepared. I most certainly hope that the Russians are reduced now, to using older, almost antiquated weapons and transport, such as T55s and T54s. However, I find it difficult to believe that Russia would have allowed their weapon stock to be reduced to that level. That is particularly so, when the one area that the Russians should be least concerned about is the defensive alliance of countries in NATO. Surely, simple logic would not have allowed them to rely, as a last resort on their nuclear weapons. That should be especially so, given that if any of the Russian nuclear weapons were to be fired, Russian targets will receive a barrage by conventional weapons, that will annihilate the targets at which they would be fired. That would occur before the US, the UK, France, Germany or any other country fired any nuclear weapons. As I was thinking about the possibility of Russia ending up requesting NATO for assistance in their defence, another possibility occurred to me. Such a situation could occur if, ten years ago, Russia decided that taking Ukraine was an all or nothing gambit. They realised that the oil and gas was only going to be a profitable market commodity for a limited number of years, given the push to "go green". So with an ever decreasing income, ageing manufacturing capacity and limited sea ports for distribution of their products, the acquisition of Ukraine, with it resources and the means of distributing products by sea, might have seemed to be a way of solving their dilemma. This situation would mean that they could attempt to take Ukraine and, if unsuccessful, could throw themselves on the mercy of what they refer to as the "west" and I prefer to call the "free world". In the situation that I have outlined, the Russians could step right up to the point of using nuclear weapons. They would know that there would be no chance of other countries striking their territory. They would also feel safe and assured that no nuclear weapons would be fired unless they did so pre-emptively. At the point where they saw that their weapons had been exhausted and their bluff, in terms of a nuclear weapons attack, had been "called", they would then have to concede defeat and rely on the "free world" for their protection. The Russians would also know that the "free world" would not want to see the uncontrolled collapse of the Russian Federation and would then, in some ways, feel bound by their own concerns {of the "free world"} to support Russia. This could be accomplished by something akin to the "Marshall Plan" that was instituted following the second world war. In this way, the "free world" also has a positive outcome. However, during that time, Ukraine will have had to endure the agonies of war.
    2
  4. Watching some of the interviews of Russians in Russia seems to indicate that most of those people are constantly feeling some sort of coercion. However, I definitely do not believe that is a fixed percentage. Once the pressue cooker weight is removed, there will, I hope, be an explosive expansion of pressure that may hopefully dislodge Purin, as people migrate and following their migration, move to different bubbles. The bubbles that Anders used for the demonstration are just four of what I would think of as the many possible permutations.
    2
  5. In general I agree with your comments. However, I disagree with the idea of over-analysing. Anders {I hope that he will not mind my using the familiar first name reference} is rather simplifying a vast topic to degrees that most of us can follow and understand with the very broad brush-strokes.
    1
  6. Absolutely agreed and supported. I do like your idea expressed as: "History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme."
    1
  7. A few more thoughts that may align with your own. Alternatively, the Russians have massive underground or 'in the side of mountain' caches, like other countries, such as Iran are said to have, of military and air-force weapons that they have accumulated over the previous recent years, and can bring out at the "last minute" and spring a very unpleasant surprise. While I do not believe that is necessarily so, I believe that at least some attention must be given to the possibility, so that if the trap is sprung by the Russians, the Ukrainian military will be adequately prepared. I most certainly hope that the Russians are reduced now, to using older, almost antiquated weapons and transport, such as T55s and T54s. However, I find it difficult to believe that Russia would have allowed their weapon stock to be reduced to that level. That is particularly so, when the one area that the Russians should be least concerned about is the defensive alliance of countries in NATO. Surely, simple logic would not have allowed them to rely, as a last resort on their nuclear weapons. That should be especially so, given that if any of the Russian nuclear weapons were to be fired, Russian targets will receive a barrage by conventional weapons, that will annihilate the targets at which they would be fired. That would occur before the US, the UK, France, Germany or any other country fired any nuclear weapons. As I was thinking about the possibility of Russia ending up requesting NATO for assistance in their defence, another possibility occurred to me. Such a situation could occur if, ten years ago, Russia decided that taking Ukraine was an all or nothing gambit. They realised that the oil and gas was only going to be a profitable market commodity for a limited number of years, given the push to "go green". So with an ever decreasing income, ageing manufacturing capacity and limited sea ports for distribution of their products, the acquisition of Ukraine, with it resources and the means of distributing products by sea, might have seemed to be a way of solving their dilemma. This situation would mean that they could attempt to take Ukraine and, if un-successful, could throw themselves on the mercy of what they refer to as the "west" which I prefer to call the "free world". In the situation that I have outlined, the Russians could step right up to the point of using nuclear weapons. They would know that there would be no chance of other countries striking their territory. They would also feel safe and assured that no nuclear weapons would be fired unless they did so pre-emptively. At the point where they saw that their weapons had been exhausted and their bluff, in terms of a nuclear weapons attack, had been "called", they would then have to concede defeat and rely on the "free world" for their protection. The Russians would also know that the "free world" would not want to see the uncontrolled collapse of the Russian Federation. The "free world" would then, in some ways, feel bound by their own concerns to support Russia. This could be accomplished by something akin to the "Marshall Plan" that was instituted following the second world war. In this way, the "free world" also has a positive outcome. However, during that time, Ukraine will have had to endure the agonies of war.
    1
  8. Some people are suggesting "diplomatically negotiated peace". Are they suggesting peace at any cost? It is all very well to constantly call for "peace by diplomatic negotiation". However, without any reference to the possible "diplomatically negotiated TERMS of PEACE", the words, "peace by diplomatic negotiation" are vacuous and hollow. The RuZZian political and military establishment have shown no indication that they are sincere about working toward a peaceful settlement. Indeed, at each stage, where opportunities may have existed, the Moscow menagerie have escalated their WAR footing. Their stated reasons for the WAR have been shown, by the RuZZians themselves, to be a web of obfuscation, untruths and lies. Because of this, there are no "hooks" on which Ukraine or any other country can begin to pursue peaceful settlement. Even Turkey's President Erdogan seems to have found it difficult, even impossible, to establish preliminary points on which discussions with RuZZia may be based. It appears to me that RuZZia, according to Putin's own words, is bent on their goal of complete subjugation and subordination of the countries within the pre-Russian Federation borders, in other words those borders of the former USSR. In March of last year (2022), President Zelensky offered a number of concessions, including the agreement not to join NATO. { web-search "Ukraine not to join NATO" for details } However, the offer was declined or ignored by Moscow. It therefore appears that what RuZZia was stating they wanted, was a lie among so many other lies. Following the crimes perpetrated in Bucha, Irpin, Hostomel and other villages, towns and cities, Zelensky, having discussed with Ukrainian troops, civilians and the government, hardened Ukraine's position. If RuZZia is successful in gaining the "land bridge" to Odesa, the countries of Moldova, where RuZZia already has its "separatist" state Transnistria, between Ukraine and Moldova, and Romania, may well be subject to assault and invasion by RuZZia on pretexts similar to those that they used for the invasion of Ukraine and other states and countries. If RuZZia is successful in subjugating Ukraine completely, the countries, in addition to Moldova and Romania, being Slovakia and Hungary, will then have land borders with RuZZian controlled territory. Finland already has a land border of 1340 km with RuZZia. Poland and Lithuania already have a border with Russia, by being adjacent to Kaliningrad. Latvia and Estonia both have land borders with Russia of 214 km and 294 km respectively. Poland also has a 420 km border with Belarus; Lithuania ~680 km and Latvia of ~173 km, respectively. In the event that Ukraine concedes defeat or even peace by appeasement with significant concessions, it is likely that RuZZia will again wage WAR against what is left of Ukraine. If RuZZia is then successful, the remainder of the former Soviet Bloc is likely to be at risk of attack and invasion by RuZZia. This is not simply a concept; It has been stated by Putin and other members of the Russian establishment. They would expand their borders, one small country at a time. It may also be of interest to readers, to consider the alleged war-crimes committed during the initial assault on Kyiv and also, alleged crimes associated with the presence of certain troops in the Donbas. While I definitely do not support the presence of Russian troops in Ukraine, it is of interest to note that a letter has apparently been sent to the kremlin regarding sexual attacks on the wives and daughters of Russian service personnel based in the Donbas region. It may be worthwhile, in view of such recent events, to assess the RuZZian style of operation, by reading the following article. The information relates specifically to Ramzan Kadyrov and Chechen forces in the first attacks on Kyiv and the sexual assaults in the Donbas: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/18/the-real-role-of-pro-russian-chechens-in-ukraine. Is it any wonder that Ukrainians do not wish to return to the Jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. Better to die with honour than to live in shame, as submissive serfs, servants and slaves in a vassal state, dominated by the RuZZian Federation, which is itself a state in a state of decline. {The term RuZZia refers to the RuZZian Fascist-Nazi style regime that appears to be acting against the interests of their own people of Russia and the people of other countries, in particular, but not only Ukraine, at the present time.}
    1
  9. I agree with your reference to Putin supporters by default. Just watching some of the interviews of Russians in Russia seems to indicate that most of those people are constantly feeling some sort of coercion. However, I definitely do not agree with that as a fixed percentage. Once the pressue cooker weight is removed, there will, I hope, be an explosive expansion of pressure that may hopefully dislodge Purin, as people migrate and following that transition, migrate to different bubbles. I would think of the bubbles that Anders used for the demonstration as just four of the many possible permutations.
    1
  10. We can only conjecture hypothetically. We hope that our propositions allow us to prepare for what may come. There are, indeed, no guarantees, but if we do not plan, we are totally unprepared for anything that will happen.
    1