Is Ukraine about to have a war?
you can see him in almost every picture taken of Zelenskyi, here's a perfect example: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/zelenskyy...sian-invasion/
Sigh. Since they're referencing Ghandi, perhps they can all go to Moscow and try some "peaceful resistance" on Vlad's doorstep...
The Guardian: Thousands-protest-in-berlin-against-giving-weapons-to-ukraine
The Guardian: Thousands-protest-in-berlin-against-giving-weapons-to-ukraine
A long read but well worth it - based on interviews / soundbites from the key actors in western administrations reflecting on months leading up to the war. Admin - if posted previously, please feel free to remove.
Answered a key question for me: if we knew it was going to happen, why didn't we move to preempt it?
Politico: A first-ever oral history of how top U.S. and Western officials saw the warning signs of a European land war, their frantic attempts to stop it — and the moment Putin actually crossed the border.
For nearly a year prior, U.S. and Western officials had signs of what was coming: a suspicious buildup of Russian troops, intelligence about the Kremlin’s plans, statements from President Vladimir Putin himself. Those officials raised increasingly specific public alarms, some of which were based on a novel new strategy of rapidly declassifying and publicizing intelligence in near real-time, and made desperate attempts to avert a war, even as it became more and more clear that Putin was determined to invade.
The events in eastern Europe in 2021 and 2022, coming just as the world emerged from the Covid-19 pandemic, also unfolded against a fraught geopolitical backdrop: In 2014, Russia had already seized Crimea from Ukraine, and fighting by Russia’s irregular, unmarked troops, known as “little green men,” had destabilized eastern Ukraine and led to a long-running, low-level war that had continued ever since. Meanwhile, during the summer of 2021, the United States faced its own challenge: a chaotic and controversial end to its nearly 20-year war in Afghanistan.
This is the story of the Biden administration’s strategy and reaction to that looming Russian invasion — the battle to persuade skeptics and rally foreign allies to confront an almost-unthinkable threat, one that continues to shake the world today. All titles and military ranks are presented based on roles the speakers held in February 2022, and interviews have been condensed and edited for clarity.
Answered a key question for me: if we knew it was going to happen, why didn't we move to preempt it?
Politico: A first-ever oral history of how top U.S. and Western officials saw the warning signs of a European land war, their frantic attempts to stop it — and the moment Putin actually crossed the border.
For nearly a year prior, U.S. and Western officials had signs of what was coming: a suspicious buildup of Russian troops, intelligence about the Kremlin’s plans, statements from President Vladimir Putin himself. Those officials raised increasingly specific public alarms, some of which were based on a novel new strategy of rapidly declassifying and publicizing intelligence in near real-time, and made desperate attempts to avert a war, even as it became more and more clear that Putin was determined to invade.
The events in eastern Europe in 2021 and 2022, coming just as the world emerged from the Covid-19 pandemic, also unfolded against a fraught geopolitical backdrop: In 2014, Russia had already seized Crimea from Ukraine, and fighting by Russia’s irregular, unmarked troops, known as “little green men,” had destabilized eastern Ukraine and led to a long-running, low-level war that had continued ever since. Meanwhile, during the summer of 2021, the United States faced its own challenge: a chaotic and controversial end to its nearly 20-year war in Afghanistan.
This is the story of the Biden administration’s strategy and reaction to that looming Russian invasion — the battle to persuade skeptics and rally foreign allies to confront an almost-unthinkable threat, one that continues to shake the world today. All titles and military ranks are presented based on roles the speakers held in February 2022, and interviews have been condensed and edited for clarity.
Last edited by sheikhthecamel; 26th Feb 2023 at 16:10.
The following 2 users liked this post by sheikhthecamel:
Hitler was mad enough to have wanted it, but I very much doubt his senior officers would have gone along, there was a wish for surrender to take place in some quarters prior to Hitler committing suicide. There were those planning as early as 1938 to get rid of Hitler as they had no wish for another world war. The apparent aim of the bomb assassination attempt was to wrest political control of Germany and its armed forces from the Nazi Party (including the SS) and to make peace with the Western Allies as soon as possible.
If Putin was on the pavement in the middle of a Pro Hart/Jackson Pollock esque pizza splash, maybe.
It's a glaring psychological weakness present in civilised societies, and Russia exploits it to the max.
No need to go all the way to his bunker in Moscow though - defeat him in Ukraine.
The following users liked this post:
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Excellent article by Matthew Syed in The Times.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/m...tand-vb7dsg7dd
Matthew Syed: The autocratic axis gains strength every day — it’s time to take a stand
(p.s. For those frustrated by paywalls, may I recommend “12ft Ladder” Easily located on the web. (Show me a 10ft paywall, I’ll show you a 12ft ladder.))
Times editorial to accompany the above:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/i...blic-qwk0t9r2r
If we’re committed to Ukraine, it’s time to level with the public
A year after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, no one can be under any illusion as to the grim cost of war. On the outskirts of Kyiv, freshly dug graves depict the ever-growing toll of Vladimir Putin’s aggression. The numbers are horrifying: between 80,000 and 100,000 Ukrainians are estimated to have died or been wounded so far, along with 180,000 Russians. But these figures are just a guess. The reality is that countless unknown victims have been lost to the conflict. Millions more have fled their homes. As Christina Lamb reports today, the flow of Ukrainian volunteers to recruitment centres is slowing.
The invasion on February 24 last year came as a jolt. Boris Johnson responded with an obscenity when he was woken in the early hours to be given the news. The United Nations security council was meeting in New York as word arrived that Russian troops had crossed the border. As Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US ambassador to the UN, later said: “I saw everybody on their phones. The room was stunned.”
Their shock was understandable. But their surprise was inexcusable. The West has consistently underestimated Putin’s ambition. In the 15 years preceding the invasion, the Russian president had attacked Georgia, annexed Crimea and sent unofficial troops to fight in east Ukraine. In July 2021, he published a 6,800-word essay on Ukraine claiming Russia had been “robbed” of its satellites. His intent to create a new Russian empire was clear, yet successive leaders — of Nato, the US, the EU and, yes, Britain — had failed to take him seriously.
But as the world misjudged Putin, Putin misjudged Ukraine. Last spring, as an endless column of Russian tanks rolled towards Kyiv, it seemed inevitable the city would fall. Yet the fact that Joe Biden was able to pay a surprise visit to the capital last Monday demonstrates a remarkable truth: Kyiv remains a free city; Ukraine remains a sovereign state.
The resilience of the Ukrainian people has been an inspiration, and the world has rallied to their cause. Ceremonies held around the globe last week showed that most democratic nations continue to stand with Ukraine. This is true nowhere more than in Britain, where thousands of generous families have taken in refugees.
But as the conflict enters its second year, it is clear it is far from over. In vast swathes of Ukraine, the war has become quite literally entrenched. In others, the fighting is as fierce as it has ever been. And new fronts are expected to open up in coming weeks as Russia attempts fresh assaults.
It is now a war of attrition. Ukraine needs not only our moral support, but also our tanks and our ammunition. Its forces are currently firing as many shells each month as the US produces in half a year. At some point, we may have to send jets. If the conflict escalates, do we even have enough equipment?
Defence spending in the UK will have to rise, whether we like it or not. In an era of prolonged peace, we have become used to spending just 2 per cent of GDP on defence. In 1956 it was 8 per cent. We now effectively have to arm both ourselves and Ukraine.
In that sober context, the fashionable frothy talk of tax cuts in Westminster is just that, froth. Low and competitive taxes are to be encouraged, but Rishi Sunak knows he cannot rearm our forces on the cheap. We can wave our flags but we may also have to tighten our belts further.
The conflict has also exposed our reliance on foreign gas, which sent energy bills soaring last year. While wholesale prices are now falling again, we must strengthen our defences against future shocks. The development of offshore wind — a true British success story — should be pursued at scale. Ministers must stop flip-flopping about onshore wind farms. If nuclear power is judged to be part of the solution — as successive governments have told us — they must get on with it and build the reactors.
Britain must also reassess its diplomatic relationships. The war has had a seismic impact on global geopolitics, and we must respond accordingly. China is now considering supplying arms to Russia. If it does so, it will effectively turn a regional conflict into a proxy world war.
Sweden and Finland want to join Nato. We must help them. Relationships with Poland, Moldova, the Baltic states and the Balkans must be strengthened. At a time when pro-Russian sentiment is growing in Africa, we must also invest in the Commonwealth. Putin has made it clear he is preparing Russia for a war that will last a generation. He believes the West will tire of its commitment and sue for peace.
We cannot allow him to be right.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/m...tand-vb7dsg7dd
Matthew Syed: The autocratic axis gains strength every day — it’s time to take a stand
(p.s. For those frustrated by paywalls, may I recommend “12ft Ladder” Easily located on the web. (Show me a 10ft paywall, I’ll show you a 12ft ladder.))
Times editorial to accompany the above:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/i...blic-qwk0t9r2r
If we’re committed to Ukraine, it’s time to level with the public
A year after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, no one can be under any illusion as to the grim cost of war. On the outskirts of Kyiv, freshly dug graves depict the ever-growing toll of Vladimir Putin’s aggression. The numbers are horrifying: between 80,000 and 100,000 Ukrainians are estimated to have died or been wounded so far, along with 180,000 Russians. But these figures are just a guess. The reality is that countless unknown victims have been lost to the conflict. Millions more have fled their homes. As Christina Lamb reports today, the flow of Ukrainian volunteers to recruitment centres is slowing.
The invasion on February 24 last year came as a jolt. Boris Johnson responded with an obscenity when he was woken in the early hours to be given the news. The United Nations security council was meeting in New York as word arrived that Russian troops had crossed the border. As Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US ambassador to the UN, later said: “I saw everybody on their phones. The room was stunned.”
Their shock was understandable. But their surprise was inexcusable. The West has consistently underestimated Putin’s ambition. In the 15 years preceding the invasion, the Russian president had attacked Georgia, annexed Crimea and sent unofficial troops to fight in east Ukraine. In July 2021, he published a 6,800-word essay on Ukraine claiming Russia had been “robbed” of its satellites. His intent to create a new Russian empire was clear, yet successive leaders — of Nato, the US, the EU and, yes, Britain — had failed to take him seriously.
But as the world misjudged Putin, Putin misjudged Ukraine. Last spring, as an endless column of Russian tanks rolled towards Kyiv, it seemed inevitable the city would fall. Yet the fact that Joe Biden was able to pay a surprise visit to the capital last Monday demonstrates a remarkable truth: Kyiv remains a free city; Ukraine remains a sovereign state.
The resilience of the Ukrainian people has been an inspiration, and the world has rallied to their cause. Ceremonies held around the globe last week showed that most democratic nations continue to stand with Ukraine. This is true nowhere more than in Britain, where thousands of generous families have taken in refugees.
But as the conflict enters its second year, it is clear it is far from over. In vast swathes of Ukraine, the war has become quite literally entrenched. In others, the fighting is as fierce as it has ever been. And new fronts are expected to open up in coming weeks as Russia attempts fresh assaults.
It is now a war of attrition. Ukraine needs not only our moral support, but also our tanks and our ammunition. Its forces are currently firing as many shells each month as the US produces in half a year. At some point, we may have to send jets. If the conflict escalates, do we even have enough equipment?
Defence spending in the UK will have to rise, whether we like it or not. In an era of prolonged peace, we have become used to spending just 2 per cent of GDP on defence. In 1956 it was 8 per cent. We now effectively have to arm both ourselves and Ukraine.
In that sober context, the fashionable frothy talk of tax cuts in Westminster is just that, froth. Low and competitive taxes are to be encouraged, but Rishi Sunak knows he cannot rearm our forces on the cheap. We can wave our flags but we may also have to tighten our belts further.
The conflict has also exposed our reliance on foreign gas, which sent energy bills soaring last year. While wholesale prices are now falling again, we must strengthen our defences against future shocks. The development of offshore wind — a true British success story — should be pursued at scale. Ministers must stop flip-flopping about onshore wind farms. If nuclear power is judged to be part of the solution — as successive governments have told us — they must get on with it and build the reactors.
Britain must also reassess its diplomatic relationships. The war has had a seismic impact on global geopolitics, and we must respond accordingly. China is now considering supplying arms to Russia. If it does so, it will effectively turn a regional conflict into a proxy world war.
Sweden and Finland want to join Nato. We must help them. Relationships with Poland, Moldova, the Baltic states and the Balkans must be strengthened. At a time when pro-Russian sentiment is growing in Africa, we must also invest in the Commonwealth. Putin has made it clear he is preparing Russia for a war that will last a generation. He believes the West will tire of its commitment and sue for peace.
We cannot allow him to be right.
The following 2 users liked this post by ORAC:
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Igor Girkin says Russia needs a Chinese "lend-lease" if it’s to continue fighting in Ukraine "with any level of success"
He complains that Russian generals led by the "cretin" Gerasimov are burning through armour at a rate that Russian defence plants can’t withstand…
He complains that Russian generals led by the "cretin" Gerasimov are burning through armour at a rate that Russian defence plants can’t withstand…
With Chinese industry now able to flood into Russia - Chinese electronic eyes and ears will be everywhere in Moscow. We know how they operate.
I wonder if the Russian people are concerned that they will become a Chinese puppet? Russia is desperate for support - a perfect opportunity for China. Wouldn't it be ironic, if an attempt to rebuild the USSR ended up in them covertly handing their Country over?
I wonder if the Russian people are concerned that they will become a Chinese puppet? Russia is desperate for support - a perfect opportunity for China. Wouldn't it be ironic, if an attempt to rebuild the USSR ended up in them covertly handing their Country over?
They moved down from having been the world's strategic No. 2 behind the US to No. 4 now behind the US, China and India. Add Europe if you want.
And even this can only be retained as long as Russia can remain a single entity feeding the center with raw materials income from the russian Far East. Upcoming ruptures are quite likely to happen.
And even this can only be retained as long as Russia can remain a single entity feeding the center with raw materials income from the russian Far East. Upcoming ruptures are quite likely to happen.
As for Russians revolving against Putin, only going to happen if he loses. Russians are totally committed to destroying the West and they see Ukraine under control of it.
Last edited by peter we; 26th Feb 2023 at 10:05.
The following users liked this post:
Lack of will, maybe call it cowardice? There were a few voices calling for a batalion or so of NATO Troops to be in Ukraine beforehand but no notice taken. As has been said many times already; the bottom line is that we failed to act firmly multiple times and for the same reasons, thus encouraging Putrid to keep up his agressive tactics.
Lack of will, maybe call it cowardice? There were a few voices calling for a batalion or so of NATO Troops to be in Ukraine beforehand but no notice taken. As has been said many times already; the bottom line is that we failed to act firmly multiple times and for the same reasons, thus encouraging Putrid to keep up his aggressive tactics.
Putin did his homework, studying all the holes in the Swiss European cheese. He cobbled together a special intervention scenario that paid lip service to all his gripes, and wove like a weasel in and out of the wording of the agreements that mother Russia had clearly signed.
When he was warned repeatedly in no uncertain terms of the red line, that any attack on a NATO country would bring a swift and crushing response, he saw the vacuum and took that to mean: 'Do what you like with Ukraine'.
PS I guess the main message he would have heard was that any incursion into Ukraine would lead to a gassy rupture in Nordstream.
When he was warned repeatedly in no uncertain terms of the red line, that any attack on a NATO country would bring a swift and crushing response, he saw the vacuum and took that to mean: 'Do what you like with Ukraine'.
PS I guess the main message he would have heard was that any incursion into Ukraine would lead to a gassy rupture in Nordstream.
The following users liked this post:
Guest
Russia needs to understand the days of Empire are over. We have all had our `Ukraine` moment. Now it's Russia's turn.
What I don't understand is why Russia doesn't build it's country internally. It has one of the largest land masses potentially resource laden. It could be an economic superpower without the aggression.
What I don't understand is why Russia doesn't build it's country internally. It has one of the largest land masses potentially resource laden. It could be an economic superpower without the aggression.
Russia needs to understand the days of Empire are over. We have all had our `Ukraine` moment. Now it's Russia's turn.
What I don't understand is why Russia doesn't build it's country internally. It has one of the largest land masses potentially resource laden. It could be an economic superpower without the aggression.
What I don't understand is why Russia doesn't build it's country internally. It has one of the largest land masses potentially resource laden. It could be an economic superpower without the aggression.
The following 10 users liked this post by Video Mixdown:
Russia needs to understand the days of Empire are over. We have all had our `Ukraine` moment. Now it's Russia's turn.
What I don't understand is why Russia doesn't build it's country internally. It has one of the largest land masses potentially resource laden. It could be an economic superpower without the aggression.
What I don't understand is why Russia doesn't build it's country internally. It has one of the largest land masses potentially resource laden. It could be an economic superpower without the aggression.
Last edited by Spunky Monkey; 26th Feb 2023 at 19:23.
The following 3 users liked this post by Spunky Monkey:
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,881
Received 1,321 Likes
on
598 Posts
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,881
Received 1,321 Likes
on
598 Posts
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,881
Received 1,321 Likes
on
598 Posts
in addition, almost all tank armies of the russian federation and 40-70% of land military equipment were destroyed within a year. Forbes estimated the value of destroyed and captured russian equipment at almost $25 billion.
according to forbes, russia spent almost $115 billion on the war with ukraine. This is a third of all revenues of the russian budget for 2021.
putin's expectations that the west would eventually get tired of helping ukraine have not been justified yet. In the next few months, the west will supply ukraine with more weapons than in the whole of 2022" - the wall street journa
