Has Putin met his "Bay of Pigs"?

[donald willis]

At this point, it looks as if it might be so....

[Bud]

On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 11:32:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> At this point, it looks as if it might be so....

Don`t believe what the MSM tells you.

[David Healy]

believe Dudster, he read his floaters this morning, took only 8 flushes and nearly a full roll to get the task done...

[donald willis]

On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:49:03 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:

I said "as if" and "might".

[Bud]

I don`t see Ukraine having much chance with the disparency in air power. Too easy to knock out tanks from the air, and they aren`t much good if they aren`t mobile. They should have been spending the last 6 months training snipers, that is how Finland gave the Russians such a hard time. They will get sick of it if they can`t stick their heads out of their tanks or take a piss without getting shot. Gottta send body bags back to Mother Russia so the people back home get sick of it, and demand an end.

[Christopher Strimbu]

On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 11:32:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:

> At this point, it looks as if it might be so....

No. Putin's invasion of Russia, while facing fierce resistance, will win out in the end. It's simply not possible for Ukraine to win against the 2nd strongest military in the world unless the US and NATO get involved (which I believe they should do).

[John Corbett]

It isn't a question of if Ukraine will fall but when. It seems they are very courageous but so were the guys in the Alamo and we know what happened to them. When the other side has overwhelming superiority, they are going to win. It's just a question of how difficult you can make if for them. The difficulty will not be in conquering Ukraine but occupying it. We have found that out in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The Soviet Union also discovered that in
Afghanistan and discovered like us that it was a losing proposition. Both super powers
eventually had to withdraw from Afghanistan having made no permanent gains. The same
could happen in Ukraine. I think Putin intends to install a puppet regime and then withdraw militarily once it gets established. The question will be whether the Ukrainians will accept the puppet government or resist.

[John Corbett]

We have absolutely no interest in preserving Ukraine's sovereignty. We are not the world's policeman and every time we try to be, we lose a lot of our soldiers, lots of treasure, and end up getting nothing for it.

When Putin wins the military battle, he will install a puppet government. He will be replacing one despot with another of his own choosing. Why should we spend American lives to keep that from happening. A direct fight between the US and Russia risks escalating into a nuclear confrontation and there is no way to control events if that happens.

[Bud]

I was thinking he might just try to absorb the parts that have an overwhelmingly Russian population into Russia.

This woman gives a good explanation of Ukraine historical context and background issues.

https://youtu.be/nK-yJD_fAtk

[Christopher Strimbu]

I never said I wanted a direct conflict with Russia. We're stuck between a rock and a hard place here. If the US and her allies don't at least somewhat involve themselves in this conflict, then we'll be telling Putin that the West has no stomach for war. If we do involve ourselfs, this could indeed escalate into a much larger conflict.

This reminds me of the days before the Second World War, with Germany annexing it's neighbors and the British and French doing absolutely nothing. If we don't involve ourselves, this could lead to a much worse outcome.

Between remaining neutral and involving ourselves without direct conflict, I'll go with option #2.

[Bud]

On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:35:30 PM UTC-5, christoph...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:16:26 PM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:09:12 PM UTC-5, christoph...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 11:32:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> > > > At this point, it looks as if it might be so....
> > > No. Putin's invasion of Russia, while facing fierce resistance, will win out in the end. It's simply not possible for Ukraine to win against the 2nd strongest military in the world unless the US and NATO get involved (which I believe they should do).
> > We have absolutely no interest in preserving Ukraine's sovereignty. We are not the world's policeman and every time we try to be, we lose a lot of our soldiers, lots of treasure, and end up getting nothing for it.
> >
> > When Putin wins the military battle, he will install a puppet government. He will be replacing one despot with another of his own choosing. Why should we spend American lives to keep that from happening. A direct fight between the US and Russia risks escalating into a nuclear confrontation and there is no way to control events if that happens.
> I never said I wanted a direct conflict with Russia. We're stuck between a rock and a hard place here.

Only if we put ourselves there. Nothing about this event so far requires us to do so.

[Christopher Strimbu]

> Only if we put ourselves there. Nothing about this event so far requires us to do so.

So far.

[John Corbett]

The entire history of Europe has been governments trying to draw nice and neat boundaries around people who are ethnically and culturally diverse. These cultures are interspersed which makes it virtually impossible to creates countries where the peoples are united. For example the Alsace-Lorain region is a mixture of French and Germanic people. Germany took control of the region in the Franco-Prussian War and it was a major front during WWI. France regained control following Germany's surrender. No matter how you draw boundaries in Europe, there are going to be people living in a country who wished they were part of another country and that country is going to want to annex them. WWI was the result of these tensions. Add to that the monarchs were all related and many couldn't stand one another. WWI was inevitable. If it hadn't been the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and his wife, it would have been something else to light the fuse to the powder keg.

[John Corbett]

On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:35:30 PM UTC-5, christoph...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:16:26 PM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:09:12 PM UTC-5, christoph...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 11:32:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> > > > At this point, it looks as if it might be so....
> > > No. Putin's invasion of Russia, while facing fierce resistance, will win out in the end. It's simply not possible for Ukraine to win against the 2nd strongest military in the world unless the US and NATO get involved (which I believe they should do).
> > We have absolutely no interest in preserving Ukraine's sovereignty. We are not the world's policeman and every time we try to be, we lose a lot of our soldiers, lots of treasure, and end up getting nothing for it.
> >
> > When Putin wins the military battle, he will install a puppet government. He will be replacing one despot with another of his own choosing. Why should we spend American lives to keep that from happening. A direct fight between the US and Russia risks escalating into a nuclear confrontation and there is no way to control events if that happens.
> I never said I wanted a direct conflict with Russia. We're stuck between a rock and a hard place here. If the US and her allies don't at least somewhat involve themselves in this conflict, then we'll be telling Putin that the West has no stomach for war. If we do involve ourselfs, this could indeed escalate into a much larger conflict.

We're not stuck at all. We don't have a dog in this fight. Ukraine is not part of NATO. The Baltic states, Poland, and Romania are. We are treaty bound to come to their aid if they are attacked. A line in the sand has much more credibility if you have tanks and armies on the other side of that line. We need to harden those borders so Putin knows it would be foolish to attack.

For much of the Cold War, the Warsaw Pact had an advantage in conventional forces over NATO. Had they invaded the west, we would have to have resorted to tactical nukes to thwart their invasion. Now the situation is reversed. NATO has a 3-1 superiority in conventional forces and Putin would have to resort to tactical nukes in order to invade. That would surely bring about a response in kind. If that happens, all bets are off. Let's hope Putin is not a mad man. I don't think he is. He is calculating and ruthless but I don't think he wants to risk a nuclear exchange with the US.

[John Corbett]

This is nothing like the lead up to WWII. The UK and France betrayed their obligations by allowing Hitler to annex the Sudetenland. It was only after the Germans invaded Poland that they realized they had to go to war. We have no moral obligation to come to Ukraine's aid. They are not are allies. We are legitimately neutral in this fight. Sanctions aren't going to work. When have they ever. Sanctions punish the citizens of a country, not their leaders.
Sanctions are going to punish our people as well and it is unnecessary.

[Bud]

Here`s one I came across a month ago when I happened to be looking at a map of Russia.

https://www.worldatlas.com/upload/1f/12/a0/russia-administrative-divisions-map.png

I was wondering what the hell was that little province in the upper left of the map so separated from Russia proper. It is Kaliningrad, and it was once the German city of Konigsberg. After WWII they moved a quarter million Germans out of the city and moved a quarter million Russians into it to give the Russians a warm water port.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaliningrad

And then in 1957 Poland was nice enough to give some land to it.

[John Corbett]

If Ukraine gets added to that mish-mash, is it really going to make much difference? It's really amazing the Russian empire has held together for so long given the massive amount of land (11 time zones) and vastly diverse people. The people of eastern Russian have more in common ethnically and culturally with the Chinese, Mongols, and Koreans than they do European Russians.

[Bud]

Oh, and Lithuania has closed it`s airspace to flights to Kaliningrad...

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2022-02-26/lithuania-closes-its-airspace-to-russian-airlines-government

[Alan Johnstone]

Talking of Russia, can we be sure LHO was not acting on its behalf when he killed JFK?

Of all the CTs that one is a lot stronger than it was the CIA.

There is, at least, have actual evidence that a named KGB operative in Mexico City communicated with LHO whereas we have no documentary evidence of the CIA ever being in contact with LHO.

[John Corbett]

The contact came well before it could have been known that Oswald would be working in a building overlooking the motorcade route. It was before Oswald got the TSBD job, before the Texas trip was announced, and before a motorcade had been planned. Whatever they talked about, it safe to say assassinating JFK wasn't among them.

[Steven Galbraith]

The West, that includes us, is giving weapons - pretty deadly ones - to the Ukrainians that are being used to kill Russian troops. The Pentagon just announced that $350 million in aid is going there. Not sure how that is going to get through. That's not the US being neutral. Apparently lots of Russians are being killed and the Ukrainians are fighting with deadly force. Over the long haul, like several weeks from now, they're going to lose. The numbers are just too great for them.
But from his point of view, Putin can't allow this to go unanswered. This is right next door to his country; his soldiers are dying in large numbers when it was expected to be a cakewalk. it will have tremendous consequences to his leadership.
This is getting a little hinky here.

[Steven Galbraith]

And the West is sanctioning his people, the oligarchs around him that give him support. Add to it the pressure on the Russia economy with these banking/financial sanctions. As someone said, Russia is a giant gas station. Oil is about their only cash crop. They don't produce much else. This is a nuclear superpower. He's got little support internationally.
And he sounded desperate last week with that speech. Not the normal cool Putin. Now's the time to throttle things back a bit, I think.

[John Corbett]

This is why we need to pick our fights. Ukraine is not worth a direct confrontation with Russia. NATO is where the line needs to be drawn. That's where our obligations lie. Putin is taking enough of a beating trying to subdue Ukraine that he will think twice about attacking any NATO country. He wouldn't have the superiority in forces that he does in Ukraine.

Unless Putin is a madman, and I don't think he is, he is not going to attack NATO. That is guaranteed to end badly for him. Unfortunately it could end badly for the rest of the world. If Putin were to decide to go nuclear, there is nothing we can do to stop him. All we can do is assure him that we will respond in kind.

[Steven Galbraith]

Right, but he sees us taking all of these actions, providing weapons to the Ukrainians, sanctioning the people around him, putting enormous pressure on his economy. That's not being neutral.
All of this talk by people who say hit him hard seem to forget he has thousands of nuclear weapons. And a large army.
We need to make sure he knows he's not being cornered here. Which is apparently what some people want.

[Steven Galbraith]

This is good (Reuters report): "Ukrainian and Russian officials will meet for talks at a venue on the Belarusian border with Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s office said on Sunday."
At least something to ratchet things down. Too much hot talk going around.
Look, he's a gangster and until he's replaced we'll have to face this type of threat. But too many people are getting ahead of themselves with all of this talk about getting rid of him. This is not some tinpot dictator.

[John Corbett]

If anyone is going to get rid of Putin, it is the Russian hierarchy. It could be a bloodless coup the way the Politburo got rid of Khrushchev and tried to get rid of Gorbachev. Now it must be the National Security Council of Russia if action is going to be taken. The question is whether anybody on the council has the guts to do it.

[Bud]

Also about Kaliningrad, the Russians have apparently put nuclear capable hypersonic missiles there...

https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/russian-nuclear-exercise-reminder-nuclear-deterrence-isnt-relic-past

Some of these fly eight times the speed of sound, much too fast for our anti missile weaponry.

[Bud]

A lot of Russians approve of Putin and what he is doing...

https://www.levada.ru/en/ratings/

[Bud]

On Feb 19th Putin flexed his nuclear muscle to the West during nuclear maneuvers. They fired their land based and new hypersonic missiles to let the West know what their capabilities are.

https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2022/02/russian-navy-launched-hypersonic-tsirkon-missile-norwegian-sector-barents-sea

[Bud]

This article said that planes landing in Kaliningrad are seen carrying hypersonic missiles capable of carrying 500 megaton nuclear warheads that could hit European capitals in 7-10 minutes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastienroblin/2022/02/08/russia-deploys-hypersonic-missile-to-baltic-in-range-of-nato-capitols/?sh=606b1bbe217e

It would be ominous if they were shadowing out nuclear subs right now, they are out biggest deterrent, they would need to be knocked out for Russia to have any hope of survival, each one is capable of tremendous destruction.

[donald willis]

One word: Vietnam.

[Bud]

It just got real...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i3QU3R4JLo

[John Corbett]

I don't know if it is still true but at one time, a single trident submarine had more firepower than all but two countries in the world.

[John Corbett]

I read this earlier this morning. It might just be saber rattling. I don't think Putin is suicidal
but who knows. If he is, we could all be in deep shit.

[Steven Galbraith]

Recall reading back in college the famous "Mr. X" article by George Kennan that laid out our containment policy? It was called "The Sources of Soviet Conduct" and was an explanation as to what was behind Moscow's policies. He said it was a mix or combination of Marxist-Leninism hostility towards the non-communist and capitalist world plus Russia's centuries old historic sense of insecurity with the West in particular. The two fueled each other.
Putin's always wanted to reassemble the Soviet Empire - he's said as much - but he also wanted to do so not just for Russian pride and esteem but because of this insecure feeling towards the West. I think this is all saber rattling but his speech last week was pretty troubling. He's usually pretty cool; he was erratic and really a bit off the wall.

[Alan Johnstone]

Wars always get justified. Both sides immediately engage in a propaganda battle for hearts and minds.

The cause of Ukraine's war can be traced back to the USSR break-up, 1994 Budapest Memoranda, Orange Revolution, the 2008 agreement, the 2014 Euromaidan coup, the series of Minsk Talks. A lot of reading.

Ukraine was a very artificial and recent creation - so very much like Yugoslavia and the NATO bombing of Serbia to "defend" the "rights" of breakaway republics. An analogy, the Western media avoids.

The mainstream media may present it as unprovoked aggression but the Russians have been surprisingly forbearing with the NATO eastward expansion. The USA wouldn't with their Monroe Doctrine and the Cuba Missile Crisis have tolerated such a similar geo-political strategy to happen on its side of the Atlantic.

A low-intensity war has been going on between the government and the two Russian-speaking breakaway republics (there are others that exist elsewhere from the former Soviet Union such as Georgia).

But my concern is with ordinary working people being used as pawns in a game played by the Great Powers whose governments are primarily representing rival oligarchs.

We have no insight into why 2022 was chosen by the Russian Federation as the year to bring the problems to the forefront. We have no insight into why diplomacy failed so tragically and negotiations did not bring compromise and concessions as it should have - and here the complicity of hard-line intransigence must lie with US and UK. The blame is not all with the Russian Federation

We have no idea why 2022 was chosen by Russia as the year that the rights and wrongs of Ukrainian history were to be fixed but it sure was not the suffering of the LPR or DPR that Putin decided had gone on long enough and now required protection.

Putin presented it as a humanitarian war to the Russian people to gain support and sympathy for what was the aim to de-militarise a buffer state and return it to the previous Russian sphere of influence both politically and economically. (Khruschev assigned Crimea to Ukraine in the first place for political opportunism in a Communist Party power struggle).

But as with all wars, it is the working people who were going to be the cannon fodder.

Imagine Ukraine's leaders urging an untrained civilian population to throw petrol bombs at a T-72 Main Battle Tank - a suicidal sacrifice committed in the name of nationalism and patriotism, those poisons and myths that Einstein, Tolstoy, Mark Twain and a host of other thinkers taught us to treat as anathema.

The right thing to do in a war is to flee (and Ukrainian males of fighting age are being stopped and forced to enlist) or simply surrender.

Peace at any cost. Survival at any price.

Also, note the different welcoming responses to refugees in Poland and Hungary when refugees from conflict are not Arab nor Muslim.

On our blogs and our discussion forums, I have tried to include all those nuances and caveats. All the shades of grey what is never black and white.

People are indoctrinated with false ideas presented as ideals to be aspired to and brainwashed into mistaken beliefs that are manipulated by our rulers. Isn't it absurd that by an accident of birth your identity and loyalty should be determined?

The World Socialist Movement is anti-nationalist and for a world cooperative commonwealth. It opposed the so-called good wars as well as the bad imperialist ones. Yes, even being against WW2.

It does not support creating new borders of independent countries (South Sudan, anybody?) but exposes the class nature of society that is exemplified by the nation-state. It trusts in no treaty which are so easily broken, nor in the legalistic pronouncements of international bodies such as the United Nations. (Korea?)

It may be described as a simplistic slogan, but expressing home truths are not that complicated even if advocating them isn't always popular.

"No war between peoples, No peace between classes."

The only war to fight in is the class war.

I hope this reply goes some way of demonstrating just how different the WSM attitude is to conventional left-wing parties, even if the position may result in being seen as Utopian or sectarian or dogmatic.

[Steven Galbraith]

Not one sentence from you, Alan, or your Marxist friends condemning Putin. You'll make excuses for him, attack NATO, condemn everyone but him and his government. You're not anti-nationalist; you're anti-capitalist and anti-Western.
This is why America and the world rejects this bankrupt and immoral ideology. It's been given nearly a century to show how it performs. It was a miserable bloody failure wherever it was tried. In Europe, in Asia, in Africa, in North America, in South America. Failure after failure after failure.
Marxism belongs in the dustbin of history.

[Steven Galbraith]

I think it's safe to say that if things were going well in Ukraine he wouldn't be doing this? Might be smart for Biden to come out and say we're freezing our support for the Ukrainian military, putting a hold on sanctions and letting the two sides talk.
Give Putin something? It's getting hot here with all of this talk about sanctions and boycotts and cutting Moscow off from the world. He's got people around him who would go down with him if he's deposed. This isn't cutting just the head to the snake.
I think he and this group are isolated, out of touch with events; and people like that do and believe strange things. Like, y'know people who think "the government' killed JFK and have been covering it up for 50 years? Those types.
Imagine some of these knuckleheads running a country?

[Steven Galbraith]

Remember all of those odd UFO videos that have been released showing aircraft of some type operating with incredible agility and speed? We thought it may be something from one of our enemies?
Well, at this point we can conclude they're not from Russia.

[Bud]

Russian POWs (maybe) are saying they were told they were only there for exercises...

https://youtu.be/nifxKIhFSuw

[Christopher Strimbu]

Now that Putin has put nuclear weapons on the table, I officially take back what I said about US involvement.

[Alan Johnstone]

SG, I stated that:

"my concern is with ordinary working people being used as pawns in a game played by the Great Powers whose governments are primarily representing rival oligarchs."

"with all wars, it is the working people who were going to be the cannon fodder."...

"it sure was not the suffering of the LPR or DPR that Putin decided had gone on long enough and now required protection."

Putin uses Russian nationalism even humanitarianism to justify his war crimes. ( there i stated it clearly) but the West uses Ukrainian nationalism to justify its expansionism.

A plague on both houses.

I provided a list of events that contributed to the build-up to the war. This was an avoidable and preventable war. It was a diplomatic failure going back decades.

War is always the last resort and you fail to explain why Putin felt it necessary to sacrifice the whole Russian economy? He clearly identified a reason.

Why did Putin wait until Feb 2022 rather than 2014

It is an important question. I don't have the answer. Do you?

You seek a blanket condemnation of only one side and seek an a-historical explanation of the background to the war, suggesting that because Putin took military action it means he was the ONLY aggressor. You wish to ignore all the years of provocations by NATO and EU that weaned Ukraine away from the previous stable status quo, a client subservient state of Russia. You ignore the US complicity in the Euromaidan coup that overthrew a democratically elected pro-Russian president and resulted in an ethnic CIVIL WAR.

I am saying two wrongs don't make a right. Putin is acting in the national interest of the Russian Federation. NATO is acting in the national interest of its members. And Ukraine is caught between.

And the victims as always are working people who are duped into believing they have something to gain. They don't and that is the Marxist case. A

[Bud]

On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 2:20:27 AM UTC-5, Alan Johnstone wrote:
> SG, I stated that:
> "my concern is with ordinary working people being used as pawns in a game played by the Great Powers whose governments are primarily representing rival oligarchs."
> "with all wars, it is the working people who were going to be the cannon fodder."...
> "it sure was not the suffering of the LPR or DPR that Putin decided had gone on long enough and now required protection."
> Putin uses Russian nationalism even humanitarianism to justify his war crimes. ( there i stated it clearly) but the West uses Ukrainian nationalism to justify its expansionism.
>
> A plague on both houses.
>
> I provided a list of events that contributed to the build-up to the war. This was an avoidable and preventable war. It was a diplomatic failure going back decades.
>
> War is always the last resort and you fail to explain why Putin felt it necessary to sacrifice the whole Russian economy? He clearly identified a reason.
>
> Why did Putin wait until Feb 2022 rather than 2014
>
> It is an important question. I don't have the answer. Do you?
>
> You seek a blanket condemnation of only one side and seek an a-historical explanation of the background to the war, suggesting that because Putin took military action it means he was the ONLY aggressor. You wish to ignore all the years of provocations by NATO and EU that weaned Ukraine away from the previous stable status quo, a client subservient state of Russia.

The Ukraine`s desire for security, stability and freedom played no part in this?

> You ignore the US complicity in the Euromaidan coup that overthrew a democratically elected pro-Russian president and resulted in an ethnic CIVIL WAR.

And you ignore a truckload of historic reality. The only reason a vote could be close is because Russia has killed millions of Ukrainians over the years, and moved millions of Russians into the Ukraine over the years. BTW, this is the same strategy being employed by the Democrats by bringing in millions of illegal Mexicans and trying to give them the vote.

You also ignore that the violence was the direct result of the crackdown on protests (interesting how quickly the repression of the people is fine with you, like with the Freedom truckers. Scratch a communist and uncover an authoritarian).

> I am saying two wrongs don't make a right. Putin is acting in the national interest of the Russian Federation. NATO is acting in the national interest of its members. And Ukraine is caught between.

NATO`s natural interest is for the Ukraine to be free and independent. Russia`s claim that the Ukraine in NATO is a threat to Russia is bogus, the people of the west would never tolerate an invasion of Russia, and besides, they have nukes up the wazoo.

> And the victims as always are working people who are duped into believing they have something to gain. They don't and that is the Marxist case. A

Putin is the natural and inevitable product of communism. It is a political system designed to produce evil men like this.

[John Corbett]

I seriously doubt they are 500 megaton warheads. During the arms race, 50 megatons was
the largest device the Soviets exploded. The typical payload for a long range missile is 20 megatons. For shorter range missiles and bomber ordinance, it is probably much less. If you detonate a large device from close to where you are, you risk killing yourself with the fallout. Russia would have to take that into account if they were to attack Europe. The prevailing winds would carry dangerous fallout in their direction.

https://www.quora.com/Is-a-500-megaton-bomb-theoretically-possible

[Bud]

You are correct, I misquoted the article....

"The Kinzhal (“Dagger”) missile—designated the Kh-47M2 and more recently the 9-A-76609 in Russian sources—has a reported range of 1,240 miles and can carry either an 1,100-pound fragmentation warhead or up to a 500-kiloton nuclear warhead with 33 times the yield of the Fat Man bomb dropped on Hiroshima."

But the Russians having nukes in Kaliningrad is similar to Europe as the Soviets having missiles in Cuba was to the US. It makes you have to make decisions faster, decisions that might be in error and can`t be taken back.

[Gil Jesus]

On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:09:12 PM UTC-5, christoph...@yahoo.com wrote:

> No. Putin's invasion of Russia, while facing fierce resistance, will win out in the end. It's simply not possible for Ukraine to win against the 2nd strongest military in the world

You mean lose like the Afghans did ?

[Gil Jesus]

On Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 7:26:22 PM UTC-5, Bud wrote:

> Russian POWs (maybe) are saying they were told they were only there for exercises...

Military exercises firing live ammunition at another country's military within their borders.

Right.

[BT George]

It does a *great* job too!

[BT George]

Yep. Sound like a legitimate "exercise" to me too. Hopefully this "exercise" will leave them quite beat!

[John Corbett]

In Cuba the Soviets deployed mostly intermediate range missiles but also had some long
range missiles. The intermediate range missiles could reach Washington DC and most of
the Southeast. The long range missiles could cover most of the lower 48 states. What we
didn't know was the had also deployed tactical nukes which could have been used against
our troops had we invaded which was being advocated by some in the Cabinet as well as the Pentagon.

There used to be battlefield nukes that could be launched from howitzers. Now short range missiles are the battlefield nukes and are several times more powerful than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs which were firecrackers compared to modern nuclear weapons. Given the destruction of those bombs, even limited nuclear exchange today would be devastating to whatever region they were used. There also used to be nuclear depth charges. I hope they had a fast boat if they were going to drop one of those. The US could drop them from planes. The British Navy had those deployed during the Falkland Islands War but never used them. In 1990, all the nuclear powers at the time agreed to eliminate those from their arsenals.

Any use of nuclear weapons, even tactical nukes, runs the risk escalation into a full blown nuclear exchange between the US and Russia. It would be hard to keep a lid on the situation
if that were to ever occur.

[John Corbett]

It is one thing to conquer a country. Quite another to occupy it for a lengthy time. Both the US and USSR have failed in that regard. In Vietnam, the US was never defeated on the
battlefield but was eventually driven out because the enemy outlasted us. We lost our will
to continue the fight. The USSR had the same thing happen in Afghanistan and we have run into the same reality in Iraq and Afghanistan. When it comes to a test of wills, the natives have the advantage because the occupiers are there by choice whereas the natives have nowhere else to go. If Russia has the will, they will defeat the Ukranian army but that's when
the hard part starts.

[Steven Galbraith]

I mangled my previous post. Let me try again with this one.
There's a story about a former North Vietnamese officer who visited Israel to give military advice. He was asked how they defeated such superior militaries. He said, "The French had France to return to. The Americans had the US to go back to."
Then he added, "The Palestinians will never defeat Israel because the Israelis have no place to go back to." Neither do the Ukrainians.
As to Putin: Boy, we need to give him an off ramp. Everyone is saying press, press, press until he's overthrown. Well, let's make sure he doesn't bring the temple down with him.

[Alan Johnstone]

As is the custom when i try place events into a political and historical context it is misinterpreted into me presenting a pro-Putin narrative. It is you who neglect the past. I declare that the Russians are the aggressors in this war but you however believe it was unprovoked.

I referred to the previous status quo of Ukraine, where the president was democratically elected in what was deemed a fair and free election. He was ovethrown in a coup supported actively by the USA and a new policy instituted that resulted in rebellion by the Eastern Ukrainian Russian speakers.

I referred to the Monroe Doctrine and again it is side-stepped by you. The analogy of Cuba invasion and ongoing economic sanctions has been mentioned elsewhere.

But after the Euromaidan 2014 coup, the US was expressing a desire to the new government for fleet access at thE port of Sevastapol similar to what they have in Djbouti and Bahrain. The US actually conducted military manoeuvres in Ukraine, and US politicians had to intervene as it partly involved a Ukrainian unit called the Azov Battalion, a neo-nazi paramilitary force, filled with supporters of the WW2 Banderite German collaborators who assisted in mass killings of Jews.

Now imagine how the USA would respect the sovereignty of Mexico if it invited Russia to establish military bases and permitted Russian army exercises. Even the hint of that possibility resulted in Nicaragua being subjected to destabilisation, American supported terrorism by the Contras and its ports mined with the US found guilty by an international court.

And as for Ukraine joining the EU, imagine if instead of NAFTA , Mexico signed a free trade pact with China. If NAFTA with Mexico is already causing the off-shoring of American jobs imagine the flight that would occur if Mexico was full of Chinese factories undercutting America and flooding it with cheap products. That was and is the prospect for Russia's already very shaky economy. Such a prospect would incur retaliation from the USA.

Geo-politics is all about alliances and spheres of influence. That is Real Politik.

Imagining Ukraine could be free of the consequences of switching alignment was always going to lead to serious consequences. It was the risk the Western powers were willing to gamble upon, that Russia would not react. Plenty of prior warning was given that they had been pushed too far was ignored and the fruits of that is a new Cold War.

As for ordinary Russian citizens, all the benefits of the post-USSR thaw have now been lost.

Once that reality of Putin's actions sinks in there will be a political backlash. We already witness it with Russian anti-war protests. The discontent will grow and dissent spread as the pain of sanctions are felt. Putin may be deposed, either by the apparachik or the oligarchs. But sadly it may also mean a tragic civil war in Russia.

Fingers crossed that a Ukrainian ceasefire and then a tentative peace will ensue soon.

But my condemnation of capitalism is that the problems will spring up again elsewhere.

China and Taiwan isn't going to be resolved unless a Hong Kong type of arrangement is agreed. War and invasion is a real possibility. A China Cold War is already happening. Military saber-rattling taking place.

That is the problem with capitalism. It breeds nationalism and rivalry for consumer markets, trade routes and natural resources. The cause of the conflicts keep on recurring.

The situation isn't helped by political incompetents being in charge of diplomacy. The voice of moderation and reason went unheard.

[Michael Dworetsky]

On 27/02/2022 00:49, Bud wrote:
> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 7:02:46 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
>> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:49:03 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
>>> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 11:32:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
>>>> At this point, it looks as if it might be so....
>>> Don`t believe what the MSM tells you.
>> I said "as if" and "might".
>
> I don`t see Ukraine having much chance with the disparency in air power. Too easy to knock out tanks from the air, and they aren`t much good if they aren`t mobile. They should have been spending the last 6 months training snipers, that is how Finland gave the Russians such a hard time. They will get sick of it if they can`t stick their heads out of their tanks or take a piss without getting shot. Gottta send body bags back to Mother Russia so the people back home get sick of it, and demand an end.

The latter only works if the people get to see it. (a) The media are
tightly controlled so seeing bodies coming back is not going to be
allowed if Dobby* has his way and (b) he will just put more protestors
in jail. Just possibly the internet media will be able to have an
impact, but not mainstream TV.

*Do you recall the flap when Putin complained about the Harry Potter
films because people said Dobby the house-elf looks like him?

--
Mike Dworetsky

[Bud]

On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 5:38:46 PM UTC-5, Michael Dworetsky wrote:
> On 27/02/2022 00:49, Bud wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 7:02:46 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> >> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 8:49:03 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, February 26, 2022 at 11:32:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> >>>> At this point, it looks as if it might be so....
> >>> Don`t believe what the MSM tells you.
> >> I said "as if" and "might".
> >
> > I don`t see Ukraine having much chance with the disparency in air power. Too easy to knock out tanks from the air, and they aren`t much good if they aren`t mobile. They should have been spending the last 6 months training snipers, that is how Finland gave the Russians such a hard time. They will get sick of it if they can`t stick their heads out of their tanks or take a piss without getting shot. Gottta send body bags back to Mother Russia so the people back home get sick of it, and demand an end.
> The latter only works if the people get to see it. (a) The media are
> tightly controlled so seeing bodies coming back is not going to be
> allowed if Dobby* has his way and (b) he will just put more protestors
> in jail. Just possibly the internet media will be able to have an
> impact, but not mainstream TV.

The mothers know. This may be a case where the average Russians soldier`s heart is not into it, and the average Ukrainian`s heart is very much into it. I`m seeing more and more photos of what appear to be perfectly good Russian tanks being captured, or just sitting on the side of the road. There is speculation that Russians are emptying their tanks of fuel so as not to have to fight. There was a video of some Ukrainians offering to give the crew of a tank a ride back to Russia.

That said it is almost impossible to get good, reliable information.

> *Do you recall the flap when Putin complained about the Harry Potter
> films because people said Dobby the house-elf looks like him?

4chan has a ball with Putin...

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1646089305605.jpg

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1646089008426.jpg

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1646088755552.png

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1646088729965.png

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1646090516865.jpg

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1646089522517.jpg

Putin consults his advisors...

https://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/364192376/putin-is-fucked
> --
> Mike Dworetsky

[Steven Galbraith]

I wonder what the average Russian on the street, Boris Sixpack, thinks about this? There's a long history of Russian insecurity and paranoia about the West, about encirclement, about surrounded by enemies. The Marxists were able to tap into this when they attained power. So there was this combination of the anti-capitalist worldview of the Marxist - that capitalist enemies were everywhere (recall the Stalin show trials where the accused admitted to being "capitalist agents"?) - plus the historic Russian inferiority and insecurity. That was the source of the Soviet conduct to external affairs. We this with Alan's absurd responses that NATO and the West are to blame.
So the Marxist worldview has been removed but the Russian view remains. It's interesting that Putin keeps referring to the Ukrainians as fascists and Nazis and that the goal is to "de-Nazifi" the country.
The sanctions have to have a purpose other than just an expression of our dissatisfaction towards the invasion. What do we want Putin to do? Leave Ukraine? Resign? What? What are our demands? Is it to weaken his country? Again, how will ordinary Russians react to this? We laugh and dismiss their propaganda on RT and elsewhere. But I'm not sure the Russian people are.
I am surprised at the unanimity of the Europeans, including especially the Germans. This has really led them to saying "Enough". But will that last?

[John Corbett]

The troubling question is whether Putin has become unhinged and whether those under him have the will or the power to remove him before he does something insane, like start WWIII.
Even though the Ukrainians are putting up a hell of a fight, if Putin presses the attack, he will eventually take control of the country. Occupying a hostile country is much more difficult than taking it over initially. If the rest of world squeezes Putin hard enough, he might think he has nothing to lose by escalating hostilities by attacking former Warsaw Pact nations that are now part of NATO, perhaps with short range nukes.

The alliances that formed in the earliest days of the 20th Century allowed the assassination of a member of Austria-Hungary's royal family to set in motion the events that led to WWI and the slaughter of millions on both sides of the conflict. France and Germany already had their war plans in order, waiting for the right event. France wanted to regain Alsace-Lorain and planned to attack Germany directly in a northeasterly direction. Germany on the hand
planned to end run French defenses by attacking through the Low Countries (as they would do again in WWII). What developed was two armies moving in opposite directions as if they were in opposite lanes of the same highway. The French advance stalled and Germany missed a chance at an early knockout by choosing to try to envelop the French army rather than capture lightly defended Paris. That exposed their right flank to the British Expeditionary Force and the result was four years of stalemate and gruesome carnage.

It's impossible to predict how this current situation will play out. The events that led to WWI were a series of miscalculations. Let's hope history does not repeat itself.

[Steven Galbraith]

But I don't seen him having any help, any country that will support him in Europe over this. He's on his own. Cuba and Venezuela and Iran to a lesser extent have defended him. But where are their troops to help him? WWI was caused by series of alliances that came to the defense of an allied nation that was under attack, a sort of dominoes of alliance falling. Then the larger powers were brought in. What are the alliances that will be dragged into a war here? I don't see the parallels.
Putin is on his own. Which is what is worrisome. He really miscalculated the response by Europe; I think he thought they would just roll over. Even the Germans are saying they need to change their policies towards him. And Merkel was clearly favoring Russia over the US. But no more.

[John Corbett]

If Russia attacks any NATO country, the rest of NATO is treaty bound to come to their defense. The most likely targets would be former Warsaw Pact republics Romania, Poland, and the Baltic republics what were once part of the USSR. It has to stick in Putin's craw that
those republics are now aligned against him.

Given how badly the Ukraine campaign is going, it seems unlikely he would go beyond that. The danger is if Putin has really become unhinged and decides to go nuclear. All bets are off if that happens.

> Putin is on his own. Which is what is worrisome. He really miscalculated the response by Europe; I think he thought they would just roll over. Even the Germans are saying they need to change their policies towards him. And Merkel was clearly favoring Russia over the US. But no more.

I think more than miscalculating Europe's response, he miscalculated Ukraine. I think he expected it to be a pushover and once he got his puppet installed, the West would come to accept it and gradually ease the sanctions. As things have been going badly on the battlefield, the sanctions are becoming worse. No telling what a desperate Putin might do.

[Steven Galbraith]

Oliver Stone, remember he did a movie about some president?, is tweeting that we're being misled by anti-Russian propaganda just like during the Cold War. He's telling people to watch RT television to get the straight story.
It's remarkable how many, not all but many, JFK conspiracy believers are just silly asses when it comes to non-assassination topics. I don't think that's an accident.

[Steven Galbraith]

Good news, the Swedes are sending 5000 missiles to Ukraine. The bad news is they have to put them together themselves.
However, the good news is that they come with a sent of instructions. In six languages. The bad news is none of them are in Ukrainian.

[Steven Galbraith]

I did put together a table from IKEA about a year ago. Wasn't that bad. But there's always one or two bolts or screws or whatever that just don't fit. The holes are just a little off; the screw is slightly big. Something.
I think there's some guy in the factory who does that on purpose just because.

[John Corbett]

On Tuesday, March 1, 2022 at 2:24:29 PM UTC-5, Steven Galbraith wrote:

> It's remarkable how many, not all but many, JFK conspiracy believers are just silly asses when it comes to non-assassination topics. I don't think that's an accident.

As Bud likes to tell us, they look at the wrong things incorrectly. No surprise that would carry over to other topics.

[Bud]

Yah, Don keeps bringing up that Trump said he and Kim Jong-un were in love, which was probably just Trump mocking how well they hit it off when they finally talked. This is insignificant, what was significant is that Kim Jung-un resumed firing missiles just as soon as Trump left office.

Similarly the MSM and late night talk show hosts thought it significant that Trump called Putin a "genius". Yes, that`s right, one word out of context with no attempt to represent the concept he was going for honestly. Like Don does with the assassination they cling to certain things as significant in a "this is all I need to know" manner. Hell, Hitler was a genius, Stalin was a genius, it isn`t an endorsement of their actions, just recognizing extraordinary traits.

[Chuck Schuyler]

Absolutely. Meant in the context that Putin is a "genius" for pouncing to realize his USSR reunification dreams while the West is weak with a feckless NATO, a US President who is obviously impaired, a party (the Dems) who shut off their own country's energy independence, and on and on.

But hey, no more mean tweets. In fact, no more tweets of any sort. Trump is banned from tweeting.

[Steven Galbraith]

Saying a Stalin or a Mao were geniuses does not carry any moral weight with it. People should be able to understand that acknowledging the ingenuity of them doesn't mean you endorse what they did.
Mao instructed his soldiers that if they took a pig or cow from a farmer or damaged his property that they compensate him for the acts. That's pretty simple but it helped get the support of the masses for his cause. Usually the soldiers would just take what they wanted. Brilliant? Or common sense? In any case it worked.

[John Corbett]

It is important to recognize your opponents' strengths as well as his weaknesses whether we are talking about a football game or foreign policy.