Ukraine

[C. Ross]

Poor Russia. Forced to invade Ukraine because of unrelenting pressure over decades by the U.S. and NATO.

Is that pretty much it, except for the fancy words like “irredentism”?

Where is the history of Russia engaging in diplomacy to relieve these real or perceived pressure on its border? Sullen resentment and complaining isn’t diplomacy. For its part, Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in hopes of peace. That didn’t work out either.

[Vadim 68]

Poor Russia

You think so?

Forced to invade Ukraine because of unrelenting pressure over decades by the U.S. and NATO.

You think so? Seems to me it was Putins idea.

Where is the history of Russia engaging in diplomacy to relieve these real or perceived pressure on its border?

In the possibility that you are one of those Americans who had not heard of Ukraine, let alone find it on a map prior to February this year, your answers can be found here: Meeting Records - UN Security Council Documentation - Research Guides at United Nations Dag Hammarskjöld Library

For its part, Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in hopes of peace

Ukraine never owned its own nuclear arsenal. International consensus at the time deemed the former USSR as responsible for the weapons, and they were removed under the Bucharest Memorandum.

[L.W. Baxter]

That is a good question. Ukraine /Russia had security guarantees under the Bucharest Memorandum. The question you might want to ask is why that agreement never held up, and who was the first party to nullify it?

"".....while technically the Budapest Memorandum was supposed to guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty, even this was not without some caveats. None of the parties to the agreement would have expected Russia to keep clutching the Budapest Memorandum, when a new government in Ukraine – from the mid-2000s – set at some dangerous political manoeuvres, which Moscow kept decrying as constituting existential threat to its own national security. Meanwhile, there are precedents in contemporary diplomatic history of how countries of comparable power capability to Russia, dealt with similar security situations and challenges in the past. To expect Russia to stand akinbo and look on, while the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) steadily prosecuted its agenda for expansion into Ukraine, was unrealistic. And this is not necessarily a justification of the expanding scope of Russia’s extant military campaign in hapless Ukraine. It isn’t.""


As posted earlier, it was the US governments position that Ukraine joining NATO would be a risk too great and a shift in the strategic balance. At some point, that position changed with full awareness of Russia's concerns, and disregarded......so here we are.....

I have not seen anyone here posting support of irredentism, and calling other members "Russophiles" for perhaps seeing things from a different perspective, is as demeaning as Zelensky calling Ukrainians in the East "a species". Such language serves no purpose here stains your own character and shows a complete lack of empathy.

you continually point out that no prior events "justify" the invasion of ukraine. so, what is your argument?

that the invasion was not justifiable, but the motives are nevertheless somehow valid, such that a settlement should come before russia is repelled behind its borders?

that despite unjustifiably invading a neighboring country with intent to annex territory, a settlement should be negotiated to include ceded territory?

or what? what actions do you argue for?

[sandtown]

“Old duckboards” was a nickname for General Smedley Butler, USMC, some of whose writings I have, perhaps to the disappointment of our friend Davies, actually read. ”.

You should read this book - from Cuba to the Philippines to Mexico to Haiti to China and elsewhere Butler did bad things - except for the duckboard anomaly.

But to his credit, he finally figured it out.

[HRDavies]

From Ukraine's perspective, the flight time of Ukrainian missiles to Moscow is hypothetical, but of Russian missiles to Kiev is proven.

This is not what it's about. It is much easier to shoot down an outgoing missile from behind, rather than trying to intersect its path halfway to the US at 2,000 mph. Placement of NATO, i.e. American, missiles on the border with Russia is an end to MAD. It's beyond stupid.

Given the American and English intentions towards Russia ever since 1917, they are correct in their assessment that this is a dangerous and unacceptable situation. Washington, starting with Raygun and his Strategic "Defense" Initiative, are blundering fools capable only of knocking over the applecart.

Unlike Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Vietnam, or Iran and Chile and Africa before them, this is a knife directly at Russia's throat. 142 pages of ridiculous name-calling by the most evil country the modern world has, when the facts of the situation are obvious to anyone who has read any history. Pitiful.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

This is of course from the “Moscow Times”, still published in English and Russian but now published from Riga so you should make appropriate allowances:

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/...r-rages-a78842

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Given the American and English intentions towards Russia ever since 1917, they are correct in their assessment that this is a dangerous and unacceptable situation. Washington, starting with Raygun and his Strategic "Defense" Initiative, are blundering fools capable only of knocking over the applecart .

This is the fellow who was lecturing us on history. He seems to have missed 1941-45. A lot of men died bringing American and British aid to the Soviet Union in those years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic...f_World_War_II

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

[Lew Barrett]

A tour or two in the big muddy of Vietnam in the 1960's will do that to ya.

I’m surprised you volunteered for a second tour under the circumstance
Thank you for your civility.

[/QUOTE]
And I note the rest of you still are unable to offer any real evidence that Russia's aims were or are to take all of Ukr . .

You got nuttin !![/QUOTE]

That’s easily debunked by the most trivial search.

https://www.google.com/search?q=does...&client=safari

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Fwiw:

Big picture:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63016675

And, two hours ago, a detail:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63021117

[Tom Hunter]

@sandtown A persons inability to accept (or even look for) evidence does not mean that evidence does not exist.

Back on topic I still have yet to see a well informed source saying that Putin's mobilization is going to lead to the defeat of Ukraine.

I have seen several sources saying that Russia is mobilizing over a million people, not just 300,000. Interesting to me, I have also seen a statement that the army of the Ukraine now numbers in the 600,000 to 800,000 range. Meaning that Russia is outnumbered on the battlefield and the mobilization is an attempt to address that.

Putin is on the horns of a dilemma. If he trains his conscripts his army in Ukraine will be outnumbered from now until December. If he does not train them they will take huge casualties but they will have a favorable (from Putin's point of view) impact on the balance of forces during the next few months.

Putin is (very possibly correctly) betting that when things get really cold Germany and Italy will decide that many dead Ukrainians is better than many cold Germans and Italians. (and some dead ones, Putin wants some of us reading this to freeze to death, it helps him put political pressure on his adversaries). So if he sends poorly trained troops but many of them he can both hold ground and take ground and then win the peace in January.

Thoughts? does this make sense as a strategy if you put on your Putin hat? (Putin hats are drenched in blood and smell bad, so if you don't have one we understand, but just imagine it when writing your reply)

[epoxyboy]

Well, they do have rocket and missile experience . Russia, eating itself from the inside out.

Pete

[sandtown]

This is the fellow who was lecturing us on history.

History ?? Lets not be selective . .

How did the US react in 1962 at the prospect of USSR-Cuba military ties ??

If the US was allowed to freak out over that, then why is Russian not allowed to freak out now ??

[Keith Wilson]

Yeah, and Germany was just responding to Polish aggression in 1939. Jesus T. Christ, Sandtown, you seem to have overdosed very badly on Chomsky. Not everything is the US's fault.

[sandtown]

Back on topic

Many, likely most, people in the West want the war to end and the killing & destruction to stop. Vets For Peace is mostly of that persuasion.

Clearly much of the onus is on Russia.

But all wars end with negotiations, except for the genocidal ones.

Start with a cease-fire.

Another factor to consider is what the result would be of a Russia that is no longer a significant power -

it could well be much more war and death.

Thanks for being civil.

[Peerie Maa]

History ?? Lets not be selective . .

How did the US react in 1962 at the prospect of USSR-Cuba military ties ??

If the US was allowed to freak out over that, then why is Russian not allowed to freak out now ??

There is a bit of a difference between ballistic missile delivered warheads as close to the US as Cuba, and gravity bombs delivered by manned aircraft in Western Europe, the closest to the Russian borders being in Turkey.

But I suspect that you are bright enough to see that.

[epoxyboy]

The Cuban invasion in '62 was pretty bad though. Entire cities destroyed, reports of US troops behaving badly, numerous human rights violations.
Meanwhile, back in the real world...

Pete

[Peerie Maa]

The Cuban invasion in '62 was pretty bad though. Entire cities destroyed, reports of US troops behaving badly, numerous human rights violations.
Meanwhile, back in the real world...

Pete

Wrong year. Bay of Pigs was 61, it triggered the Missile Crisis of 62.

[epoxyboy]

Wrong year. Bay of Pigs was 61, it triggered the Missile Crisis of 62.

It was a poor attempt at satire, not a reference to the Bay of Pigs invasion - in which no cities were destroyed.

Pete

[skuthorp]

Meantime the arctic is melting and tipping points have already been reached in Greenland.
Fiddling about while the planet burns, and it's methane not CO2.

[Lew Barrett]

History ?? Lets not be selective . .

How did the US react in 1962 at the prospect of USSR-Cuba military ties ??

If the US was allowed to freak out over that, then why is Russian not allowed to freak out now ??

What do you think of the Vexler response to Chomsky? Around here Noam is not considered to be objective on this topic. your opinion?

Also, was that one or two tours you endured in Vietnam? Being enthusiastic about service during that war says something about a person. Volunteers were a different breed. You must have a fascinating back story. I am perplexed by your position on this issue, that is Ukraine, since I can agree with you on others.

[Gerarddm]

Peter Ziehan is right: Russia is FINISHED.

All that remains are the echoes of some shouting amidst posturing.

We'll see Putin at The Hague, and Lavrov winding up like Baghdad Bob, at best, at worst like Ribbentrop.

[WX]

Many, likely most, people in the West want the war to end and the killing & destruction to stop. Vets For Peace is mostly of that persuasion.

Clearly much of the onus is on Russia.

But all wars end with negotiations, except for the genocidal ones.

Start with a cease-fire.

Another factor to consider is what the result would be of a Russia that is no longer a significant power -

it could well be much more war and death.

Thanks for being civil.

Ukraine tried negotiating, even offered to drop the NATO membership. Putin wanted Ukraine back under Russian control pure and simple.
However the Russian military machine has proved not to be the well organised and armed machine it was thought to be. And to top it off we have mass deportation, torture and very well documented massacres.

[sandtown]

I love Chomsky - I try to be a good internationalist like him. The world should be grateful for his principled criticism of Israel, and much else. He is brilliant.

And here in the Bilge his critics merely slime him - and utterly refuse to deal with his points. I'm proud to have met him - and told him so.

Meanwhile, my call for an Eastern European DMZ (before the Russian invasion) looks pretty good right now.

And yes, I am aware that almost nobody paid the slightest attention to it - but they should have.

https://www.juancole.com/2022/02/neu...d-eastern.html

[Peerie Maa]

It was a poor attempt at satire, not a reference to the Bay of Pigs invasion - in which no cities were destroyed.

Pete

It is suggested that this emoji is what we need.

[JayInOz]

I love Chomsky - I try to be a good internationalist like him. The world should be grateful for his principled criticism of Israel, and much else. He is brilliant.

And here in the Bilge his critics merely slime him - and utterly refuse to deal with his points. I'm proud to have met him - and told him so.

Meanwhile, my call for an Eastern European DMZ (before the Russian invasion) looks pretty good right now.

And yes, I am aware that almost nobody paid the slightest attention to it - but they should have.

https://www.juancole.com/2022/02/neu...d-eastern.html

Sandtown and Chomsky have all the answers. America has behaved terribly in the past. Everything is their fault. Now lets take a peek---- nope. Russia are still invading a smaller neighbour and threatening nukes. Do you have a plan B Sandtown? JayInOz

[Canoeyawl]

Russian bots are just a fact of life, it is best to ignore them

[HRDavies]

This is the fellow who was lecturing us on history. He seems to have missed 1941-45. A lot of men died bringing American and British aid to the Soviet Union in those years.

Soviet casualties are estimated to be about 26 million. That's 2/3 of the entire population of the UK at the time.

British casualties came in at under a half million. Who was helping whom ?

Russian bots are just a fact of life, it is best to ignore them

Intellectually dishonest warmongering Americans likewise

[bluedog225]

I hope these are authentic. Videos of the equipment being deployed for the new troops.

Russian gunpowder is notoriously corrosive. It looks like these were put into storage ?? years ago without being cleaned.

I can imagine a leaky warehouse with 500,000 rifles in storage.

I doubt even an AK can survive this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF__UnJ_T3c

[bluedog225]

Another (nsfw language….in Russian):

[Hallam]

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/20...nd-ukraine-war

China and India have called for a negotiated end to the Ukraine war, stopping short of robust support for traditional ally Russia.
After a week of pressure at the United Nations general assembly, Russia’s foreign minister took the general assembly rostrum to deliver a fiery rebuke to western nations for what he termed a “grotesque” campaign against Russians.
But no major nation has rallied behind Russia, including China, which just days before the February invasion of Ukraine had vowed an “unbreakable” bond with President Vladimir Putin.
China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, called on Russia and Ukraine to “keep the crisis from spilling over” and from affecting developing countries.

“China supports all efforts conducive to the peaceful resolution of the Ukraine crisis. The pressing priority is to facilitate talks for peace,” Wang said on Saturday.
“The fundamental solution is to address the legitimate security concerns of all parties and build a balanced, effective and sustainable security architecture.”

[Nicholas Carey]

I hope these are authentic. Videos of the equipment being deployed for the new troops.

Russian gunpowder is notoriously corrosive. It looks like these were put into storage ?? years ago without being cleaned.

I can imagine a leaky warehouse with 500,000 rifles in storage.

I doubt even an AK can survive this.

I saw this. Apparently the Russian Ministry of Defence has never heard of a product called Cosmoline.

https://www.cosmolinedirect.com/cosmoline-hot-melt-360/

[johnw]

Many, likely most, people in the West want the war to end and the killing & destruction to stop. Vets For Peace is mostly of that persuasion.

Clearly much of the onus is on Russia.

But all wars end with negotiations, except for the genocidal ones.

Start with a cease-fire.

Another factor to consider is what the result would be of a Russia that is no longer a significant power -

it could well be much more war and death.

Thanks for being civil.

I think a lot of us appreciate the work Chomsky has done, and think he has a point. Personally, I think he exaggerates American power. I really would appreciate it if you would respond to the link Lew provided on Chomsky. Vlad Vexler clearly likes and respects Chomsky, so his views on Chomsky are all the more worth listening to.

Yes, wars tend to end in negotiations. One problem here is that that Putin clearly does not regard Ukraine as a legitimate country, and has said so repeatedly. Maya Angelou said, when people show you who they are, believe them the first time. I think Putin has shown us who he is enough times that we aren't believing him the first time. Consequently, I understand why Ukraine doesn't trust him. This makes negotiating a cease fire pretty difficult. I'm sure it will be done eventually, but it's a lot harder than you seem to think it is.

[skuthorp]

At the beginning of this I was calling it 'the Phoney War', fought by Ukraine as proxies with weapons supplied by its allies. I think the phoney war is coming to an end and I do not think the next stage will be good unless Putin is no longer in charge.
On Feb 19 Putin said, "Vladimir Putin has insisted he "of course" does not want a war in Europe"
Mirroring Goering who said he didn't want a war either……. and we know how that went.
I doubt that Putin can be trusted at all on any matter.

and Jay…" America has behaved terribly in the past."
Every country has…. including our own, and will again…………Just wait till climate change really bites.
Humans are ike that

[WszystekPoTrochu]

Consequently, I understand why Ukraine doesn't trust him. This makes negotiating a cease fire pretty difficult

The aggressor regularly broke the 2014 ceasefire for the 8 years preceding the full scale aggression and even took a small patch of land. If I were an Ukrainian, I would only negotiate ceasefire if it were either the only way to survive at all, or if the regular ceasefire attacks became a minor issue. Currently though the falcon has the upper hand over the eagle, why would they be interested with a ceasefire at all?


I've heard that muscovites plan to mobilise in Abkhazia and South Osetia. All I can say is: serves them right.