patrick.net

clambo says

Ukraine did all it could diplomatically to avoid being invaded by Putin.

I’m slightly amazed that anyone actually believes that Ukraine is a sovereign nation, and not just a vassal territory captive to both the western and eastern oligarchs.

Ceffer says

Unfortunately, WWIII is a long planned policy of the Shadow Government and neocons, not a feature of Biden Actor Stable's fake senility, that's the usual distraction.

You are not wrong. But politically speaking, everyone who is not Biden, should be blaming him for this war. If Biden would stop funding and promoting it we might make strides toward peace. Politically we need to make Biden and the Democrats own all the death and destruction they are endorsing and funding in Ukraine.

In Explosive New Interview, Sy Hersh Details His Allegations of the Nord Stream 2 Sabotage (VIDEO)

From the article:

Hersh then tackled his recent reporting by discussing Germany. The people there made it through this winter with natural gas prices at 3-4 times their regular prices but next year is going to be a disaster.

The people of Germany and of Europe are not jumping on the war with Russia train and don’t care so much about Ukraine because it’s one of the most corrupt countries in the world is what Biden was being told.

The choice for Europe was either to keep supporting the war or keep receiving the natural gas and keep warm and make money.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/02/in-explosive-interview-sy-hersh-details-his-allegations-of-the-nord-stream-2-sabotage-video/

They Do Not Want Peace, And So You Need To Prepare For A Horrific Global War

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/they-do-not-want-peace-and-so-you-need-prepare-horrific-global-war

... our leaders made it abundantly clear that they aren’t even interested in considering China’s peace plan…

US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, speaking on CNN, brushed off the Chinese proposal, saying it should have ended after the first bullet point, which calls for “respecting the sovereignty of all countries.”

“This war could end tomorrow, if Russia stopped attacking Ukraine and withdrew its forces,” he said.

Asked about the proposal, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said, “China doesn’t have much credibility” in light of its failure to condemn Putin’s war.

NOTE: did the USA 'respect the sovereignty of all' the countries in which the CIA conducted coup d'etats countless times, including the nation in question, UKRAINE in 2014?

Patrick says

What Ukraine failed to do was stop shelling the ethnic Russian civilians in the Donbass. They did that for many years and are still doing it.

Now Russia has pretty much leveled much of the Donbass in their total cockup of this war getting hundreds of thousands of people killed. I guess that is Putin's way of protecting all those pro-Russian civilians? They have to "destroy the village to save it"?

Are there still pro-Russian people for Putin to "save" in Ukraine? If so, save them from what? And is that "what" so serious and important to kill hundreds of thousands of human beings and risk WWIII?

Russia had a small window to get this done and they failed miserably. Not only have they failed beyond miserably on this initial conventional stage of shock and awe, they haven't even gotten to the insurgency stage yet. How does Russia hang onto portions of Ukraine without decades of massive unrest keeping this a festering sore?

The war, death, destruction and global instability ends today if Putin orders Russian troops to return home. Everything short of the Russian invaders returning home and recognizing existing borders is prolonging death and creating greater risk to the world.

Since Ivan the Terrible Russia annexed neighboring countries because there is no geographic barrier to invaders reaching Moscow.
This is the rationale given by Putin apologists; he's just protecting Russia from another invasion.
But this was a pretext for Putin, since Europe had no desire to invade and were Russia's biggest cash cows.
Putin has a warm water port in Syria now so he doesn't need to freak out over leaving the Crimea peninsula.
As Trump often said, imagine if the trillions of dollars spent on wars had been spent in the USA instead.
I'm annoyed that Putin and the CCP are going to keep our military budgets high indefinitely.

Brief history:

During the collapse of the Soviet Union, then President George H. W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker both PROMISED Soviet Premiere Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand 'one inch' beyond its current membership. That promise was broken repeatedly by NATO's ever expanding sphere of nations and strategic placement of weapons ... all aimed at Russia.

In 2013, Victoria Nuland of the State Department, and, Sen. John McCain, both strongly advocated the overthrow of the duly elected, pro-Russian Government in Ukraine. McCain went so far as to travel to Ukraine whereby he promised "US support" for their 'revolution,' which did take place in 2014. Russia felt
threatened and hostilities between Ukraine and Russia went to a new level, culminating in Russia's military invasion last year.

Question: due to the Monroe Doctrine, JFK stood firm against the installation of nuclear missiles being placed in Cuba some 90 miles away from our shore. The conflict was so serious it came close to an all out war with the then USSR. How is this any different for Russia, with their country being surrounded by hostile member nations of NATO and now Ukraine?

Is Ukraine worth risking World War III???

Russia's puppet was thrown out of Ukraine; this pissed off Putin but is not agression towards Russia.
To dictators, like Putin and Xi, any neighbor who has a freer form of goverment is seen as a threat.
Taiwan would never invade China, but the CCP doesn't like an example of freedom so nearby that Chinese people see what they are missing.
Putin rolled the dice and lost; the weak, ineffectual West he was expecting decided to start sending weapons to Ukraine.
When Israel was invaded by its neighbors using Soviet weapons, it defeated them with its own and Western weapons; this enraged the Saudis so much they had an oil embargo in 1973.
Today, it's happening again; Russian military equipment and tactics are inferior.

socal2 says

The war, death, destruction and global instability ends today if Putin orders Russian troops to return home.

Do they have to leave Crimea too?

clambo says

I'm annoyed that Biden and the Democrats are going to keep our military budgets high indefinitely.

Fixed it for ya.

adolf Hitler says

Russian military equipment and tactics are inferior.

Remind me Adolf, how well did that German hubris work out for you?

clambo says

Russia's puppet was thrown out of Ukraine; this pissed off Putin but is not agression towards Russia.

It is when the Ukraine constitution was amended in 2014 as well to allow Ukraine to join NATO. Putin then took Crimea to prevent seeing a NATO naval base at Sevastopol.

RayAmerica says

Is Ukraine worth risking World War III???

elites will fight russia till last Ukrainian. its easy to sacrifice others for once personal goals. would end instantly if their own children were on front lines.

RayAmerica says

Is Ukraine worth risking World War III???

No it's not.

Putin should stop this shit now and end all the violence.

RayAmerica says

Is Ukraine worth risking World War III???

Well said, Neville.

Putin is just following NATOs precedent set in 1999 when they illegally attacked a sovereign nation (Serbia) and chopped off Kosovo.

Yep. And nobody gave a shit about Austria and Italy arming the Croat Militias, or the Arabs dumping weapons and terrorist volunteers (many who went on to fight in Iraq and Syria as various AQ/ISIS members) in Bosnia. Only EBIL SERBIA was functionally blockaded.

The Western Press never mentioned that the first act of Independent Croatia was to round up all Serbian military age males in concentration camps with no trial and no charges, 70,000 of them. Reminding Serbia of Jasenovak, when Nazis and Croats executed hundreds of thousands of Serbian Orthodox.

Nomograph says

Well said, Neville.

Look who's gone full NeoCon! The warhawks find friends on all sides of the aisle now days.

Look at how the propaganda on the lab leak is changing now that China might start supporting Russia. We should have never gotten involved in Ukraine, NATO should have been dissolved with the end of the Soviet Union. The War machine just keeps it going.

Nomograph says

RayAmerica says

Is Ukraine worth risking World War III???

Well said, Neville.

Question: How is Ukraine, one of the most corrupt nations on earth, a threat to our national interests?

Ukraine War Poses Existential Threat To Survival Of The Russian People: Putin

(Interpretation: if Russia is backed into a corner by the USA & NATO, they will go nuclear)

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-war-poses-existential-threat-survival-russian-people-putin

RayAmerica says

Question: How is Ukraine, one of the most corrupt nations on earth, a threat to our national interests?

You keep asking these types of questions to America and the West.

Why aren't you asking this of Putin and the Russians since they are the only ones that can stop the carnage? Ukrainians are not going to just sit back and let Russia take over their country. America could cut off weapons today, but Ukraine would still fight and form insurgent movements in the occupied portions of their country - keeping this conflict burning hot for years.

Imagine the Israeli/Palestinian conflict - but 10X!

Seriously, what would a Western/NATO aligned Ukraine "threat" be in concrete terms to Russia other than prestige and Putin's standing? Once you have identified the threat to Russia, was that threat greater than all of the Russian loss of life and military equipment this past year in their total fuck up of a war?

socal2 says

Seriously, what would a Western/NATO aligned Ukraine "threat" be in concrete terms to Russia other than prestige and Putin's standing?

NATO naval bases on the Black Sea at Sevastopol and Odessa.

socal2 says

Seriously, what would a Western/NATO aligned Ukraine "threat" be in concrete terms to Russia other than prestige and Putin's standing? Once you have identified the threat to Russia, was that threat greater than all of the Russian loss of life and military equipment this past year in their total fuck up of a war?

Outside of oil and gas Russia has nothing for the most part. Its land is shit besides the resources. Cold as fuck. It's misery. But someone has to make the vodka and get the resources out of the ground. That's why they want the somewhat more temperate land and access to a warm water port consistently.

Think Canada. Go 200 miles inland north of the border and live from October to May and enjoy. I believe Alaska is the highest suicide state in the nation. That's 80% of Russia basically. Actually it's Wyoming, didn't see that coming: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm

Either way, Russia is shit land. They're alway going to try and move West. IF they were a superpower they could have just purchased the land from one of the most corrupt nations on the planet. They chose to throw 1950's war machines at it and a bunch of drunks. It's like going into a bar and punching the guy that just got served a beer and you could have just bought it yourself. Russians are morons. So are Ukrainians.

socal2,

Several questions for you ... I'd really appreciate some answers.

Were you in favor of the CIA led Coup in 2014 which removed the duly elected government of Ukraine, only to be replaced by a CIA puppet government which just so happened to be hostile to Russia?

Are you in favor of the never ending expansion of NATO, all designed to isolate and threaten Russia?

Are you in favor of the placement of offensive weapons, all aimed at Russia, in NATO nations and territories, including Ukraine?

Are you willing to start World War III over the Ukraine conflict? (Rutgers Univ. recently conducted a study of such a scenario and concluded that within 5 years, over 2 BILLION people would die)

Would you be supportive of a hostile China organizing a coalition of nations in our region and hemisphere, along with installing offensive (including nuclear) weapons, all aimed at mainland America?

Would you be supportive of Canada, Cuba and Mexico joining such a coalition, or, would you view this as a threat to America?

HeadSet says

socal2 says

Seriously, what would a Western/NATO aligned Ukraine "threat" be in concrete terms to Russia other than prestige and Putin's standing?

NATO naval bases on the Black Sea at Sevastopol and Odessa.

It's not about NATO necessarily. Western Europeans are pussies. They're worried about the US. We're literally at war with Russia now. We just don't have enlisted boots on the ground. This doesn't end well for Russia either way. Ukraine is already destroyed in many areas.

Frankly dumbfounded by anyone that thinks Russia wins this. If the West keeps sending weapons and training, Russia stands no chance. They've built nothing new. If Putin says push the nuclear button in 10 minutes, there's a high probability it won't work. They had 40 fucking miles of equipment destroyed and/or taken. They didn't bring fuel or food.

Do people not watch videos? There's a reason 90% of Russians have dash cams in their cars. Because people will walk out in front of cars, fake getting hit and make money off of it. I am of Eastern European descent. We are ass holes. My parents were born here and so was I, but it's in my gut. I know I'm a dick. Russian, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, etc are all dicks.

HeadSet says

socal2 says

Seriously, what would a Western/NATO aligned Ukraine "threat" be in concrete terms to Russia other than prestige and Putin's standing?

NATO naval bases on the Black Sea at Sevastopol and Odessa.

Would those naval bases result in 100,000+ dead/injured Russians and loss of thousands of tanks, BMPs, trucks, helicopters, jets.......let alone the destruction of Nord stream pipeline?

I just fail to see the cost benefit analysis or ROI for Russia in all this.

If Russia managed to quickly knock out Kiev in the first few weeks and limit casualties on both sides, it might have worked like Georgia and Crimea. But that ship has totally sailed where Russia's ham-fisted fuckups have only galvanized a generation of Ukrainians to hate Russia like never before. Even if Russia manages to totally pacify Ukraine and bomb it to the stone age - what have they gained other than a destroyed buffer zone holding tens of thousands of Russian corpses and a more unified Europe and NATO.

RayAmerica says

socal2,

Several questions for you ... I'd really appreciate some answers.

Were you in favor of the CIA led Coup in 2014 which removed the duly elected government of Ukraine, only to be replaced by a CIA puppet government which just so happened to be hostile to Russia?

Are you in favor of the never ending expansion of NATO, all designed to isolate and threaten Russia?

Are you in favor of the placement of offensive weapons, all aimed at Russia, in NATO nations and territories, including Ukraine?

Are you willing to start World War III over the Ukraine conflict? (Rutgers Univ. recently conducted a study of such a scenario and concluded that within 5 years, over 2 BILLION people would die)

Would you be supportive of a hostile China organizing a coalition of nations in our region and hemisphere, along with installing offensive (including nuclear) weapons, all aimed at mainland America?

Would you be supportive of Canada, Cuba a...

Respectfully, all these questions are meaningless because there was never a universe where Ukraine (let alone NATO) were going to invade or attack Moscow - let alone try to occupy that shit country. As Wookieman has pointed out, Russia's land is shit - their only value is oil and gas. And that won't be worth that much in 50+ years.

All of the actions of NATO and so called coups 10+ years ago are defensive REACTIONS of Eastern European nations trying to peel themselves away and protect themselves from Russian influence. They saw what Putin did to to Chechnya, Georgia and Crimea and didn't want to be next.

And judging by Russia's actions in the past year destroying hundreds of thousands of lives, Ukraine had every right to want the protection of NATO.

Some people are dumb and dishonest.

socal2 says

Would those naval bases result in 100,000+ dead/injured Russians and loss of thousands of tanks, BMPs, trucks, helicopters, jets.......let alone the destruction of Nord stream pipeline?

No, the Russians did not have a crystal ball. What they did see, and what the US government should have seen, is that Russia would consider a NATO aligned Ukraine as an existential threat. Thus, when the 2014 coup happened and replaced a pro-Russia government with a pro NATO government, then the Ukraine constitution was amended to allow membership in NATO, then the US Vice Presidents talks about adding Ukraine to NATO, then Russia sees fit to annex Crimea to stop a NATO naval base at Sevastopol. Seems to me that US government neocons wanted this war, and kept prodding the bear until it attacked.

The entire expansion of NATO after the USSR fell was total aggression against Russia. I'd say the only caveat being the three Baltic States.

Ukraine has been poking the bear since then and the neocons managed to prod Putin enough to make him out to be the aggressor in western media by invading. It's just such pro-level baiting and propaganda, which we excel at, and Ukraine and US taxpayers are paying for it.

HeadSet says

No, the Russians did not have a crystal ball. What they did see, and what the US government should have seen, is that Russia would consider a NATO aligned Ukraine as an existential threat

Sorry - I am just not buying any of this bit about an expanded NATO being "existential threat" to Russia or Putin.

There is no universe where NATO was going to invade Russia.

The EU was perfectly happy buying every last bit of oil and gas Russia was willing to sell. There is nothing else of value that Russia has or can provide. We just wanted Putin to stay in his borders and pump as much gas as possible.

An expanded NATO certainly puts a crimp on Putin's plans of invading and dominating more Eastern European countries - so unless we are now at the point where we are claiming Russia has legitimate rights to their former Commie Slave colonies they occupied after WWII - I really fail to see how we can blame any of this needless death and destruction on NATO or the West.

This ALL falls on Putin - and he is the only one that could stop this human catastrophe overnight.

But for some inexplicable reason, we have normally anti-war folks on the Right basically egging on Putin to keep fighting an unwinnable war and risking WWIII.

RedStar says

The entire expansion of NATO after the USSR fell was total aggression against Russia

Please be specific.

Can you define NATO "aggression"?

What territorial designs did NATO have on Russia other than building a defensive shield for sovereign nations that are not Russian?

No one was demanding that Russia change borders, give up land or pay reparations for 100+ years of fucking up the planet (including funding and arming Marxist insurgencies all over the 3rd world).

We just wanted Putin to stop invading their sovereign neighbors and getting thousands of human beings killed causing world instability. Based on Russia's recent history (let alone catastrophic history of the 20th century) - Eastern European countries like Ukraine had every right to want NATO protection and not be comically labeled an "aggressor".

cisTits says

socal2 says

Sorry - I am just not buying any of this bit about an expanded NATO being "existential threat" to Russia or Putin.

Then you just demonstrated a poor understanding of Russian geopolitical imperatives.

Russia doesn't need most of Ukraine for the sake of having it. Ukraine is just in the way. So is Moldova, the Baltic nations and chunks of Romania and Poland.

Please educate me.

What are Ukraine and Moldova in the way of? Sounds like Putin and Russia have some serious plans outside their borders??

Thought Russia was just a poor victim of NATO "aggression" and a victim in all this?

socal2 says

There is no universe where NATO was going to invade Russia.

Russian point of view. In 1939 Germany and the USSR had a non- aggression pact. Germany and the USSR just divided up Poland, with their soldiers shaking hands as they met in the middle. In 1940-41 Germany was busy with Britain. No way Germany would invade the USSR in 1941, especially since the USSR let the Germans train for years in Soviet territory as a way to undermine the Versailles Treaty limitations. Surprise!

^ 100 up votes.

HeadSet says

Russian point of view. In 1939 Germany and the USSR had a non- aggression pact. Germany and the USSR just divided up Poland, with their soldiers shaking hands as they met in the middle. In 1940-41 Germany was busy with Britain. No way Germany would invade the USSR in 1941, especially since the USSR let the Germans train for years in Soviet territory as a way to undermine the Versailles Treaty limitations. Surprise!

Right - the Commies teamed up with the Nazis to carve up Europe and got double-crossed by the Nazis.

Russia getting double-crossed by their Nazi allies, is in no way a legitimate excuse for Russia being the aggressor again in Ukraine 80 years later!

Total fucking paranoia!

In fact, Russia never paid the diplomatic price for being Nazi allies let alone occupying Eastern Europe after WWII - stunting generations with their retardation.

If we are going to use 20th century history to justify Russia's aggression in 2023, than Ukraine has a shit-ton of lived experience to justify wanting to be aligned with the West along with NATO protection.......and not be under the thumb of Putin and Russia.

I wonder why socal2 won't answer these simple, direct questions?

Were you in favor of the CIA led Coup in 2014 which removed the duly elected government of Ukraine, only to be replaced by a CIA puppet government which just so happened to be hostile to Russia?

Are you in favor of the never ending expansion of NATO, all designed to isolate and threaten Russia?

Are you in favor of the placement of offensive weapons, all aimed at Russia, in NATO nations and territories, including Ukraine?

Are you willing to start World War III over the Ukraine conflict? (Rutgers Univ. recently conducted a study of such a scenario and concluded that within 5 years, over 2 BILLION people would die)

Would you be supportive of a hostile China organizing a coalition of nations in our region and hemisphere, along with installing offensive (including nuclear) weapons, all aimed at mainland America?

Would you be supportive of Canada, Cuba and Mexico joining such a coalition, or, would you view this as a threat to America?

socal2 says

If we are going to use 20th century history to justify Russia's aggression in 2023, than Ukraine has a shit-ton of lived experience to justify wanting to be aligned with the West along with NATO protection.......and not be under the thumb of Putin and Russia.

The other thing is geopolitically Russia simply needs more fertile land. This isn't an argument for either side. They want more tillable land. Gas and Oil only allow you to sell it and import most of you food that's not vodka. Russia is a generally useless landmass. Ice locked to the north with Crimea being their only 24/7 body of water for shipping and trade. We trade with China so an Eastern port is useless to them. South America has it's own oil, with issues, but it's cheaper to get from the ME.

Russia is 100% backed into a corner. That's what this is. Who honestly knows who blew up Nordstream? Doesn't matter. They're kind of fucked. Lob nukes and they're fucked in 24 hours with useless land besides the resources in the earth which can still be extracted upon take over. We'd take out military and civilians if they nuke civilians elsewhere. It would take two bombs on our end to wipe out Russia. We likely have 4-8 subs with ICBM's that could strike in 10 minutes.

As I said I give no shits about Ukraine. Russia has shown to be the emperor with no clothes.