The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Benjamin Cole]

50 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

"Gangsta Phant" BenC,  let down again while trying to shoot the HC low hangin' fruit!

 

This is the Hilary Clinton   story that Trump has said the Clintons should be "executed" over. Which I'm sure lends credibility to the Hillary spying story for BenC and Fox News, but now Fox news hero Prosecutor John Durham (a foremost proponent that facial hair is more attractive than lips) has repudiated Fox News for exaggerating his results, after no less than a week of Fox News spinning the results that Hillary was at last, going to jail.

I get it, what TV journalists have time to read these days?

It was a lot of fun while it lasted!

 

Warning: Content may contain clips of Hilary Clinton  and for Pizzagate believers, Parental Guidance is Advised

 

 

Also this,       https://www.alternet.org/2022/02/durham/

 

Hilary is threatening to sue. It's probably too late now!l

 

"Javert" Durham will prevail! 

[Kirk Gallaway]

12 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Kirk, I am as mystified as anyone else reading the news of Ukraine and have not followed it carefully. As you know I am a Sanders/Biden Democrat generally with zero affection for Trump and Trumpers. However I do see another possible reading of the conflicting claims going back and forth re this Ukraine situation, though I do not think of it as more than a possibility. Nevertheless, would be interested in your take on this. (Also, I am not getting this from reading it somewhere; it is homemade.)

This is gut instinct, coming from a background of trying to read between the lines of public pronouncements. It is a given that Putin would like all or part of Ukraine, and feels threatened by the NATO/Russian border being close to Russia's border. I just assume that if he could get away with it, he would have had Russian troops in and annexed eastern Ukraine already, just as Crimea.

What I see ahead in my crystal ball is quite simply, partition (at best for Putin), and NATO troops inside Ukraine with the Ukraine government's permission on Putin's direct border (in the worst case for Putin).

My suspicion is that the talk of a Russian false flag (as plausible as it is) may be cover for an upcoming false flag or pretext from our own side, but whether or not that is the case it just looks to me--(but what do I know?)--like NATO will move into west Ukraine in the name of defending western Ukraine (minimally) or into all of Ukraine including east Ukraine under the same rationale. No one will call it an invasion of Ukraine by NATO because it will happen for the most legitimate and defensible and reasonable grounds, of defending Ukraine against Russian aggression, and will be at the invitation and cooperation of the Ukraine government. Sort of like South Vietnam inviting the US and its allies to defend South Vietnam from Ho Chi Minh aggression.

In this analysis (in my state of acknowledged ignorance on the finer points), what is said is that the NATO forces lined up on the other side of Ukraine are (a) not going to go into Ukraine to go to war with Putin if he invades; and (b) are there (mobilized and built up) for the purpose of preventing Putin from invading anyone beyond Ukraine. 

To which it occurred to me that there is a "c" going on not named: (c) preparation to move into west Ukraine justified as defending against the Putin threat.

End result: either NATO forces inside all of Ukraine with Putin having none of Ukraine, or NATO forces have west Ukraine and Putin has east Ukraine, partition. 

In terms of humanitarian concern, NATO in Ukraine would be better for the people living there because war is so horrifyingly destructive which is what it would be from Ukrainian resistance if Putin invades.

I have done business with a hair salon stylist locally who is from Latvia. She has told me in recent years of the situation in Latvia where her family and friends are. According to her, they just expect and assume that at some point Russia (Putin) is going to invade. I thought, how that must feel to live in areas of the world under fear and threat of invasion, something that we in the US do not experience.

I think back to Gorbachev of the old Soviet Union--and his vision of a Russia rejoining Europe and becoming a peaceful democratic-socialist nation re-integrated with Europe, working together with the US and the other major powers of the world toward solving common problems of the world. It was like Kennedy's American University speech except Gorbachev was making breathtaking significant strides toward achievement of that vision, but of course Gorbachev lost power and that was the end of that.

I hope one day another party in a post-Putin Russia will be a "second Gorbachev" in reuniting Russia with Europe. Of one thing I am very convinced: pan-european organizations such as the EU and NATO (not that they are the same) have prevented devastating european wars for the most part and are in principle the way to prevent future european wars which have so ravaged europe's history. Whatever problems and criticisms that exist in EU and NATO, I believe the situation is an improved EU and NATO, not an end to EU and NATO.  

But what do you think of the idea of an endgame to what we see being NATO forces either in part of or all of Ukraine, and second question, if that happens, on some level that may have been planned as distinguished from entirely brought about ad hoc in response to Putin's current actions? 

Greg, I believe this crisis was instigated by Putin. I do think if his purpose was to invade, he would have. He would have gotten ready and gone. It's possible that he had intentions and they were usurped by a strong exposure and a vociferous threatening reaction by the West, but I don't think so. I think many of the threatened sanctions had already been voiced. I do think he sees Nato as weak and divided economically, and possibly bluffing. I don't think he thought Nato would militarily take any action. I tend to think there is some revision going on

 

Greg: What I see ahead in my crystal ball is quite simply, partition (at best for Putin), and NATO troops inside Ukraine with the Ukraine government's permission on Putin's direct border (in the worst case for Putin).

 

I agree in that I don't think Putin had any interest in an extended ground war in Ukraine. Gaining some of Eastern Ukraine and yet yielding Nato troops in West Ukraine would be a disaster for Putin's stated goals. 

 

I'm probably oversimplifying this but the only time Nato has used article 5, a threat against a member,  was 9-11. Many people say the intervention in Kosovo was illegitimate because it was a civil war and not a threat to any  Nato member from without but rationalized under article 4, as a threat to the region. This is neither,  a threat from without to a non Nato member. 

 

What I think Putin  wants is some guarantees about Ukraine never being admitted to Nato, which would never be granted by Nato under military threat, but admittedly probably wouldn't have been listened to otherwise. If that's not possible, he may opt to secure areas of East Ukraine and force Nato's hand when Zelensky asks for intervention.

 

It was interesting today, in an interview Zelensky said, he's being told by the West that invasion is imminent. He says if that's true, bring on the sanctions now, before the invasion. But the intelligence agencies think just the opposite, that Putin is more likely to invade once he is sanctioned.

 

First Biden says, the invasion will be  after the Winter Olympics, then it's the 16th, then it's in a couple of days, or maybe now it looks with further talks, it's after the Olympics again. But maybe this pants wetting spamming that Biden is doing is intentional. He looks prophetic if Putin invades at all. The longer it goes, the more indecisive Putin looks which he can overcome by looking like negotiations were all he ever wanted in the first place.

Does that make sense?

******

 

 

Mentioning Gorbachev, I really thought we botched a great opportunity by which this all could have been averted, at the the fall of the Soviet Empire. If we had just given a hand to start them out right, but it seems we lost interest in them after beating them, and found them profitless and moved on. I can't say exactly. But it seems like something we'd do. 

 

 

But why the Russian economic collapse? To hear Di Eugenio tell it years back, the U.S, policy doomed them to eternal bankruptcy, and now Jeff, says Russia was just an innocent victim of the U.S.and Jeff lists a series of broken promises regarding NATO expansion, and a general dismissal of articulated Russian security concerns (as can be confirmed at the National Security Archive).

But what do any of these have to do with Russia's economic development in the 90's? Nothing. They already gave their satellite's up, and less defense spending would have been a good thing. And of course it begs the question, why would the U.S. sabotage  a Russia fledgling Democracy? Probably their response would be that we missed bullying the Soviet Union around and wanted them under our thumbs again.

 

To hear them tell it. We just wanted to plunder their economy out of malice, for the fun of it. But in reality, there wasn't much activism on the part of the U.S. at all, but indifference.  It's really more like being turned down for a bank loan.

heh heh    And I understand that hurts a bit, but come on!

 It's true, we did sort of preach to them to be like us. You would have thought that they at least had a good safety net, after all isn't that what a Socialist country is all about? Even though the reality is I don't think it even provided the level the European and U.S. countries provided. But they have to take responsibility. What did they do?

 

IMO, They  ended throwing the baby (safety net) out  with the bathwater to emulate the West and fouling up everything they did have going, and abandoning the people who won the Great Patriotic War and about everyone else outside of a handful of oligarchs. Nothing was well thought out.

 

China on the other hand, could see also see their problems and  gradually let people start businesses, make money and obtain property and now they're the burgeoning economic super power.

 

 

[Paul Rigby]

Five observations:

The retreat of the CIA, the real ruler of the post-coup (2014) rump Ukrainian terror-state, to Lvov appears to portend the attempted creation, within an area of central rump-Ukraine encompassing Kiev, of an arc of instability designed to sever connectivity within Eurasia

The teetering Bidenescu regime is resolved for a classic “khaki election” in an effort to ward off a devastating mid-term electoral defeat 

The prolongation of the manufactured rump-Ukraine crisis will be accompanied by a concerted programme of domestic repression, most likely along Trudescu lines, albeit one supplemented by false flag terrorism 

The costs of the Bidenescu regime’s geopolitical gambits, both to the American consumer and non-military component of the domestic economy, are almost certain to prove devastating, and even worse within America’s European satrapies, most notably Germany – they’re out of gas, and fast running out of time 

The inevitable heightening of the economic crises within the American empire will likely lead to a kinetic attack on Russia

[Pat Speer]

FWIW, my best friend growing up was the son of Ukrainian immigrants. I spent days at the house talking to his granddad and later had some dinners with his parents in which Russia was discussed. There was no love lost. My friend's father was multilingual and was kidnapped by the Germans during WWII. And he wasn't alone. After the war, he was put in a camp for Ukrainian refugees, where they awaited their fate. The Soviet Union wanted all Ukrainians from the Soviet half of Ukraine returned immediately. But most of them didn't want to go. Since those from the Polish part of Ukraine were allowed to immigrate to the U.S., my friend's father, as the clerk for the camp, and with the blessing of an American Congressman, if I recall, faked a number of documents, in order to allow many Soviet Ukrainians to come to America. That was his story, anyhow. My friend was a Lt. Col. in Special Forces and his father brought it up in the context of this being the only remotely heroic thing he'd done in his life. 

Now, the point is that over the years I met some of their fellow Uke immigrants. And these people felt about Russians the way Armenians feel about Turks: that they are murderers who stole their country. While I haven't read a ton on the subject I believe, much as the Armenian genocide conducted by the Turks, the Ukrainian genocide conducted by the Russians has become accepted history. Ukraine was the bread basket of the Soviet empire. And the farmers did not embrace the communist ways. So they were kicked off their farms and replaced by people who knew nothing about farming. And the country starved. Millions died. 

In any event, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants, many of whom have long memories. Ukrainian-Americans will not sit back and allow Russia to re-invade their country any more than Jewish-Americans will sit back and allow Israel to be overtaken, or, perhaps more fitting, Korean-Americans will allow North Korea to swallow up South Korea. 

It's been clear for some time that Putin wants to reconstruct the Soviet empire. And Ukraine is the jewel in the crown. NATO member or not, the fate of Ukraine could very well determine the fate of Europe, as a successful invasion of Ukraine will almost certainly lead to more invasions. 

An added thought. A few years back I got to know a Russian immigrant who remained enamored with Putin. I asked her why Putin was so popular in Russia. And she told me he made the Russian people--who were historically not a happy people--feel good about themselves. He made them feel important. Well, this is classic dictator stuff--we like him because he makes us feel important. These are dangerous times. 

[Steve Thomas]

- Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina -

“"I think everybody wants to be on President Trump's bandwagon," Scott replied. "One of the things that I've said to the president is that he gets to decide the future of our party and our country because he is still the loudest voice."”

https://www.rawstory.com/tim-scott-2024-vice-president/

Donald Trump gets to decide the future of our country because he has the loudest voice?

Sure sounds like good qualifications to me.

Steve Thomas

[Steve Thomas]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

It's been clear for some time that Putin wants to reconstruct the Soviet empire.

Pat,

Whenever I see Putin, I think of Peter the Great.

Steve Thomas

[W. Niederhut]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

FWIW, my best friend growing up was the son of Ukrainian immigrants. I spent days at the house talking to his granddad and later had some dinners with his parents in which Russia was discussed. There was no love lost. My friend's father was multilingual and was kidnapped by the Germans during WWII. And he wasn't alone. After the war, he was put in a camp for Ukrainian refugees, where they awaited their fate. The Soviet Union wanted all Ukrainians from the Soviet half of Ukraine returned immediately. But most of them didn't want to go. Since those from the Polish part of Ukraine were allowed to immigrate to the U.S., my friend's father, as the clerk for the camp, and with the blessing of an American Congressman, if I recall, faked a number of documents, in order to allow many Soviet Ukrainians to come to America. That was his story, anyhow. My friend was a Lt. Col. in Special Forces and his father brought it up in the context of this being the only remotely heroic thing he'd done in his life. 

Now, the point is that over the years I met some of their fellow Uke immigrants. And these people felt about Russians the way Armenians feel about Turks: that they are murderers who stole their country. While I haven't read a ton on the subject I believe, much as the Armenian genocide conducted by the Turks, the Ukrainian genocide conducted by the Russians has become accepted history. Ukraine was the bread basket of the Soviet empire. And the farmers did not embrace the communist ways. So they were kicked off their farms and replaced by people who knew nothing about farming. And the country starved. Millions died. 

In any event, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants, many of whom have long memories. Ukrainian-Americans will not sit back and allow Russia to re-invade their country any more than Jewish-Americans will sit back and allow Israel to be overtaken, or, perhaps more fitting, Korean-Americans will allow North Korea to swallow up South Korea. 

It's been clear for some time that Putin wants to reconstruct the Soviet empire. And Ukraine is the jewel in the crown. NATO member or not, the fate of Ukraine could very well determine the fate of Europe, as a successful invasion of Ukraine will almost certainly lead to more invasions. 

An added thought. A few years back I got to know a Russian immigrant who remained enamored with Putin. I asked her why Putin was so popular in Russia. And she told me he made the Russian people--who were historically not a happy people--feel good about themselves. He made them feel important. Well, this is classic dictator stuff--we like him because he makes us feel important. These are dangerous times. 

       Excellent post, Pat.  I would add that your Ukrainian friends' fear of Russia is mirrored by people from Estonia and other former Eastern bloc nations.  Even Soviet emigres I know have no illusions about Putin and the FSB.

       I was playing tennis with a guy, a Soviet emigre from our local ROCOR parish here in Denver, in the summer of 2007, shortly after Putin and the FSB had taken over the ROCOR.  He said, "It's a shame the Kremlin took over the church."

      Putin deserves credit for saving Russia from the chaos and economic collapse of the Yeltsin years, but he also re-established a non-democratic police state in the Russian Federation -- gradually taking control of the media and the elections.

     Now he's even sending opposition politicians to the Gulag.

     That said, I do agree with the NATO critics on the forum.  It was foolish of Biden and NATO to provoke Putin by staging joint military exercises with the Ukrainians last year.  Why bait the Russian bear?  From what I have read, that's what set the stage for the current crisis.

Edited February 20, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Matt Allison]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

It was foolish of Biden and NATO to provoke Putin by staging joint military exercises with the Ukrainians last year.  Why bait the Russian bear?  From what I have read, that's what set the stage for the current crisis.

eh, I ain't buying that. Ostensibly, Ukraine is a sovereign country and has the right to train for its defense preparedness.

There's no threat to Russia there. Ukraine isn't going to freakin invade Russia. C'mon.

[Paul Brancato]

Crimea, and the separatist enclaves bordering it, all in eastern Ukraine, are nearly 70% Russian, whereas in the rest of Ukraine they are about 30%. 

[Bob Ness]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Crimea, and the separatist enclaves bordering it, all in eastern Ukraine, are nearly 70% Russian, whereas in the rest of Ukraine they are about 30%. 

They're 100% Ukrainian. Don't listen to the disinformation. Same thing Hitler and every European invasion is prefaced by. "I'm going to protect our people!" Putin has handed out 700,000 passports. Did the same thing in Crimea.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Bob Ness

[Jeff Carter]

There is no invasion. The Ukrainians themselves don’t believe there will be an invasion. The only faction hyping an invasion is the anglo bloc of NATO along with NATO senior leadership - the same entities which helped to facilitate the 2014 coup which started all the problems in the first place.

To claim there is a universalist Ukrainian identity which has been disrupted by Russian aggression - which is Bob’s stated opinion - is itself a form of disinformation. Stating that 70% of people in eastern Ukraine are “Russian” reflects long-standing cultural, economic, historic, and linguistic ties - not a form of nationalist identity. The fine print of the EU Association agreement, only published in September 2013 near the end of negotiations, mandated a severance of specifically the economic ties which, along with the stipulations of a wide-ranging austerity program, is what caused Yanukovych to back away from the deal. At that time, some 80% or so of economic activity in eastern Ukraine was with Russia, so the EU Association agreement would have led to severe recessionary repercussions. This has been grossly misrepresented by the western media. Within Ukraine as a whole, a deep-seated animus towards Russia is a factor solely in the western regions, partly a factor of an entirely different historical experience. Again, the reality is more complex and nuanced than the comic book version would have it.

[Matt Allison]

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

There is no invasion. The Ukrainians themselves don’t believe there will be an invasion. The only faction hyping an invasion is the anglo bloc of NATO along with NATO senior leadership - the same entities which helped to facilitate the 2014 coup which started all the problems in the first place.

To claim there is a universalist Ukrainian identity which has been disrupted by Russian aggression - which is Bob’s stated opinion - is itself a form of disinformation. Stating that 70% of people in eastern Ukraine are “Russian” reflects long-standing cultural, economic, historic, and linguistic ties - not a form of nationalist identity. The fine print of the EU Association agreement, only published in September 2013 near the end of negotiations, mandated a severance of specifically the economic ties which, along with the stipulations of a wide-ranging austerity program, is what caused Yanukovych to back away from the deal. At that time, some 80% or so of economic activity in eastern Ukraine was with Russia, so the EU Association agreement would have led to severe recessionary repercussions. This has been grossly misrepresented by the western media. Within Ukraine as a whole, a deep-seated animus towards Russia is a factor solely in the western regions, partly a factor of an entirely different historical experience. Again, the reality is more complex and nuanced than the comic book version would have it.

Let's see how this ages, shall we?

[W. Niederhut]

Mysterious ‘Z’ Painted on Russian Tanks and Transports Closing in on Ukraine Border

https://www.thedailybeast.com/z-painted-on-russian-tanks-and-military-vehicles-near-ukraine-border?ref=scroll

February 20, 2022

[Denny Zartman]

39 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Mysterious ‘Z’ Painted on Russian Tanks and Transports Closing in on Ukraine Border

https://www.thedailybeast.com/z-painted-on-russian-tanks-and-military-vehicles-near-ukraine-border?ref=scroll

February 20, 2022

Don't look at me. I didn't do it, I swear.

[Jeff Carter]

On 2/19/2022 at 1:06 PM, Jeff Carter said:

The current dispute is actually over broader security guarantees.

Breaking news:

The Elysee Palace in Paris released a statement just a few minutes ago announcing both Biden and Putin had agreement to a summit to “discuss security and strategic stability in Europe”.

The summit was proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron, who spoke on the phone to both Biden and Putin.