The invasion of Ukraine: who’s Putin’s puppet now?
When Obama was elected I suspected that I knew what we were in for concerning foreign policy: withdrawing from Iraq, empowering Iran, weakening our military, and general movement towards the leftist position.
When Trump was elected, I was worried that he was in way over his head and would do something foolhardy. He had no experience, he was a braggart and a blowhard, and the world stage was not the world of real estate development. My nervousness lasted a while, but by the end of the first year of his administration I started to relax. None of the predicted catastrophes had occurred, and he seemed to actually be able to make good on his promises about what an effective dealmaker he was and how he would act in America’s interests.
On Biden’s election, it was easy to predict what he would do, at least in the general sense. He’d continue Obama’s policies and add huge extra doses of stupidity, incompetence, and undeserving bravado. Every wannabee aggressor on earth would get the picture: this might just be a good time to make a move.
Thus, Ukraine. What better time could there be? The US struggling with inflation, Europe more dependent on Russian oil thanks to Biden’s energy policies, the US unable to exercise any kind of effective international leadership, and Putin’s knowledge of Biden’s traditionally poor judgment and more recent cognitive difficulties.
Some people didn’t expect the large scale and scope of the invasion last night, although the numbers massing on the border did make some people predict it. It seems Putin wants to take over the whole country, although he might just want to strike a series of blows to weaken its defenses and then take over just Donetsk and Luhansk in the eastern portion of the country. There are many reports from the area, and it’s hard to know what’s true and what’s false (fog of war), and certainly hard to know what’s next.
I happen to think that Putin wants to take over Ukraine itself, or at least to install a puppet or satellite government there. As this analyst said a short time before the invasion actually occurred:
The main reason for Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is to reinforce Russia’s security importance in Europe, according to Edmonds.
He wants to ensure that Moscow is deeply involved in “any kind of decisions or the overall structure in Europe,” he said. It’s about “restoring Russia to the place, it believes it leads in Europe.”
And I don’t think sanctions will have much effect on his plans.
Nor do I think Putin’s designs are only limited to Ukraine. Those of us who remember the Cold War recall the extent of the Soviet empire. Much of eastern Europe was part of the USSR, and although it may not be the case that Putin would like to recreate that – and certainly not in that exact form – I believe that he may want to have a greater hand in the governance of several of what used to be known as “the captive nations.”
Do I know this for certain? Absolutely not. But that’s what my gut is telling me.
One more thing: many people say that Biden isn’t in charge of our policy. I think it depends on what is meant by “in charge.” Of course there are others who influence him. But I thought he was mostly in charge of our disastrous Afghanistan pullout, and I think the same is true of Ukraine. Remember, Ukraine was his special field of interest as vice president. Remember also that Biden fancies himself a highly experienced, highly knowledgeable, highly effective foreign policy expert in general. Even in his younger days he was a blustering fool, but he never had to answer for his decisions back then because he wasn’t president. Of course, with his friends in the press he may not even have to answer for them now.
Sowell, in his essay, “Intellectuals and war” demonstrates how Hitler tried a few pushes he could not have sustained militarily. But he read his opponents correctly and was, along with his generals, emboldened.
Actually, I was noticing in the comments section at Fox last night, lefties insisting that Trump is Putin’s puppet, and somehow Trump caused this. TDS is a real thing.
A good friend pinged me today and wanted to hyperventilate about Putin’s invasion–not about the invasion but about Trump having called it a “genius move” in what I am pretty sure was classic Trump sarcastic trolling.
TDS is indeed a real thing and I can appreciate why. It’s politically and psychologically very rewarding. If the news is exposing your leaders and policies as utter failures, just shout “Trump!” and change the subject. If you’re sad about how things are going, again just shout “Trump” and conduct a nice 2-minute hate.
Yes, it was Trump being sarcastic. But he points out, correctly, that Putin is smart in thinking that he can get away with this Ukraine attack, which so far is true.
Here you go, straight from Putin’s lips to your ears.
https://youtu.be/W2Cugn8JZfk
Like the comedy Nazi wonders, “do you think that we could be the bad guys?”
People in the West want peace, the West’s leadership and the Elite want conflict because it suits their agenda and profits.
Nukes will not fly therefore the left will proclaim Biden a diplomatic genius.
Biden is weak and befuddled and macho – pretty much the worst we could have as Commander in Chief now.
On my own, I’ve recently reached the conclusions I’ve been expounding upon. Below is evidence that others, much more knowledgable than I, realized the truth long ago.
I too bought into the narrative that Putin was another Hitler/Stalin monster and entirely the bad guy.
Yes, he’s still a dictator but how he’s portrayed by the media and West’s leadership/Elite serves their agenda very well.
“Ex-U.S. Ambassador to USSR: Ukraine Crisis Stems Directly from Post-Cold War Push to Expand NATO”
https://youtu.be/e5F0JSy-HHY
Geoffrey Britain:
There are many levels of bad. Putin is a bad guy but I’ve never heard anyone assert that his “bad” is anywhere remotely in the Stalin/Hitler league. So I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
I didn’t watch the YouTube video you linked, but I’ve read that Putin is reacting to that push to expand NATO. I’m sure he’s not happy about it, but I don’t see how that justifies the invasion of Ukraine (which if memory serves me, he doesn’t consider a separate country, really).
And a blast from the past (courtesy of Instapundit):
“Classified State Department email declared Hunter Biden ‘undercut’ U.S. efforts in Ukraine;
“Withheld from public for five years, memo conflicts with Democrats’ official narrative that president’s son had no impact on U.S. anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine.”
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/classified-state-department-email-declared-hunter-biden
“Withheld for five years”?
Seems like the State Dept. thinks it’s the CDC…
(In any event, sure hope “The-smartest-man-I-know”‘s testifying ex-es know how to keep themselves safe….)
“Ex-U.S. Ambassador to USSR: Ukraine Crisis Stems Directly from Post-Cold War Push to Expand NATO”
No, our expansion of NATO (in 1999 and 2004) is the impediment to him attempting this contra the Baltics. For now.
Like Geoffrey Britain, I have been doing some independent reading and think he is correct. Sad to say, I didn’t pay attention what was happening there until a few weeks ago. When I started reading, I thought we were on the right side, but the more I read the more disturbed I became.
We are not the good guys here. We are not the bad guys, but Putin’s position has more validity than ours. Go to Google maps and look at the world from Russia. From the Baltic to the Black Sea, it is surrounded by NATO countries who have access to nuclear missles. Ukraine occupies a place near Russia like Mexico does to the United States or like Cuba does. If Mexico wanted to ally itself with Russia or China, the US government and people would respond vigorously, even to invading.
Putin has good reason to not think Ukraine is not a separate country, mainly because until 1991, it was a part of the Russian empire for centuries. About 25 percent of the population of Ukraine is of Russian descent and wants to be part of Russian. Much of the disputed territory was part of Russia until Krushev in a purely administrative moved the Ukrainian borders. When Ukraine became independent, the new borders were used keeping the ethnic Russians in Ukraine. Do the ethnic Russians have a right to be governed by Moscow if they wish?
Everything you have said about Biden is accurate. A sophisticated man and administration would understand Putin’s and Russia’s position and Ukraine’s concerns.
Putin’s position has more validity than ours.
Putin’s position is that any country he can move his troops into is his for the taking. That’s your idea of ‘validity’.
From today’s WSJ: Remember 1994? No, of course not!
“As the people of Ukraine steel themselves for a Russian attack, it’s worth recalling how the U.S. persuaded the country to give up its nuclear weapons. The event was the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, in which the U.S., Great Britain and Russia offered security assurances to the nation [Ukraine] that had won independence when the Soviet Union dissolved.
“That was the halcyon post-Cold War era when history had supposedly ended. Some 1,800 nuclear weapons were on Ukrainian territory, including short-range tactical weapons and air-launched cruise missiles. The U.S. wanted fewer countries to have fewer nukes, and U.S. credibility was at its peak.
“The memo begins with the U.S., U.K. and Russia noting that Ukraine had committed “to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time.” Then the three countries “confirm” a half-dozen commitments to Ukraine.
“The most important was to “reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.” They also pledged to “refrain from economic coercion” against Ukraine and to “seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine” in the event of an “act of aggression” against the country. Ukraine had returned all of the nuclear weapons to Russia by 1996.
“Vladimir Putin made the Budapest Memorandum a dead letter with his first invasion of Ukraine in 2014. But the betrayal of Budapest isn’t forgotten in Kyiv, as President Volodymyr Zelensky noted bitterly in weekend remarks in Munich.
“Budapest shows again the folly of trusting parchment promises in a world where autocrats think might makes right. More damaging is the message that nations give up their nuclear arsenals at their peril. That’s the lesson North Korea has learned, and Iran is following the same playbook as it connives to build the bomb even as it promises not to do so.
“The inability of the U.S. to enforce its Budapest commitments will also echo in allied capitals that rely on America’s military assurances. Don’t be surprised if Japan or South Korea seek their own nuclear deterrent. If Americans want to know why they should care about Ukraine, nuclear proliferation is one reason. Betrayal has consequences, as the world seems destined to learn again the hard way.”
neo,
“I’ve read that Putin is reacting to that push to expand NATO. I’m sure he’s not happy about it, but I don’t see how that justifies the invasion of Ukraine”
Since I’ve laid out quite clearly and more than once, the legitimate concerns Putin’s Russia has with NATO directly on Russia’s border less than an 8 hr drive from Moscow… I really am puzzled at your failure to grasp or perhaps dismiss, that existential national security threat for Russia. No way would we dismiss Canada becoming part of the Russian Federation. We would view that in exactly the same terms as Putin views Ukrainian membership in NATO.
Art Deco,
“Putin’s position has more validity than ours.”
“Putin’s position is that any country he can move his troops into is his for the taking. That’s your idea of ‘validity’.”
Speaking generously, that’s an astonishing level of obtuseness.
Speaking generously, that’s an astonishing level of obtuseness.
No, I’m telling the truth. You’re uttering nonsense at wearying length.
Cicero,
So you think that there was never any concerns by Russia of NATO expansion eastward? That the Russians never extracted that promise from the U.S. as a condition of agreement? That they were that trusting and naive?
That, as NATO has expanded eastward in 5 waves over the past 30 years that Russia has never expressed concerns over what it must view as a growing and existential threat to its national security? As would any nation of an alliance with a history of mutual hostility?
Art,
Your “truth” is decidedly one sided. I’d suggest leavening your view with a bit of objectivity but apparently that’s asking too much.
As for my ‘nonsense’, my premises may be in error but my logic extends coherently from premise to conclusion. Which obviates an accusation of offering a nonsensical analysis.
Your “truth” is decidedly one sided.
It’s just truth. It bothers you because you’re addicted to you own pixels.
my logic extends coherently from premise to conclusion.
When you’ve learned the distinction between logic and vanity, get back to me.
Getting attached to one’s own words to the point of willful blindness? Never happen! 🙂
BTW, I just checked and the distance from Kiev to Moscow is roughly equivalent to Toronto to Washington D.C.
Now that Canada is for all intents and purposes a dictatorship*, I’m sure no one here characterzing Putin has having no legitimate concerns, wouldn’t object to the possiblity of nuclear cruise missiles being emplaced just south of Toronto. Of course, we can trust that Trudeau or a later successor would never conceive of such a thing. Since polite Canadian’s would never elect a mean dictator like Putin.
*“Farm Credit Canada is making a list to punish citizens who donated to Trucker Convoy…”
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/farm-credit-canada-is-making-a-list-to-punish-donors-to-trucker-convoy/
It’s just truth. It bothers you because you’re addicted to you own pixels.
Pope Deco speaks! The Truth!
He has no addiction to pixels. He is here to show us the way.
It is often necessary for him to insult us. But it’s for our own good.
Look on his words, Ye Foolish, and despair.
Art Deco,
Of course its just truth, no need to articulate a defense of ‘truth’!
Oh I agree, someone here does have some difficulty in distinguishing between logic and vanity. Or at least in making the accusation.
om,
Extend a reasoned argument as to how the argument I’ve made is “willfully blind” and I’ll happily rescind my analysis. I’d much rather Putin be the cardboard character that he’s been consistently portrayed as, simplistic analysis being so much easier with which to gain agreement.
I’ve never been much concerned with being in the right (as my previous admissions of being mistaken demonstrate) but rather, it is clarity in understanding I pursue. That pursuit has led me to the conclusions on this issue that I’ve expounded upon. I’ve gone on about it, as I happen to think it of some importance, given the current possibility of stumbling into a nuclear war.
BTW, I can’t off the top of my head recall very many admissions of being mistaken by others here. But then again my memory is not what it once was, perhaps I’m just forgetful.
The Budapest Meo was violated by Putin when he took Crimea, and we did nothing of consequence. So, it’s a dead letter. Obama was not willing to stand up to him and also betrayed what was promised in that memo of understanding. We are not blame free. We should have made Putin’s Russia a pariah among nations at that point.
Yes, Putin is paranoid about NATO, because it has expanded eastward. Yet the fact is that many former USSR countries have joined NATO because they fear Russian aggression. And Putin is proving them right.
Whether Putin is valid is his fear of NATO aggression, the world’s nations (at least those that are nominally free) should all condemn this unprovoked aggression. Russia and Putin should be treated as pariahs until they are willing to once again renounce military force against peaceful neighbors.
Russia has an economy the size of Italy’s. Serious economic sanctions coupled with releasing our energy industry to lower energy prices will exhaust their ability to continue their war effort. People in some Russian cities are already protesting the invasion. Putin may be a dictator, but he doesn’t have control like in the old days of the USSR.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/24/russia-ukraine-protests-putin/
I don’t know what the end game is, but Putin cannot keep his war going without approval at home and continued high oil prices. Drill, drill, drill!
Yes, Putin is paranoid about NATO, because it has expanded eastward.
It expanded eastward in two installments. The expansion was 60% complete in 1999 and 100% complete in 2004. The countries which joined had their historically-informed reasons for joining. They’ve just been proved to have bet correctly.
And what is the exogenous evidence that Putin is ‘paranoid’? Reasons of state are not driving this. Megalomania and revanchism are driving this. The question at hand is the optimal course of action in response over the next several decades.
Nuclear missiles on Vlad’s doorstep. Poor, put upon Putin, it sounds remarkably similar to me anyway, to the Pershing II Intermediate Range ballistic missile crisis that the USSR was so threatened by in the 1980s.
Not that Vlad has nuclear weapons in Kalinagrad, that curious Roosian metastasis between Poland and Lithuania. But Geoffrey, you recognize that Poland and much of the Baltics were once part of Roosia too? Vlad pines for them, and for the persecuted Roosians in those breakaway provinces!
Funny that Vlad is threatening nuclear war if the west opposes his adventures. He’s your guy now? By the short hairs. That’s way too personal.
The recent novel judicial concept of “mental rape” comes to mind as an instance of someone in love with his own pixels.
But this is supposed to be a happy occassion. Is Vlad planning on building Swamp Castle in the Donbass or in Kyiv?
“It expanded eastward in two installments. The expansion was 60% complete in 1999 and 100% complete in 2004.” Art Deco
I know its just Wikipedia but the following seems to be accurate and easily verifiable.
“After its formation in 1949 with twelve founding members, NATO grew by including Greece and Turkey in 1952 and West Germany in 1955, and then later Spain in 1982.
After the Cold War ended, and Germany reunited in 1990, there was a debate in NATO about continued expansion eastward.
In 1999, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined NATO, amid much debate within the organization and Russian opposition.
Another expansion came with the accession of seven Central and Eastern European countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. These nations were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague summit, and joined NATO shortly before the 2004 Istanbul summit.
Albania and Croatia joined on 1 April 2009, prior to the 2009 Strasbourg–Kehl summit.
The most recent member states to be added to NATO are Montenegro on 5 June 2017 and North Macedonia on 27 March 2020.
As of 2021, NATO officially recognizes three aspiring members: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine.[1]
Future expansion is currently a topic of debate in several countries outside the alliance, and countries like Sweden, Finland, and Serbia have open political debate on the topic of membership, while in countries like Ukraine, support and opposition to membership is tied to ethnic and nationalist ideologies.
The incorporation of countries formerly part of the Eastern Bloc and the Soviet Union has been a cause of increased tension between NATO countries and Russia.”
So there you go, Russian concerns are just crazy paranoia! You’d have to be crazy to see a steady pattern of encroachment…
Poor put upon Putin. Sucks to be Ukrainian or Russian right now.
https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/02/24/putin-begins-to-pay-in-blood-for-his-ukrainian-misadventure-n527552
Was the Kyiv airborne assault an Airport Too Far, or Crete part duex?
Go Vlad, Xi and Z approve.
om,
I had to take a phone call. Now that I’m back, suggesting that Putin is “your boy now” is a low blow. It also indicates an inability to refute an argument. Silly me, I thought you were above using a pure leftist tactic.
I know its just Wikipedia but the following seems to be accurate and easily verifiable.
What’s easily verifiable are production statistics. The output of the states which joined was distributed just as I described to you – 60% in Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, 40% in the other seven states.
Albania and Croatia joined on 1 April 2009, prior to the 2009 Strasbourg–Kehl summit.The most recent member states to be added to NATO are Montenegro on 5 June 2017 and North Macedonia on 27 March 2020.As of 2021, NATO officially recognizes three aspiring members: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine.[1]
Absolutely every one of those states joining is along the Adriatic, which does not run on an east-west axis. Albania ceased to co-operate with the other Warsaw Pact states in 1961 and formally abrogated the treaty in 1968. The other states were fragments of Yugoslavia, which was never a member of the Warsaw Pact.
‘Aspiring members’ means they applied. They’ve never been members. This isn’t that difficult.
Of course its just truth, no need to articulate a defense of ‘truth’!
I’ve been contending with you for weeks. Not that you listen to anyone.
Remember back when Art wasn’t such a horse’s ass on here?
Nah, me neither.
From om’s RedState link, Russian stock market reported down 40% today. That won’t improve Vlad’s reputation at home.
Frankly, If I were Taiwan, I would be very very very concerned right now.,,
}}} Biden is weak and befuddled and macho – pretty much the worst we could have as Commander in Chief now.
Somehow, I think Harris would go, “Hey, Hold my Mojito…”
:-/
I was in Kiev in 1994. Our guide took us around and one of the sights was the “Great Gate of Kiev”, a modern reproduction of the main gate of the walled city that there 1000 years ago. She told us that was where the Kieven Rus had been, the origin of modern Russia. Don’t underestimate the chauvinism attached to Kiev and the Ukraine by the Russians. The Europeans have very long time frames that are unknown to Americans.
Don’t forget that Biden is deeply compromised by Hunter’s association with Burisma and its corrupt owner. Anyone who thinks that Putin doesn’t know all the details and could blackmail Biden with them is very naive.
Geoffrey:
Got your attention. Ok, now consider that other people have arguments and facts, such as Soviet and Russian behaviour, that counter your self assessed “logic and reasoning” of Vlad’s behavior.
Geoffrey Britain:
Who’s saying Putin has “no concerns”? I haven’t read all the comments, but I don’t see people saying that.
It’s what he does about those concerns that is the problem, and also whether those concerns are really the reason for his invasion.
I don’t think we’d invade and try to take over Canada if they put weapons there. Now, if the Soviets put them there, that would be different – more like the Cuban missile crisis (which did not include an invasion).
And a leftist dictator in Canada who has never been murderous or interested in taking over another country is not the same as Putin, who not only murders his enemies at times but who gave a speech explaining why Ukraine is actually part of Russia and is an “illegitimate state.” There is no Canada analogy, nuclear weapons or not. I don’t see anyone ever arguing that we are entitled to take over Canada because it’s not really a country on its own, it’s really part of the US.
Seems to me he’d like to reassemble the old Soviet Union or something rather like it, only with a different economic system and without the gulags.
Art Deco:
If you want to present facts, present them.
Please stop insulting people and please stop asserting that you are the only purveyor of Truth. The facts can speak well for themselves.
Paul in Boston:
I don’t think Hunter is blackmailable anymore. If Putin was going to do it, the time to do it was before the fall of 2020. Once the laptop got published, and people don’t care that much, what’s left to blackmail him about? The guy is an utterly corrupt, whoring, totally dissipated crackhead.
In fact, maybe leaving that laptop at the repair shop was a clever ploy to immunize himself against future blackmail.
Art Deco,
“It expanded eastward in two installments. The expansion was 60% complete in 1999 and 100% complete in 2004. The countries which joined had their historically-informed reasons for joining. They’ve just been proved to have bet correctly.”
I’m sorry, was I too obtuse to catch the implied “production statistics” in what you first stated?
You also stated; “It expanded eastward in two installments. The expansion was 60% complete in 1999 and 100% complete in 2004. “
Silly me, I thought “100% complete in 2004″… actually meant 100% complete. So the other states added after 2004 had nothing to contribute in “production statistics”? Wow, that’s some deal, NATO membership with no defense production contributions?
“Absolutely every one of those states joining is along the Adriatic, which does not run on an east-west axis.”
Gee, I didnt realize that encirclement of the eastern borders of the largest country in the world only lay along an “east-west axis”.
“Aspiring members’ means they applied. They’ve never been members. This isn’t that difficult.”
“As of 2021, NATO officially recognizes three aspiring members: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine.[1]”
If they’d ever been members Art, they wouldn’t be 2021 aspiring applicants… now would they? Perhaps rebutal is a bit difficult after all?
“I’ve been contending with you for weeks. Not that you listen to anyone.”
I recall a couple of mild disagreements over the past few weeks but I didn’t realize you were ‘contending’ with me. Tell you what, I’ll pay closer attention and you try harder, OK?
I do listen to anyone with a lick of sense Art. And I freely admit that when you give your ego a rest, you occasionally make sense.
He’d be silly not to install a puppet government.
One way or another these border nations are going to be puppet states.
Events of the past decade have shown that the USA cannot be trusted to run a puppet state on Russia’s Borders (*) and therefore it’s time to give the Russians a go.
* How would you like it if China took over the PRI and ran Mexico as a fiefdom?
Amusingly when the protests were on in HK in 2019 I spent a LOT of time on Twitter following the chatter of the Western journalists, freelancers, stringers, NGO types, OSint types who were all over it. To give an idea of the sorts of filth they were… these guys tried hard to get Michael Yon doxxed and Swatted while he was in HK.. Because idealogical hatred trumps all. Guess what they constantly reminisced fondly about: Everything was referred back to and compared to EuroMaidan… They had all been there in the thick of it.
om,
“consider that other people have arguments and facts, such as Soviet and Russian behaviour, that counter your self assessed “logic and reasoning” of Vlad’s behavior.”
I must have missed the ‘facts’ you’ve previously offered regarding Putin’s behavior and the Soviet’s thinking regarding NATO.
neo,
Only a very few here have expressed any acknowledgement that Putin might have legitimate concerns. I’ve offered a coherent explanation of Putin’s primary motivation regarding his actions vis a vis the Ukraine. Ones backed up with easily verified points.
As for whether that’s really his primary motivation, military strategy in regard to national security concerns simply cannot be reasonably dismissed. I’ve already acknowleded Putin’s desire to regain much of the former Soviet Union’s territory. Though I dont think that includes Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The Baltic States yes because they represent a strategic concern. No country wants its shoreline to be occupied by States folded within an alliance that has in the past exhibited hostility toward it, however justified. And which contiues to exhibit passive/aggressive behavior toward that country.
I do agree that my Canada analogy was too far a stretch. I should have suggested a rerun in Cuba. That IMO fits because its highly likely that NATO has offensive weapon systems trained on Russia.
I quite agree as I just stated and have repeatedly said that Putin wants an expanded Russia. But I continue to think that NATO’s expansion with Ukraine next has forced his hand. He simply cannot afford to wait and I think that Biden and his advisers secretely welcomes Putin’s invasion as a marvelous distraction from domestic concerns.
The major adversaries of the USA are run by mobsters, as a Builder / Real estate person in New York and New Jersey as well as other places world wide, Donald Trump had been dealing with mobsters for years. He knows what they want and what they respond to.
neo,
“maybe leaving that laptop at the repair shop was a clever ploy to immunize himself against future blackmail.”
Maybe but I’m a bit doubtful that a “corrupt, whoring, totally dissipated crackhead” could plan that far ahead. But if so, Hunter is a lot more crafty than I’ve thought. Course, he had excellent tutoring in slimy manuevers…
om,
I’m not assessing Putin’s thoughts. I’ve assessed the strategic circumstances he faces and realized, given NATO’s behavior that he cannot view it in any other way. As any military strategist, put in Putin’s place would draw the same conclusions.
Geoffrey:
Here you go for a younger perspective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVE8qPX9uT4
Geoffrey:
Crimea invasion not that long ago. I guess you missed that. Your memory is failing. Soviet behavior in response to the Pershing II deployments, 1980s. Propaganda non stop. You missed that too.
I won’t say that you can’t think, just that you confuse Putin’s pretexts and propaganda with “legitimate” concerns. Oh I forgot war is just another way of solving “legitimate” concerns. 🙂
Z’s take, get used to being a puppet, Baltics, Poland, Romania, Czeck Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and the biggest puppet, Xi land. Siberia borders Xi land. Sucks to be a Han I guess.
Sorry Z I forgot Norway and Finland. They get to be Vlad puppets too. You are such a master of international diplomacy. Do we get to be a puppet, you know Alaska?
Geoffrey also stated
“People in the West want peace, the West’s leadership and the Elite want conflict because it suits their agenda and profits.”
That’s some awesome logic and reasoning with facts to boot. For Vlad wants nothing, he was minding his legitimate concerns and keeping the peace.
Swamp Castle estates. Vlad needs a dacha in Kyiv.
🙂
“Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.”
There is ZERO reason any of those nations should be in NATO and there is ZERO reason an ounce of American blood or a penny of American treasure should be pledged to defend them. They literally add nothing of value to the alliance other than expressly hemming in Russia.
I have no desire to defend a revanchist like Putin but the post-Cold War purpose of NATO has been nothing more than promoting the power of the Atlantic alliance at the expense, primarily, of Russia. You may approve but you can’t be shocked that whoever runs Russia would not.
Mike
“That, as NATO has expanded eastward in 5 waves over the past 30 years that Russia has never expressed concerns over what it must view as a growing and existential threat to its national security? As would any nation of an alliance with a history of mutual hostility?”
First of all, neither NATO nor America has ever had hostility to Russia. They have had hostility to the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact but never Russia.
That every other nation in the former Warsaw Pact and many nations of the former Soviet Union not only recognize that lack of hostility but also either actually want to join or have already joined NATO should tell you something. And that something is that NATO is not a threat to Russia or any other state of the former Warsaw Pact.
Believing it is not only a threat but an existential threat is an example of either 1) Russian paranoia, or 2) disingenuousness. Russia’s reaction may be part #1 (the Russian character is famously paranoid) but is mostly #2. It’s more like an abusive ex-boyfriend angry that his ex-girlfriend has found someone new who will stick up for her, and he wants to destroy the relationship before they move in together.
Seriously believing NATO is a threat to Russia marks one as a victim of Russian propaganda.
@mkent:
“Seriously believing NATO is a threat to Russia marks one as a victim of Russian propaganda.”
Seriously believing that NATO isn’t a corrupt money-making military industrial complex racket in 2022 and that Russia doesn’t have strong legitimate reasons to want to keep buffer states suggests that one enjoys wrapping oneself in rainbow flags and mutilating small children in the name of a sick, corrupt and anti-human GloboHomo Rainbow Flag ideology.
Two can play at name-calling.
How about you defend your own borders from hordes of aliens instead of getting all hot and flustered about the virginal sanctity of the Dnieper or whatever the @#$% it is being ravished by the slavering Bear?
You have enough troubles at home without gratuitously making more for yourself elsewhere.
“First of all, neither NATO nor America has ever had hostility to Russia.”
Gaslighting. America’s political establishment just spent the last four years making Putin the evil mastermind responsible for fraudulently putting Donald Trump in the White House. And I can’t believe this has to be bluntly stated, but apparently it does. The point is not that anyone in the West thinks NATO is a threat to Russia.
THE POINT IS PUTIN AND COMPANY THINKS NATO IS A THREAT TO RUSSIA.
You may not agree with that belief but to behave as though they don’t think that is one of the things which has gotten us to this point.
Mike
@MBunge:
You’ve set yourself a Sisyphean Task with some of the Stuck in the Ruts here.
“THE POINT IS PUTIN AND COMPANY THINKS NATO IS A THREAT TO RUSSIA.
You may not agree with that belief but to behave as though they don’t think that is one of the things which has gotten us to this point.”
I mean just think of the multi-level multifaceted powers of reasoning required to decode and fully integrate a mental model which encompasses the above statements.
🙂
The funniest thing in the world would be to lock up all the Muh Evil Russians Morning In America Where’s My Meds brigade with the much younger and quicker evil brains behind and foot soldiers of the Euromaidan Color Revolution in the same camp and watch the latter tear the former gormless grazing cattle bloviators to pieces. ‘BBBBBBuuutttt we’re on the same side!’ *club*
Putin can think the moon is made of Z cheese and Z can think that Vlad and Xi are the future; he’s seen it after all. It seems NATO is just a pretext Vlad is using to Restore Roosia. NATO, the colossus that barely pays for it’s own maintenance, but Vlad wants no resistance.
But since Vlad is threatening to nuke the west here is something historical.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZp3LJ-WtrU
He’s younger than Z but I don’t hold it against him, Z, now that’s another thing altogether.
om,
When used as rebutal, disparaging satire is the refuge of the too clever by half crowd. So far, you’re batting a thousand.
As I recall, Putin invaded the Crimea when access to Russia’s sole warm water port of Sevastopol was threatened. Another strategic consideration that no competent military strategist standing in the place of Russia would dispute.
When have I ever disputed the Soviet’s employing propaganda?
You imply that Putin is doing so as well, which unfortunately for your argument fails to counter the fact that NATO has progressively moved in a campaign of encirclement of Russia. Calling it something else doesn’t change the strategic reality that Russia faces.
“you confuse Putin’s pretexts and propaganda with “legitimate” concerns.”
You continue to assert that NATO’s long campaign of encirclement drawing ever closer to Russia’s borders is a convenient excuse used by Putin as a pretext for invasion and a useful propagandistic device. If encroachment ever closer to Russia’s borders didn’t carry the most serious of existential national security threats for Russia that might be so. But as that encroachment can have only one purpose, i.e. to hold the potential of a nuclear Sword of Damocles at Russia’s throat… your presupposition falls on its face for any competent military strategist.
Do you dispute that the majority of citizens in the West desire peace? Then you must dispute that “the West’s leadership and the Elite want conflict because it suits their agenda and profits.”
Your faith in the West’s political and military leadership, which of course controls NATO would be admirable, if the current occupants of those positions didn’t make a mockery of your assumptions.
Remember, Klaus Schwab and his ‘associates’ in the West’s leadership want what’s best for you, apparently you believe it.
mkent,
It doesn’t matter whether NATO’s leadership has hostile intentions toward Russia. What matters is that NATO’s repeated violation of an agreement not to move eastward leaves Russia with no other option but to consider it an existential national security threat because they can’t afford to take it on faith that NATO’s intentions will always be peaceful. History repeatedly demonstrates that what has ‘always been true’ can easily change and when the very survival of a nation may be at stake “playing ones cards close to the vest” is a necessity.
Yes, the Russian character is famously paranoid and with good reason. Napoleon’s invasion can be dismissed as a distant one off, though his troops almost made it to Moscow. Hitler’s invasion almost destroyed Russia and survivors of the generation that mightily sacrificed and died in the millions, shared their stories with today’s generations. You can bet those events are thoroughly covered in Russian schools.
I assure you I’ve not been exposed to Russian propaganda in reaching my conclusions. I simply examined the strategic factors involved in NATO’s long encirclement of Russia and its continued encroachment toward Russia’s western border. That examination led to realizing that regardless of Putin’s brutality, that had to be the most major of considerations for him. His words support that.
Finally consider this, if Eastern European states joined NATO out of fear of the return of a long dead Soviet Union, why is it not reasonable for Putin’s Russia to look askance at NATO’s passive/aggressive behavior?
All of this is a perfect example of the old saw about disagreements: you’re unreasonably obstinate in your opinions, whereas I’m simply firm in my opinions.
You all might reflect upon my having agreed with you about Putin’s character and desire for territorial expansion, yet some here cannot put themselves in the other guy’s shoes for even the briefest of moments. Putin Bad! Putin baaaddd… think about it.
@Om:
You’re living in the past.
Possibly because some canny folks got inside your head and told you that Tomorrow Must *Never* Belong to You because that would make you a Very Very Bad Doggie.
Good news is that not all Chinese eat dogs today.
And *your* Government will always have a bone for the Good Doggie:
https://thepostmillennial.com/office-of-nuclear-energy-deputy-assistant-partook-in-puppy-play
Glass Half Full!
Count me as undecided.
I was talking to conservative cafe friend today, who wanted to discuss Ukraine with the presumption that Putin’s actions were understandable and legitimate.
When I demurred that I simply didn’t have enough information to assess what he was saying, he tried to explain it to me. Which seemed to be more of the same problem. I returned to my original demurral. He still wanted to explain it to me some more, but got the message I was done.
From what I can tell, there is something to be said for the various sides, but I get the sense the sides are only playing to their strengths and agendas, while ignoring their weaknesses.
And it will take some work to sort things, at least for my purposes.
Geoffrey:
Consider that Eastern European nations and the Baltics know a thing or two about living as puppets of Roosia. Funny they want no part of it no matter what Vlad thinks. They know a bit more about it than you do.
I have considered my first wake up call to you and on second thought am convinced that you are a Vlad boy now. Back to your old progressive ways.
I care not to walk in Vlad’s slippers. They are a bit bloody now. You missed that too.
Z you are the past master of slurs, so up your game.
The Department of Energy Assistant Secretary of Spent Nuclear Fuel and Nuclear Waste Disposal is his official title, which is way too long, so I just refer to him as
Trans Uranus Waste.
You seem to know a lot about the furrie or fuzzy scene, TMI.
om,
Is Glenn Greenwald a Vlad boy too? Just watched him on Tucker Carlson Tonight 2/24/24 Greenwald comes on at @13.21 into the program and reiterates the very same points I’ve been making, though from a deeper knowledge base. Tucker also has some informative points to make before Greenwald’s section. Watch it if you dare Schwab boy…;-)
@ huxley > “From what I can tell, there is something to be said for the various sides, but I get the sense the sides are only playing to their strengths and agendas, while ignoring their weaknesses.”
Count me as undecided as well, other than having a decisive desire not to instigate Armageddon over Ukraine’s sovereignty.
I followed up some links from Barry on the open thread that are applicable to this one. I don’t know the author from any past reading; he didn’t give any bias vibes in the first couple of posts, but the last one revealed him as pro-Russian, although that doesn’t necessarily make his information wrong — but Eastern Europe is not my wheelhouse.
So, for anyone interested, the links and commentary are here:
https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/02/24/open-thread-2-24-22/#comment-2609347
Neo, I was unclear about the blackmail. Hunter was getting his million a year from Burisma because Joe was his father and only for that reason. What was the quid pro quo? Was it Joe shutting down the corruption prosecution? That would require knowing the time lines of the Hunter hire and the prosecution. How would the agreement be enforced so that Hunter wouldn’t just take the money and run? Maybe they have incriminating video of Joe with small children, after all, he quite publicly puts his hands all over them. Inquiring minds want to know.
https://vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-republicans-need-to-stop-talking-about-ukraine-s-borders-start-defending-america-s
Makes sense to me.
Maybe Russia and the USA should devote more time, energy and treasure to working on their own internal problems?
“Maybe Russia and the USA should devote more time, energy and treasure to working on their own internal problems?”
That would be ideal. Golden opportunity for the USA to lead by example.
J. E. Dyer, who has a considerably larger wheelhouse than most of us here, posted three articles on the Guerre du Jour.
Or, per Google translate, the ????? ??? (Russian) or ????? ??? (Ukrainian).
(Tomato, tom-ah-to; Kyiv, Kiev – let’s call the whole thing off.)
[but WordPress doesn’t do Cyrillic, and ruined my joke]
One before, one during the kinetic action.
The other is more directly related to Biden’s speech and the press reaction, so I will put it on that thread.
https://theoptimisticconservative.wordpress.com/2022/02/21/russia-ukraine-putin-announces-his-presence-from-inside-the-ooda-loop/
Maybe Putin didn’t “have to” invade, but he certainly chose to.
https://theoptimisticconservative.wordpress.com/2022/02/24/toc-ready-room-24-feb-2022-putin-makes-his-move/
“Maybe Russia and the USA should devote more time, energy and treasure to working on their own internal problems?”
Can’t speak for Russia but no way in hell are the democrats going to allow for effectively dealing with America’s problems. The hard core leftists are intent upon destroying America and then erecting upon its ashes their Marxist State. While the liberal “useful idiots” continue to enable the left’s fashioning of the chains of their not-so-distant enslavement.
“What matters is that NATO’s repeated violation of an agreement not to move eastward leaves Russia with no other option but to consider it an existential national security threat because they can’t afford to take it on faith that NATO’s intentions will always be peaceful.”
Funny, isn’t it, that Russia is the only country in the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact that sees it that way? Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, every other country involved except Russia (and its puppet Belarus) sees NATO not only as not a threat at all, let alone an existential one, but a protector of the peace. The former East Germany, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, the states of the former Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, and Georgia are all not only not threatened by NATO but actually have joined or want to join NATO.
Switzerland and Austria, long completely surrounded by NATO, don’t see NATO as a threat. Sweden and Finland, longstanding neutral countries, not only don’t see NATO as a threat but are now discussing joining NATO.
It seems *every country in Europe* sees NATO favorably except the country that has launched wars of conquest against its neighbors in Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine and threatened the same against Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, and what’s left of Moldova (that country would be Russia). Only that country sees NATO as a threat.
It’s clear to every competent military and political analyst that NATO is not a threat at all, let alone an existential one, to a Russia that stays within its borders. It is only a threat to Russia’s imperial dreams of conquest. But it should be that. It is, right now, its primary purpose.
Yes, the Russian character is famously paranoid and with good reason. Napoleon’s invasion can be dismissed as a distant one off, though his troops almost made it to Moscow. Hitler’s invasion almost destroyed Russia and survivors of the generation that mightily sacrificed and died in the millions, shared their stories with today’s generations. You can bet those events are thoroughly covered in Russian schools.
If WWII is taught in Russian schools, and I’m sure the Great Patriotic War is, then the Russians should know that the main military force behind NATO is not the one that invaded them but the one that allied with the Soviets in defeating said invaders. In fact, it was the one that helped bomb the invaders back to the stone age.
And they should know that said nation, when it had a monopoly on nuclear weapons, a conventional military that occupied half of Europe and all of the world’s two biggest oceans, and an economy larger than the entire rest of the world combined kept no land of conquest. It asked for “only enough land to bury [its] dead.” They should also know that through NATO said nation kept the peace in Europe for 75 years.
There’s an old expression dating back to the Cold War: “The purpose of NATO is to keep the American in, the Russians out, and the Germans down.” It meant that as long as America had 350,000 troops stationed in Germany there was no way Germany was going to invade Belgium, Holland, or France. Nor would any NATO member launch an invasion to the east.
The truth of the matter is that a U.S.-led NATO that includes Ukraine is one of the greatest security guarantees Russia could have. Any possibility of Ukraine trying to settle old scores would cease. It would allow Russia to concentrate its forces on its border with an aggressive neighbor with a long history of conquest and its eyes on the resource-rich Siberia.
That is, it would recognize that if its aims were purely defensive. But the history of the last 20 years shows Russia’s aims are not defensive. They are offensive. And because they are offensive (in both senses of the term), we cannot take their claims of insecurity at face value.
They can claim insecurity all they want. It doesn’t hold water.
Zaphod wrote:
“Seriously believing that NATO isn’t a corrupt money-making military industrial complex racket in 2022 and that Russia doesn’t have strong legitimate reasons to want to keep buffer states suggests that one enjoys wrapping oneself in rainbow flags and mutilating small children in the name of a sick, corrupt and anti-human GloboHomo Rainbow Flag ideology.”
and
“Are you some kind of Nazi?”
Neo: After incoherent rage like that, let me add my voice to the chorus claiming that whatever unique insight Zaphod might have is outweighed by his constant toxicity.
As they say on twitter — just gonna drop this here.
https://babylonbee.com/news/taiwan-enjoys-free-sneak-peek-at-what-will-happen-to-them-in-six-months
NATO’s Official Twitter Account:
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/099/819/816/original/5119c87bdb6bb4d5.png
@mkent:
I’d rather be Toxic than a slavering interventionist War Monger.
YMMV.
All I have to ask myself is ‘Toxic to Whom?’ and I can sleep easy at night.
mkent, would agree with you, except it seems that Ukraine was a (proposed) “NATO member too far.”
It is a problem of perception (but not only a problem of perception—since historically aggressive nations, especially with a large dose of paranoia and a rather heavy chip on their shoulder, can never be trusted; will always present a threat); nonetheless, Ukraine and its “special” status vis-a-vis Russia, as well as its geography—it seems in retrospect—HAD to be, somehow, made a neutral state (if NOT entirely “finlandized”). This is, certainly, a realization that will not resonate with the “freedom” crowd–and justifiably so, and I would be generally sympathetic with their position—but it is a question of “realpolitik”; of being able to recognize, and work with, the reality that exists, not the “reality” that one wishes.
In fact, there may have been NO GOOD solution WRT Ukraine—but offering NATO status to that country may have been the LEAST “less bad” solution. That is, UNLESS, NATO countries were prepared, UNAMBIGUOUSLY, to go to Ukraine’s defense were the latter to be threatened.
Which they were/are clearly NOT prepared to do.
That being said, “Biden” is clearly being disingenuous here (as befits the arch-hypocrite “he” is), given “his” efforts to weaken his own country by “a thousand cuts”, “his” “pragmatic” stance towards the CCP and “his” embrace of the mullahs and their nuclear ambitions (the latter under the guise of “preventing” them from obtaining nukes).
Projecting weakness AND being hypocritical; self-destructive AND disingenuous?
One may hope that Putin has attained certain objectives and will stop there. But it is ony a hope.
Time for Taiwan (and Israel) to breathe deeply as they stare their separate but similar realities squarely in the face.
“… a clever ploy to immunize himself against future blackmail….”
I’m not at all certain that that’s how blackmail “works”.
Especially if the blackmailer has infinite patience.
Since isn’t the THREAT of blackmail dangling over someone (oh, say, someone like Joe Biden) a perennial “insurance” policy? I.e., not a “CARD” to be squandered precipitously….
(Similarly, might one wonder what Putin—or Xi for that matter—“KNOW” about the shenanigans that occurred during the 2020 elections?)
Having said all that, wouldn’t a combination of almost psychotic brazenness (IOW no limit or restraint on the lies one is willing to tell) along with the loyal support of what is essentially the STATE MEDIA—both of which “Biden” currently “enjoys”—be the ULTIMATE IMMUNIZATION (against blackmail)?
Should be ‘…a perennial “insurance” policy FOR THE BLACKMAILER?…’
I spent about an hour watching RT America (Russian Television America) last night. Truly fascinating. I can’t recommend it enough for an insight to Russia’s methodology. Also, being on the scene their field reporters have amazing images and interviews.
Also fascinating to hear their spin on America and President Biden. A lot of propaganda and outright lies, mostly by omission, but they make a case for the “Special Operation” as backed by UN procedures, protecting the people in the independent states of Lohansk and Donetsk. “For 8 years Ukraine has been launching bombs into those regions, killing innocent people and the international community has done nothing to help them, etc…”
Also, lots of assurances from President Putin that those who peacefully surrender will not be harmed. They featured footage of Russian soldiers aiding a Ukrainian soldier who had injured his leg.
Just another “Biden” clarification:
“Biden Admin Freezes New Oil And Gas Drilling Leases Despite Recent Court-Ordered Injunction”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/biden-admin-freezes-new-oil-and-gas-drilling-leases-despite-court-ruling-against-using
“would agree with you, except it seems that Ukraine was a (proposed) ‘NATO member too far.’”
Ukrainian NATO membership is a red herring. Ukraine had zero chance of joining NATO anytime soon. They are ineligible for membership and will remain so until they clear up their territorial dispute with Russia.
Barry Meislin:
That “future blackmail” remark was intended as a joke.
Zaphod:
There’s a great deal of room between “Toxic” and “slavering interventionist War Monger.”
Maybe you should consider trying to occupy it.
Zaphod:
You just love setting up those strawmen, don’t you?
As I’ve said before, I haven’t seen people here saying Putin doesn’t resent NATO and think it’s some sort of threat to him.
It’s what he’s doing about it that’s the problem.
But in addition, it’s unclear whether he really thinks NATO is that much of a threat, except in the sense that it would make it much harder for him to invade other countries that become members of it. He doesn’t think those countries have a right to be independent from Mother (Father?) Russia. In that way, NATO’s a threat to his territory-grabbing ambitions, not to Russia proper. That’s what I believe he thinks, although I’m certainly not a mind-reader and so I can’t swear that’s what he believes.
And cut out the snarky contempt for people here or you will be in moderation again.
MBunge:
I think you’ve got it reversed. Those countries you list wanted to be part of NATO so they wouldn’t be swallowed up by Russia. They are no longer part of Russia, but they know that Putin wants them to be. His anger at NATO is not because NATO is grabbing them up, it’s because NATO might stop him from grabbing them up again against their will.
Geoffrey Britain:
You seem to be claiming that Ukraine’s joining NATO was somehow imminent because NATO has been seeking it. But wasn’t it Ukraine that was seeking NATO membership, and isn’t the motive to gain protection from Russia’s expansionist claims on it? Without NATO, Ukraine can be seized by Russia (seemingly, anyway). Isn’t it NATO that has so far resisted Ukraine’s becoming a member?
Yes, the Russian character is famously paranoid and with good reason. Napoleon’s invasion can be dismissed as a distant one off, though his troops almost made it to Moscow. Hitler’s invasion almost destroyed Russia and survivors of the generation that mightily sacrificed and died in the millions, shared their stories with today’s generations. You can bet those events are thoroughly covered in Russian schools.
You mean Russia’s been invaded before, ergo anything it does is justified. The same set of excuses would apply to Japan, South Korea, Iran, the Central Asian states, Bulgaria, Roumania, Hungary, Austria, Germany, Italy, Poland, Finland, the Ukraine, White Russia, Georgia, Armenia, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, the Yugoslav states, Albania, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Norway, and Spain. Each has been invaded, occupied, despoiled at one time or another since the Napoleonic Wars. A number have been subjugated for periods measured in generations. That would include Bulgaria, Roumania, Hungary, Poland, White Russia, the Ukraine, the Baltic states, the Caucasus republics, and the Central Asian states. Guess which country was responsible for that?
She told us that was where the Kieven Rus had been, the origin of modern Russia. Don’t underestimate the chauvinism attached to Kiev and the Ukraine by the Russians. The Europeans have very long time frames that are unknown to Americans.
The 26 counties of the Irish Republic were once part of the United Kingdom and the first settlement in British North America was in Nova Scotia. Silesia, Pomerania, East Prussia, and the borderlands of Bohemia and Moravia were once German. Somehow Britain and the United States and Germany and Austria have managed to shlep along without them.
Been doing a lot of background reading about this, including religious blogs pointing out the religious aspects of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Naturally, I do not think that Putin has actually “gotten religion,” but he certainly is willing to use it for his purposes. The Russian church originated in Kyiv, and the Russian patriarchy has strongly objected to the creation, in 2019, of a Ukrainian Orthodox Church, with its own patriarch, separate from the church in Moscow, viewing this as a Western-created project antagonistic to Moscow.
What we ought to do is what we were doing when Trump was president: We should lift restrictions on our own energy production and exports so that we are not beholden to bad actors like Russia or the Middle Eastern oil producers.
Kate,
Thank you for that information on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. I had not heard any of that. Fascinating.
So the other states added after 2004 had nothing to contribute in “production statistics”? Wow, that’s some deal, NATO membership with no defense production contributions?
The other states have small economies, are located on an axis which does not approach Russia, and are descended from one country which was a working member of the Warsaw Pact for six years and another which was never a member of the Warsaw Pact. This has already been explained to you.
the Russian patriarchy has strongly objected to the creation, in 2019, of a Ukrainian Orthodox Church, with its own patriarch, separate from the church in Moscow, viewing this as a Western-created project antagonistic to Moscow.
More likely antagonistic to his pride and his revenue flow. We live in an age where it’s a challenge to be too cynical about what makes tick ecclesiastical brass.
It’s amusing to see people discuss whether Germany should close down the Nordstream pipeline when Russia is the largest source of imported oil to the US since Brandon shut down our own energy sources and domestic pipelines.
Geoffrey, Geoffrey, Geoffrey:
Just trying to pad out my response, words being power after all. Klaus Schwab being a head honcho and mighty muckey muck of the much respected World Economic Forum, and purveyor of the Great Reset, not to be confused with the Great Leap Forward, or All Your Based Are Mine, is not even remotely a “leader” that I respect or worship.
Enough Geoffrey mode.
I do not carry the water for Vlad. I do spend my waking hours obsessing about NATO’s threat to Roosia. Funny that you agree with Vlad’s spin on Crimea and with BHO’s foreign policy.
Make the Nuclear Freeze (and communism/Leninism)
Great Again! Vlad and Xi deserve it, ye minions and marionettes.
Art Deco, having some experience with church politics (not Orthodox), I agree that any church politics should be examined with jaundiced eyes. However, Orthodox believers who comment on religious blogs tend heavily in the One True Church direction, especially when disputing with Catholics, and the Russian patriarchate looks at itself as the primary archbishopric in the one true church, as opposed to the “Ecumenical” patriarch, based in Constantinople, who has theoretical authority over Orthodox (in the Greek view) but basically no churches left because of the Turkish suppression of Christianity.
Mike K,
I cannot comprehend how any adult American would view Biden’s anti-energy policies as anything but ridiculously, unnecessarily harmful to U.S. industry, U.S. consumers and U.S. national interests.
It’s as if Italy elected a Prime Minister who shut down the wine industry.
I’m not surprised Joe Biden is a bumbling, blustery buffoon. He has a 50 year history of being wrong on countless political issues. But how can so many Americans be so relaxed about something so pointless and detrimental? If Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping were making U.S. policy what would they be doing differently?
Kate @12:10pm
That’s madness! When have humans ever fought over religious differences?! 😉
Again, thank you for the insight. I was unaware of that dimension. Another example of our news media being a mile wide and an inch deep.
Rufus T. Firefly, on the energy policy, I know some True Believers whose commitment to “climate change” approaches religious intensity. They see the effects of the energy policies, but they believe this is the price we have to pay to save the planet. In addition to secular True Believers in Climate Change, many left-leaning religious groups merge their faith and Climate Change.
Interesting debate here. I had no idea this was the UN. 🙂 Many opinions strongly held.
My opinion is that, even if Putin is paranoid about NATO, an unprovoked invasion of a neighboring country should be condemned by all nations that are free or at least somewhat free. Russia should be treated like an economic pariah until they become less belligerent and threatening to world peace.
Russia is often referred to as a gas station with a government, alluding to the huge part oil and gas play in its economy. Biden’s energy policies against the fossil fuel industry have strengthened Russia economy and made its military adventurism possible. Unfortunately, Biden and his handlers will not change course because…….CO2. 🙁
Vlad reportedly has saved up about six trillion dollars to defend against economic sanctions. If so, he can last some time before sanctions begin to bite. No easy or early solution seems possible at this time. Joe says to wait thirty days for sanctions to work. Hmm. More like 300 days, I would guess.
Anyway, that’s my two cents.
J.J.
Regarding Brandon and the Junta’s energy policy I saw a story recently about Roosia signing a very large deal with the CCP for coal. But the climate! Not so much actually when you get down to it seems.
Is it part of Xi’s plan to pressure Australia, which exports a lot of coal to Asia?
http://www.coalresource.com/news/4633385/info/en
The loonies of Australia are blocking coal exports to China on environmental grounds. The climate thing is a very successful scam but it may destroy civilization along the way. Biden, with his sanctions, could stop importing Russian oil, which is our largest source of imported oil, but it would give us ten dollar gasoline. It would be an indicator of how serious his handlers are.
There is ZERO reason any of those nations should be in NATO and there is ZERO reason an ounce of American blood or a penny of American treasure should be pledged to defend them. They literally add nothing of value to the alliance other than expressly hemming in Russia.
Thanks for the ex cathedra. I’m sure the East European diplomats who negotiated their entry 25 years ago will appreciate your judiciously considered remarks.
Russia, of course, extends over 10 time zones and is adjacent to only one country which might be of military concern and that’s China. It’s about as hemmed in as Kate Smith’s rear end.
The reason they wanted to enter NATO is currently on display. From the perspective of the western powers, it’s a weight on the scale to persuade Russia to behave like a normal country. There are only a handful of countries in the world for which such weights would not be redundant. This isn’t that difficult.
…many left-leaning religious groups merge their faith and Climate Change.
Kate:
Ttrue. Some evangelical groups are getting into the act as well.
__________________________________
Take the Faithful Action Pledge
YECA was launched when 18 young evangelicals gathered together to draft and sign the Faithful Action Pledge, and signing it remains the first step to joining the movement. Will you join us?
We are young evangelicals striving to live out what Jesus said was most important: loving God fully and loving our neighbors as ourselves.
Climate change is already impacting our neighbors and God’s creation here in the United States and around the world. We believe God is calling us to faithful action and witness in the midst of the current climate crisis. Therefore, we commit ourselves to living faithfully as good stewards of creation, advocating alongside those who are poor and have been historically oppressed, supporting our faith and political leaders when they stand up for climate action, and mobilizing our generation to join
https://yecaction.org/take-action/faithful-action-pledge.html
__________________________________
Kate @ 12:35pm,
I know some people “feel” that way but anything more than a 10 second thought of the matter ought to cause one to understand that, even if one’s goal is “saving the planet,” importing oil that has to travel vast expanses in tankers that require fuel and can leak is not helping one’s cause.
A military perspective from someone who actually knows something about NATO (cough cough).
https://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/
See today’s post and yesterday’s, especially yesterday’s Geoffrey and Mike Bunge.
YECA was launched when 18 young evangelicals gathered together to draft and sign the Faithful Action Pledge, and signing it remains the first step to joining the movement. Will you join us?
Of course not. This is irrelevant to living a Christian life and a wholly gratuitous way of approaching the problem of how to address market failures like externalities. Buzz off twits.
Hello. I’m not sure whether Putin and his particular interests or obsessions or what have you are necessarily the only driver of all this. Perhaps, when one sees all the debate over what ‘Putin’ wants or ‘Putin’s’ reaction to this or that in this war, one could view it as a sort of shorthand. I am provisionally inclined to do so, in the sense that I’m not sure that Putin would be committing to military action absent some other interested parties in Russia – some kind of collection of his backers, as I assume he must have some – also wanting the same or similar things as he.
As to the attitude of the Orthodox hierarchy in Russia vis-a-vis Ukrainian vis-a-vis Greek, this aspect is mostly orthogonal to the secular political considerations between Russia, Ukraine and the U. S. There is a real spiritual aspect to the question of whether there should be an autonomous Ukrainian Orthodox Church and, if so, how it should come to be; and the fault lines in the two contexts do not clearly align, I think, certainly not in view of the respective subject matters. This is implied by the fact that while the Ecumenical Patriarchate has been one of the main actors in the ecclesiastical controversy, it plays much, much less of a role in the overlapping secular political and military disputes.
mkent, your post at 12:23 am was interesting, but I notice that you did not mention Serbia in all that long list of countries. That is an interesting data point – perhaps the Serbs are also disinclined toward NATO, which, given the fact that they were subject to the first direct NATO action ever to occur outside alliance territory that I can recall, would be no surprise. In turn, this links intriguingly to the speculation by The Optimistic Conservative yesterday about what Putin’s larger strategic goals might include, among which he/she offered the possibility that Russia might wish to eventually give Serbia a hand with retaking Kosovo.
That is an interesting data point – perhaps the Serbs are also disinclined toward NATO, which, given the fact that they were subject to the first direct NATO action ever to occur outside alliance territory that I can recall, would be no surprise. In turn, this links intriguingly to the speculation by The Optimistic Conservative yesterday about what Putin’s larger strategic goals might include, among which he/she offered the possibility that Russia might wish to eventually give Serbia a hand with retaking Kosovo.
Yeah, finance ‘retaking’ a territory where your client’s co-ethnics are all of 10% of the population and of no particular consequence in the local economy. Sounds like a plan.
Philip Sells, yes, I have seen some speculation about Serbian intentions. We’re back to the era when aggressive nations can take what they want.
We’re back to the era when aggressive nations can take what they want.
That’s the anxiety at this time, if by ‘what they want’ you mean ‘what they can get away with given countervaling force’. Russia and China are deviant in this respect; few places have these consumer preferences. Let’s see how the ambitions of the inner rings fare when actually implemented.
I suggest that the doubters of NATO’s passive/aggression view this highly informative talk by Prof. John Mearsheimer, “an American political scientist and international relations scholar, who belongs to the realist school of thought. He is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago. He has been described as the most influential realist of his generation.[3]” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer
Mearsheimer gave this lecture in 2015.
https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4
He adds additional confirmation to my conclusion. Despite his prominance in his field, I’d never heard of him until yesterday, so he did not influence my views. He freely admits that his views are decidedly in the minority and mentions how hard sharing that viewpoint is in the face of the western media’s and western government’s portrayal of Putin’s purported motivations. That so many here express an unwillingness to even consider a contrary point of view demonstrates just how effective has been that messaging.
Again, neither I nor any of the individuals I’ve cited deny Putin being a dictator, his ruthlessness nor his territorial ambitions. All we’ve suggested is that his actions are reactive to strategic considerations that any leader in his position would agree are necessary. The suggestion that the West’s leadership is driving this crisis is dismissed in a knee jerk fashion by many here and assertions made as to NATO’s peaceful intent as simply backed up by ‘common knowledge’.
“Some see, some see once shown and some do not see.” Leonardo da Vinci
“When you’re one step ahead of the crowd you’re a genius. When you’re two steps ahead of the crowd you’re a crackpot!” Rabbi Schlomo
Look up “any” in a dictionary. I doubt there are many of your “any” in Vlad’s situation.
Hurray for you, you found an authority that gives your opinion some cover. A fig leaf so to speak?
I suggest that the doubters of NATO’s passive/aggression view this highly informative talk by Prof. John Mearsheimer,
Professor Mearsheimer is an international relations specialist, which is to say a pundit who wrote a dissertation some time back. His ‘highly informative talks’ will suffer from what that department of political science suffers – an absence of means to reliably test propositions and a tendency to attempt to shoehorn the events of the day into whatever school of thought he’s been promoting all these years. (IIRC, Mearsheimer’s supposedly of the ‘realist’ school). You know what an analogue to these types is? Purveyors of psychoanalysis, ca. 1965.