Home » What the Russians left behind

Comments

What the Russians left behind — 149 Comments

  1. “…or they’re doing it on their own due to poor discipline and generalized rage.”

    Russian/Soviet troops have ALWAYS had issues with unit discipline, in victory or defeat. In WWII, the Red Army raped and pillaged their way across eastern Europe to Berlin, treating the women & property of the USSR’s allies (Yugoslavia) as poorly as they did the retreating Germans.

    The Russian Army in Ukraine seems to be failing in every other measure of unit cohesion & discipline, why not this one? You get a bunch of young heavily-armed hooligans, who are pissed-off, likely drunk, scared to death, and feeling abandoned & betrayed by their leadership, and, yes, they will take it out on anything & everything that moves.

    My worry is that atrocities like this will move the Ukrainians to reciprocate & it’ll become a war of extermination like the Germans/Soviets, where 9 out of 10 prisoners died in captivity.

  2. @Xenasolo, a Ukrainian TikToker told her pro Russian grandmother (this was a general conversation – not about this incident) that people will lose respect for Russians. Her grandmother replied something like “It doesn’t matter if they respect us as long as they fear us.”

  3. Assume we CAN trust the BBC…

    To do what ? Show us exactly the propaganda video that Ukraine provided for them ? I don’t know what that video does or doesn’t show, frankly.

    All I know for sure is that it shows what the Ukrainians want it to show. I’m well aware of what they want me to see and think. That doesn’t really make it true, though, does it ?

  4. “It doesn’t matter if they respect us as long as they fear us.”

    That sentiment in a slightly different form goes back to Caligula in the first century: Oderint dum metuant, or “Let them hate [me] so long as they fear [me].”

  5. deadrody:

    So, do you think it’s an enormous and elaborate movie set and that the destruction is staged? That the bodies are fake? Or that the Ukrainians killed their own people and bombed their own cities in order to deceive us? Do you think the BBC reporters who are there – including one who’s been reporting on wars for a long, long time – are so very easily duped, or are purposely deceiving us? Do you think they shouldn’t have Ukrainian guides?

    I haven’t seen any indication that the Russians didn’t bombard cities and kill civilians. They also have done it previously in Chechnya and in Syria. Or do you think that was fake too?

    I’m a skeptical person, but at a certain point one has to make a decision on a video by video basis. This one seems real to me.

  6. I’ve long since stopped caring or trusting the BBC as a whole, with precious few exceptions. Couple that with the obvious bias and issues with reporting in general in this war and that makes it worse. I might see, but on the whole the MSM has been generally behind the curve in reports on this war.

  7. I’m sure many Ukrainians are occasionally lying, and exaggerating Russian crimes.

    I’m more sure more Russians have committed more killing civilian crimes – including many civilian Russians inside of Russia.

    It’s good to remind folk about how brutal and full of war crimes Stalin’s WW II Red army was — all of their crimes, like at Katyn (murdering thousands of Polish officers), were done by “the USA and Allies”. Each side always demonizes the other. And usually are being fairly honest about how terrible that other side is.

    Russia TV (RTV) had that quality of mocking both Republicans and Democrats, when I sometimes watched – less unfair than the BBC. Putin, like Hitler and US ally Stalin, deserves demonization. But we shouldn’t lionize corrupt Ukraine, despite the bravery and intelligence of their resistance.

    Strange New World (dis-) Order.
    [not just wrestling]

  8. The situation is not helped when the Ukrainian government is handing out Assault rifles to civilians and encouraging them to make improvised antitank weapon (Molotov Cocktails). Unless they are issuing uniforms along with the guns they are making legitimate targets of their own civilians. If these civilians are captured unless they are uniformed, the Geneva Conventions offers them no protection, they are subject to summary execution. If these civilians fire on the Russians from their homes, do you think the Russians will show restraint in their response.
    The sad part is add this situation to the fact that Russians DO have and reputation for being brutal. And the Ukrainian civilians receiving these weapons have made videos making clear they will fight. Russian soldiers may be making engagement decisions based on this narrative and simply treat any civilian as a potential guerilla.
    The whole situation is sad, but it isn’t made any better with the fact the Ukrainians aren’t saints. I’ve seen videos on social media showing Russian tanks hit by Molotov Cocktails. These are not weapons used by regular army. Russian soldiers have smartphones and can see these videos. It might be a thing which might cause a “when in doubt kill it and let God sort it out.”
    Truth be told Putin stated quite plainly if the Ukraine moved closer to the West, he would take action to address the issue. Add to this Western nations (including the United States interjected themselves into Ukrainian politics and elections. And the Ukrainian President pushed ahead knowing that the path he was taking was going to result in war. You can say all you want about Zelensky, but a man of peace he’s not.

  9. Loren Gartee:

    I don’t see that the Ukrainians had any alternative to arming themselves. They knew what the Russians were capable of. The Russians bombarded cities with civilians in them. I doubt that was because some of the civilians might have been armed. People who are attacked have a right to defend themselves – otherwise they are sitting ducks.

    The Russians invaded Ukraine. This fact is not in dispute. And the justification for this is that Ukraine wasn’t doing what Russia told it to do? That the country had the audacity to make its own decisions about alliances? And that it didn’t want to ally with good old Russia – how dare it!

    It’s not as though Europe is attacking Russia. And now Russia is threatening Sweden and Finland, who are supposed to do what Russia wants as well.

  10. YoungHegelian…
    Not too too many years ago I knew an old old Polish gentleman who had been “conscripted” into the German Army in the early stages of WWII & seen some serious action.

    After he was “un-conscripted” post-war he immigrated and had nothing but the blazing-hate-of-1000-suns for the Communists as he saw them in the Russian army. He used the old “at least Hitler kept the ruffians in check” justification…but for the Russians, there was no justification. “They didn’t even leave one nut attached to one bolt when they came & went.”

    I also knew a former nurse from the German army…she would spit on the floor if she heard the word “Russia.” I always suspected she saw firsthand what you described. Same with an old Estonian I used to visit…but she was a tad more ready to simply forget…not the same as forgive…but she didn’t want to talk about it. It was past & she was no longer in it.

    Russian army has never been filled with the finest of humanity…from what I hear.

  11. “The situation is not helped when the Ukrainian government is handing out Assault rifles to civilians and encouraging them to make improvised antitank weapons.”
    Isn’t every resistance movement civilian in nature? In WW2, every conquered nation had a resistance movement. What are civilians supposed to do when their country is attacked – sit by and wait for their outnumbered military to defend them?

  12. The experience of two World Wars should have taught us not to dismiss atrocity stories out of hand.

  13. It is unfortunate that serving as a money laundering slush fund piggy bank for corrupt Western interests, and allowing a significant force of full blown Nazis to operate on their soil has come with consequences, some of which are landing on innocent civilians.

    Prosecuting and imprisoning corrupt Americans involved with Ukraine is the most we can effectively do to help them. The billions appropriated so far will only fortify the corruption – similar to how fake and illegitimate ballots fortified the 2020 presidential election.

  14. Banned Lizard:

    Are you saying that the Russians invaded and are killing civilians because of Ukrainian corruption and a few neo-Nazis? I certainly don’t think those are the reasons. Or are you saying that the Ukrainian reports aren’t trusted because of those things? Not sure what point you’re trying to make there.

  15. Banned Lizard: Are you saying

    That’s exactly what he’s saying. Sell him a bridge.

  16. I think passed on here a video of supposed Ukrainians shooting Russin POWs, certainly any war crime will get a retaliation then back again.
    But in general poor discipline and alcohol will be enough to start the chain.

  17. I know the 2000s were a long time ago, but there was plenty of footage of dead civilians in Iraq which were described as evidence of American war crimes, sometimes even by the BBC, which was not exactly pro-Iraq War if we will all recall. I’m sure the dead civilians we’re seeing in this video are as authentic as those were. I know that America is always the good guys–but the BBC and other foreign outlets don’t always think so, and they made videos like this about us. I’m aware of all the legitimate and excellent reasons we had for invading and occupying Iraq, and that none of those reasons apply or can excuse or justify Putin invading Ukraine.

    I don’t think there’s any war in which civilians don’t die, or in which soldiers are not sometimes brutal to civilians.* In America’s wars, I’m pretty sure everyone here understands that just because some Americans killed or were otherwise brutal to civilians, didn’t mean that was what America intended to have happen or was the result of systematically bad discipline.

    If Putin really does have some kind of policy of frightfulness to civilians, which could very well be true, that’s probably not something we’re going to be able to determine now. It’s going to come out later when they find tens or hundreds of thousands of dead civilians, and things like mass graves; for example in the battle of Grozny there were 5 – 10 thousand dead civilians and mass graves were discovered.

    The truth is not going to come out right now.

    *My link goes to an article about thousands of rapes committed by American servicemen in France in WWII. 904 American servicemen were tried. The US military was not nearly as bad as most, but nonetheless it happened, and it wasn’t just a handful of times.

  18. I think that Banned Lizard is saying that there are better ways to help the Ukrainians: “Prosecuting and imprisoning corrupt Americans involved with Ukraine is the most we can effectively do to help them.”

  19. Frederick points out correctly that civilian deaths happen in wars.

    Eva Marie, as corrupt Americans involved with Ukraine include our current president and his son, it seems unlikely that we will prosecute and imprison them, unfortunately.

  20. Loren Garter is troubled that the Ukrainians are resisting and that the Russians w
    may act with indiscriminate violence against non-combattents. You seem to imply that the Russians don’t have the gift of restraint?

    Molotov cocktails aren’t the weapon of choice in modern armies, because there are more effective weapons to blow up or brew up modern AFVs. Brew up, aka, to cause an internal ammunition fire and then a catastrophic internal explosion, generally leaving no survivors. But if you want to cause an AFV to button up and become an easier ambush victim, well game on, especially if your back is up against it. War is like that.

    The Germans used that civilians shoting at our army excuse for atrocity cover in Belgium in WWI. They just didn’t care, nor does Vlad’s army IMO.

  21. These civilian deaths don’t seem like collateral damage, because it seems like one of the basic Russian techniques of this war is to fire on dwellings rather than strategic targets. Russian fire seems particularly “dumb”, and that is an old story with the Russians.

    It’s a matter of proportion.

  22. For all the Russian apologist, Remember, Russia is literally being run by a former KGB official who laments the collapse of the Soviet Union. The same Soviet Union that starved the Ukrainians by the millions when they took away their crops. The same Soviet Union that sent millions of it’s own people to death camps . The same Soviet Union that many of the former US military members trained to fight. ( I got in after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but we still had some of the Soviet era , American Army training literature around in my Guard unit. Come to think of it, we still had the WW2 era “ grease gun” machine guns, along with our more modern M16s. Though there may have been Regular Army units still issuing the “ grease guns” to certain track mounted troops. LOL. )

  23. If communist China started building military bases in communist Cuba would the US have any basis for objection?

    If so, then does not Russia share exactly the same objection to its border with Ukraine becoming a potential launch point for NATO?

  24. Geoffrey Britain:

    Save all of us some trouble and re-familiarize yourself with the last time you asked that sort of thing and a ton of people – including me – pointed out the differences to you.

  25. Neo, firing at dwellings is what is alleged in that Reuters report I just posted. This doesn’t sound like civilian deaths in the heat of military conflict.

  26. Kate:

    Yes, that’s what I mean when I say it doesn’t seem like collateral damage.

  27. Civilians who resist must wear a distinctive symbol and be part of a military unit with a chain of command. Otherwise they are Francs-tireurs. For example when the Swiss armed civilians in May 1940, they issued an arm band and swore them into the militia. This entitled them to treatment as a POW.

    From Wikipedia:

    “After World War II, during the Hostages Trial,[11] the seventh of the Nuremberg Trials, the tribunal found that, on the question of partisans, according to the then-current laws of war, the partisan fighters in southeast Europe could not be considered lawful belligerents under Article 1 of the Hague Convention.[12] In relation to Wilhelm List, the tribunal stated:

    We are obliged to hold that such guerrillas were francs tireurs who, upon capture, could be subjected to the death penalty. Consequently, no criminal responsibility attaches to the defendant List because of the execution of captured partisans..”

  28. Are you saying that the Russians invaded and are killing civilians because of Ukrainian corruption and a few neo-Nazis?

    As a secondary effect, I say yes. The Americans like Biden and Romney, plus of course, Obama used Ukraine as an ATM for years and conducted a coup in 2014 to keep the money flowing. Russians are Russians. We know what they did in WWII. A German friend of mine was a child in Germany when his mother was able to visit his POW father in a Russian camp. She went back the next day (The war was over) only to be told he had died of “pneumonia.” She got her children out somehow and they settled in Minnesota. Her son, my friend, was the most famous Marine fighter pilot of the Vietnam War.

  29. neo,

    I well remember your response. The Soviets placed nuclear ICBMs in Cuba, which is what led to our response.

    I said nothing about China doing so, I only suggested the scenario of their building military bases. Upon what basis would you object now?

  30. Chases Eagles:

    We are not talking about partisans. We are talking about civilians defending their homes, and/or civilians fleeing in cars because their cities and dwellings are being shelled. I find it astounding that you or anyone else would believe that civilians fleeing in cars should be shot because there are some paramilitary partisans somewhere in the country.

  31. Mike K:

    Are you aware of the extent of the corruption in Russia? Do you really think they give a rat’s ass about Ukrainian corruption?

  32. The “we know what they were like in WWII” argument could be applied to Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, and would be rejected by commenters here; even those commenters who are aware that American soldiers sometimes committed war crimes in WWII.

    Let’s not forget how long ago WWII was: 80 years ago this month the British were retreating from Burma. Are the Japanese just the same? Are the British just the same? Are we?

    A Russian born in April 1942 might have had a father in the fighting–that baby grew old and died in the meantime, and his grandchildren or great-grand-children might be in the fighting today. A lot has happened. The Russian kids who are conscripted today don’t even have memories of the Soviet Union, much less Stalingrad.

    How much of what we do today is done in the same kind of way our great-grandfathers did it? My great-grandfathers were plowing with mules.

  33. @Geoffrey Britain

    If communist China started building military bases in communist Cuba would the US have any basis for objection?

    Yes, not that that’s stopped them given the amount of Chinese support that has gone in to training the Castros’ military, especially since the end of the Soviet Union.

    And in any case that’s absolutely NOT comparable. The only foreign military that HAD military bases on Ukraine was Russia as per the Crimean Naval Base leases. Leases that the Russian military violated in the Crimeaschluss.

    And no, hypothetical discussions and offers of Ukrainian entry into NATO in several years time IS NOT comparable, and IS NOT a legal justification.

    If so, then does not Russia share exactly the same objection to its border with Ukraine becoming a potential launch point for NATO?

    Again: stop the sleight of hand.

    You are conflating objections to something ACTIVELY HAPPENING (ie “started building military bases”) with something that MIGHT ARGUABLY HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE (ie “its border with Ukraine becoming a potential launch point for NATO…YEARS IN THE FUTURE had it gone through the usual NATO rigamarole of joining. Which it cannot since the invasion.”)

    Moreover, I note at no point in this discussion do you ever address the elephant in the room. Whether or not the Ukrainians have a right to object to the Russian military violating their sovereign rights or staging attacks to dismember their country (including perfidiously violating agreements with Ukraine like the Crimean lease deal).

    In any case, there’s no question about the nature of the Cuban regime. It is a thoroughly illegitimate totalitarian dictatorship that answers to nobody domestically except its regime and is self-avowedly a single party government. Even the most hardline anti-Kyiv commentor has to struggle for that.

    And in any case, the US has grudgingly tolerated Castro Cuba and Chavista Venezuela and now Sandinista Nicaragua doing a lot of nonsense for a very long time, and is doing even less to oppose them since the end of the Soviet Empire.

    I well remember your response. The Soviets placed nuclear ICBMs in Cuba, which is what led to our response.

    Now please observe that our response did not involve demanding the Castro regime be removed. It did not even involve the demand that all nuclear weapons be removed (only those land-based strategic missiles capable of hitting the US). It did not involve a demand that Cuba be “neutralized” or “demilitarized.”

    Though frankly the US had infinitely more grounds to do so than even you can argue Putin does Re: Ukraine, since unlike the Ukrainian governments the Castros tried to start a nuclear World War III behind the backs of everyone.

    Indeed, the US made a number of covert assurances to the Soviets that it would impair attempts to filibuster the Castros out of power and intercept them using USN and RN ships.

    And I’m supposed to believe that we have to put up with whatever Castro is doing now, but Putin cannot be asked to abide by the terms of Helsinki and Astana that his government signed in to agreement in order to tolerate the POSSIBILITY that in a few years time, Ukraine might START the process of entering into NATO, without Putin going chimp and starting yet another violent invasion?

    Yeah. Forget it.

    I said nothing about China doing so, I only suggested the scenario of their building military bases. Upon what basis would you object now?

    See above. Stop comparing apples to oranges.

  34. Geoffrey Britain:

    Your analogy is just as poor this time and the argument against it is very similar.

    If you don’t see the difference between what you posit – a far far-off China building military bases in Cuba, a country that is nowhere near it and essentially has no connection to it either geographic or historical, and NATO bases in eastern European countries, then you are really stretching things beyond what I consider rationality. The bases in Europe are in connection with an alliance of mostly European countries (allied with us during WWII, after which NATO was formed) who have been building bases in sovereign European nations that are also part of NATO – the eastern section of which are nations which for about half a century were subjugated by force and against their will to the Soviets (tyrannical Soviets, at that) and live in fear of Russian invasion by a Putin who has made no secret of his desire to re-acquire them by force.

  35. @Mike K

    As a secondary effect, I say yes.

    No, not really. The reasons Putin invaded had relatively little to do with Western corruption (though I can believe that’s a major reason why Western leadership like Biden and Romney have been so vewy vewy concerned about Ukraine even in comparison to myself).

    The Americans like Biden and Romney, plus of course, Obama used Ukraine as an ATM for years

    This is true.

    and conducted a coup in 2014 to keep the money flowing.

    This is inaccurate on multiple levels.

    A: On what grounds is a duly-elected (at least by the standards of siloviki-ridden Eastern Europe) Parliament exercising its constitutional power to demand the Executive answer its questions and then exercising its power to remove him from office after he flees the country, a “coup?” This would mean that somehow Soros, Romney, Nuland, etc. al. were able to subvert essentially the entire Ukrainian legislature that until weeks before the end the Kremlin was praising.

    B: The money continued flowing and assorted Western globalists continued using Ukraine as an ATM throughout the rules of both “pro-Russian Blue” and “Pro-Western Orange” leaders. Indeed, I pointed this sort of incestuous connection between the ostensibly warring sides back in my very first post.

    For instance, we have dubious US-Ukrainian agreements about the use of Biolabs in Ukraine going back to 2005 under “Orangist” politician Yuschenko… but this agreement would’ve been known to “Blue”/Pro-Russian Yanukovych when he swept back into power in 2010. Likewise a lot of other financial agreements.

    That doesn’t mean that the likes of Soros, Romney, etc. al. ever stopped fighting their influence game or dirty political financing in Ukraine or opposing Yanukovych on some levels. But sort of like the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian Military, there is politics and then there’s business, and particularly in Ukraine prior to the invasion there was a tacit understanding to not let politics get in the way of business.

    And even after the invasion of 2014 these ties only waned there.

    I’d be very surprised if finances and dirty money didn’t play some role behind the likes of Soros, Biden, etc. al. supporting the opposition to Yanukovych, but that was not the main story. Especially since prior to the outbreak of Euromaidan most Western pressure was on trying to convince Yanukovych to go through with the EU Association Deal (something he campaigned on and that his Russophone, pro-Russian “Blue” base in places like the Donbas had a modicum of support for due to the hopes it would help their rust belt economics.

    C: Azov Battalion and most other Ukrainian nutjobs are Neo-Fascists, not Neo-Nazis; basically they’re the same kind of $hit you’d expect but they’ve never forgiven Daddy Hitler and co for trying to turn their country (back) into a colonial plantation and basically venerate their own pantheon of homegrown nutjobs while clashing with both Neo-Nazis and Russian Fascists.

    Russians are Russians. We know what they did in WWII. A German friend of mine was a child in Germany when his mother was able to visit his POW father in a Russian camp. She went back the next day (The war was over) only to be told he had died of “pneumonia.” She got her children out somehow and they settled in Minnesota. Her son, my friend, was the most famous Marine fighter pilot of the Vietnam War.

    At least she and he survived, and my compliments. I was lucky enough to have known many veterans in my time, including my Grandfather, a WWII veteran who fought through the Pacific And for whatever our differences this is why I do think the home front is more important.

    America First.

  36. We are not talking about partisans. We are talking about civilians defending their homes, and/or civilians fleeing in cars because their cities and dwellings are being shelled.

    With respect Neo, a civilian taking up arms to defend their home is almost always regarded as a partisan under the laws of war barring some very chance differences (like if they are retaliating against- say- some garrisoned soldier trying to rape them/their wife, steal their goods, or kill them and then immediately cease offering resistance/put down their weapons after the immediate threat is dealt with).

    And even those exceptions are fraught with risk because if you’re a Russian contract soldier and you hear some gunshot and find a civilian has splattered Sarge Major Vladimir’s brains across the wall, do you REALLY want to take the chance of waiting those extra split seconds and seeing if they’ll not shoot you?

    Which is why while it does gladden my heart to see the weapons offloading, there is a valid issue in making sure they are properly uniformed or designated in some ways to benefit from the laws of war, OR are prepared to suffer the consequences.

    None of this is meant to justify or lighten the crimes and follies of Putin’s regime or its military, but I’d be remiss if I did not at least pay attention to the other side of the coin.

  37. During WWII Japanese troops were especially brutal when invading an Asian country (Rape of Nanjing comes to mind); one of the reasons speculated is that the Japanese soldier was told that he was “liberating” Asia – the “Asia for Asians” mantra that the Japanese claimed as their reason for WWII.

    Imagine then the surprise the Japanese soldier felt when the locals were NOT supportive of being “liberated”!? This is one reason, that many historians speculate for the Japanese soldiers’ brutality. (among other reasons as well) The soldiers’ mindset became one of “we are dying to liberate you and you hate US?”

    It makes me wonder if it is also part of the reason for the Russians’ brutality. It could be they are told to target civilians. But, it could also be that they, being undisciplined and poorly trained, are told by their superiors that they are the liberators of Ukraine, and like the Japanese soldier of WWII, finding that their work to liberate the locals is not welcomed at all. And it has sent them into a rage at the locals who are not appreciating the Russian soldiers’ “sacrifice.”

    As for those who have stated Ukrainians have obligation to identify themselves as “military” instead of civilians I can only say – since when did that make difference to Russians/Soviets?

    Read the book “A Woman in Berlin” to see how German civilians – who were NOT fighting – fared under the Russian soldier. One passage that stayed in my mind is that the author said it became a common saying “Where were you when Ivan got you?” Meaning, where were you when you were raped by Russian soldiers. Note that she didn’t ask were you raped – but, the assumption is that the women were raped. Rape, at the hands of Russian soldiers was that common in Russian-occupied Berlin.

    In more recent history – look up the history of Korea Airlines Flight 007. A flight route that I had been on a few times travelling between NY and East Asia – which made its destruction somewhat personal to me. The Russian/Soviets shot down a commercial passenger plane because it mistakenly flew into Russian airspace. They assumed it was a spy plane was their claim after initially denying that they shot it down at all.

    So, no, I do not believe that Ukrainian civilians some how or other identifying themselves as “fighters” would spare them from death upon capture and cause the Russians to treat them fairly as POWs. I mean, if it were me; given Russian history and that they are targeting MY city the last thing on my mind would be “oh, let me wear an armband or something to show that I deserve to be treated as a proper POW if captured.” No, I would be hellbent on destroying the invader and saving my family, friends and neighbors. My only reason for wearing something to identify myself as a Ukrainian fighter would be to avoid friendly fire.

  38. @Frederick Well said. Also RE American War Crimes, the sad irony is that in many ways we’ve gotten much better. Back in the bad old colonial days the neigh-universal strategy was “Find the enemy’s towns/camps. Burn them down, kill or enslave EVERYONE- men, women, children-, and then leave so the remainder starve or freeze during the winter.”

    And this was done by basically everybody, “Europeans”, “Natives”, etc. Indeed, what a lot of people forget is that when the Iroquois named George Washington “Burner of Towns” it was meant as a COMPLIMENT or Honorific, one of the greatest of praises to be given to either a member of the Confederation or one of their enemies or allies.

    We’ve cooled down a lot since then but never forget the Mark of Cain is within us all.

  39. I have no doubt that reporters would ask to see the worse parts of the war they can safely access and that Ukrainian officials would be happy to show them what they came to see. I also don’t doubt that a bitter war would have atrocities committed by both sides. Scale may be different, but they’ll still happen. Sometimes by orders and sometimes because of lack of discipline. With citizens fighting back even with small arms, because they want to protect their homes; I’d expect Russian troops to fire back. Such is war.

  40. Fredrick shortened:

    All that history stuff happened so long ago, it has nothing of value, my cohort is so much wiser.

    (exaggeration alert, umbrage to follow).

  41. In this thread, we went from whether Russia has committed war crimes (300 dead, mass grave, in one town, sounds like “yes”) to once again having someone maintain that Russia had a right and valid reason for invading Ukraine. Ukraine did not invade Russia, or threaten to do so. NATO did not invade Russia, or threaten to do so.

  42. @Banned Lizard

    It is unfortunate that serving as a money laundering slush fund piggy bank for corrupt Western interests, and allowing a significant force of full blown Nazis to operate on their soil has come with consequences, some of which are landing on innocent civilians.

    Dear God, what victim-blaming.

    Let’s go through this.

    A: Money-laundering slush fund piggy bank for Corrupt Western Interests? Check. This is true. Though while we’re at it let’s talk about its use as such by corrupt Non-Western interests, chief of which being Russia but also extending to Iran, China, and the Saudis.

    B: “Allowing a significant force of full-blown Nazis to operate on their soil.”

    Firstly: For the Umpteenth Kerjillion Time, the likes of Azov Battalion are scum but they are Neo-Fascists, not Nazis. Indeed they are actually quite opposed to Neo-Nazis, less due to any great moral qualms than because back in 1941 Hitler used them and then betrayed them as part of his goal to turn Ukraine into a slave plantaiton.

    They’re still bad, but let’s at least get the terms right.

    Now if you want to actually talk about “significant forces of full-blown Nazis” operating on soil, let’s talk about the Russian Kremlin’s pet PMC, the Wagner Group.

    https://informnapalm.org/en/russian-neo-nazis-in-the-ranks-of-wagner-pmc/

    https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/decoding-wagner-group-analyzing-role-private-military-security-contractors-russian-proxy-warfare/tracing-wagners-roots/

    Now, I don’t know about the sources per se, but I think things like the lightning bolts tattoos and swastika ones speak for themselves.

    Moreover, do I have to remind anybody that as long as they behave by the law, Nazi and Neo-Fascist groups have every constitutional and natural right to air their nonsense as we do?!? If you don’t understand the VERY VERY Slippery Slope that comes from assuming there is something WRONG with allowing Neo-Nazis or Neo-Fascists to operate on one’s soil- regardless of how lawful or unlawful their conduct is- please familiarize yourself with “Social Fascism” and “Salami Tactics” and get back to me.

    But at the core of this problem is simple. Vladimir Putin did not invade Ukraine for any of these reasons whatsoever. Indeed, he was deeply involved in using Ukraine as an nexus point for corrupt financial dealings.

    He invaded because he could not stomach some degree of legislative independence upending his vassal from the Presidency, and so decided to set the country on fire back in 2014 to make sure that if he couldn’t have it nobody could.

    Prosecuting and imprisoning corrupt Americans involved with Ukraine is the most we can effectively do to help them. The billions appropriated so far will only fortify the corruption – similar to how fake and illegitimate ballots fortified the 2020 presidential election.

    This is simple nonsense, as even a cursory look at the number of destroyed Russian vehicles (CONFIRAMBLY destroyed ones that is) shows, largely at the behest of lend-lease.

    The simple fact is, a nation in a major war being invaded usually has way more pressing concerns than hammering out corruption. That’s sad, but it’s also unsurprising. That doesn’t mean arresting corrupt Americans isn’t a good thing for both the Ukrainians and us, but I have studied enough about the Chinese Land War in WWII and the staggering corruption involved in it. But also the very real good it did.

    People can wax poetic about how it went to waste, was misused, or financed abuses by the KMT (all of which is true, though examination of the documents shows that the Stillwell/Tuchman school of Chinese KMT Historiography seriously overstated it), but killing invading troops is important.

    Now, where we diverse is that while sending weapons and aid to Ukraine is the more important benefit we can provide from Ukraine’s POV, imprisoning the corrupt and authoritarian oligarchs in our midst is the best we can do from OUR POV. Since I am not a Ukrainian but an American, I prefer the latter, even if I have little faith it will actually be done.

    But let’s not pretend that the Ukrainians fighting outside Kyiv are focused on-say- shoving Biden and co in a Supermax. Let’s at least justify it on the accurate grounds of what it does for Us.

  43. @Frederick

    The “we know what they were like in WWII” argument could be applied to Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, and would be rejected by commenters here; even those commenters who are aware that American soldiers sometimes committed war crimes in WWII.

    Let’s not forget how long ago WWII was: 80 years ago this month the British were retreating from Burma. Are the Japanese just the same? Are the British just the same? Are we?

    A big issue I think is that Japan was pretty heavily put through the wringer after WWII, to the point where its military was not only uprooted and disbanded, but its legal right to have one and wage war was suspended in one of the few times that has happened here. Now there’s plenty of reasons to complaint about how half-hearted or incomplete Denazification, De-Fascization, etc. was, but it was still heads and shoulders over what happened in WWI.

    And even that is more than what happened in Russia.

    For all intents and purposes, the political and especially bureaucratic and military leadership and lineage that took the Soviet regime through WWII has remained rather intact, and is even glorified by their current day successors, of whom Putin the former-mid-rank-Chekist is just the most famous. Which means that in contrast to the self-perpetuating reform and second guessing we in the US do and the forced re-assessment and reform the defeated went through, the Russian State and especially “Deep State” and traditions remain horrifyingly similar to what they were.

    And to anybody who thinks that the Russian government of today is NOT a successor of the USSR’s and is not protective of the USSR’s legacy at least to some degree, look at the aggressive persecution of anybody and everybody who dates to point out the objective truth that the Soviet Union played a role in starting WWII alongside Nazi Germany. As well as the continued use of its rhetoric such as the “Great Patriotic War.”

    I’d like to round this off by an excerpt of an excerpt, from the superb SMERSH: Stalin’s Secret Weapon by Vadim Birstein, making reference to some Red Army Veterans:

    Many war veterans felt that the osobisty would survive because they were in the barrage detachments placed behind the fighting troops, and would end up creating myths about the war. For instance, a former private described the feeling of the servicemen on the front line: ‘We [soldiers], dressed in cold greatcoats, will perish at the front line, while osobisty in sheepskin coats behind our backs and armed with heavy machine guns, will survive. And later they will tell stories about how they defeated Hitler.’24 This is exactly what happened.

    Much has changed, but sadly not as much as we would like.

  44. Kate,

    “to once again having someone maintain that Russia had a right and valid reason for invading Ukraine.”

    I have never said that “Russia had a right and valid reason for invading Ukraine.” It is a mistake to imagine that I have even implied that “Russia had a right and valid reason for invading Ukraine.”

    What I have consistently maintained is that, from a strategic military rationale, Russia’s reason for invading the Ukraine is understandable.

    And that Russia, after decades of trying to get the West’s political leadership to finally take seriously how unacceptable the prospect of the Ukraine joining NATO is for Russia and in their view, watching a steady progress toward that eventuality, Putin faced a choice of effectively capitulating to the West or going to war to prevent it. Because regardless of whatever delusionary justifications Putin may proclaim, NATO on his border presents a potential strategic threat that no competent military strategist would dismiss.

    That many here entirely dismiss that POV only reveals how their biases prevent them from placing themselves in Putin’s shoes for even a moment.

    I assure you that I have deeply considered the arguments those who disagree with me have advanced. Given the vehemence with which I’ve been pilloried*, I rather doubt if the reverse is true.

    *that’s an observation not a complaint.

    I get it. Schwab, Biden, Trudeau, Macron, etc. are well intentioned and the West’s political leadership have no plans for global dominance in a Unipolar New World Order and haven’t long been working toward that end with the Ukraine a focus since at least 2014. Right.

  45. Geoffrey Britain:

    Those who disagree with you on this “reveals how their biases prevent them from placing themselves in Putin’s shoes for even a moment”? For the umpteenth time, people have no problem doing that. And they think it’s only a subsidiary reason of his for doing what he’s doing, plus it’s an irrational one under the circumstances. He has much bigger fish to fry, and he has made those other intentions and thoughts perfectly clear for years, plus he has done so by deeds in other countries (Georgia, etc.).

    In addition, you seem to think this is an either/or choice. It is not, “either see Putin’s point of view like me or regard Biden and Schwab and Trudeau as good guys with good intentions, and think their plans for the Great Reset are non-existent.”

    That’s an absurd forced-choice.

  46. If only we could walk in Charlie Manson’s shoes ….

    Your arguments are understood quite thoroughly. Your problem seems to rejection.

    Why you continue to grasp at straws to support your premise is, a puzzle at best.

  47. It would be a lot easier to believe “we’re right and the Russians are wrong” if the Biden family and our own State Department had not been stirring the witches’ brew in Ukraine for the past decade or longer. Alas, they have been, and that sure muddies the clarity of our position.

    If you have not seen it, I recommend a long You Tube video by Gonzalo Lira, a Chilean-American, who recounts the history of Victoria Nuland and the Bidens in Ukraine. It is not a pretty story.

    Whenever I am in a discussion with someone, particularly one where we disagree fundamentally, I try very hard to understand the other party’s perspective. I am trying very hard to understand where Vladimir Putin is coming from in this dispute. I believe it is fair to say he and many of the people around him distrust the USA. Talk of Ukraine joining NATO would only heighten that distrust. And having Nuland give his Foreign Secretary an ultimatum on Ukraine (as Lira claims) could only exacerbate the situation.

    This is not to excuse Russia’s invasion, it is to try to understand what prompted it. Lira claims it was the threat by Ukraine to take back Crimea and the Donbas. That might seem reasonable to us — they were originally part of Ukraine — but it takes away Russia’s access to Sevastopol and the Black Sea. Again, no justification for Putin’s invasion, but a little insight into it.

  48. If you play this video side by side with video of what the US left in Fallujah which foreign media described as brutal and war crimes, are you going to be able to objectively say which was worse or better solely from what you see in the videos?

    I don’t believe the US had a policy of deliberately killing civilians in Fallujah but we did kill some and we did destroy an awful lot of that city. For our perfectly laudable, justified, and humane reasons totally different from Putin’s evil, bad and invalid reasons.

    I just don’t think you can tell from looking at a video presentation. I think the people who put this together are trying to create an impression using emotion, and it may turn out to be true, but that truth will not be known for a long time yet.

    And it’s not wrong or pro-Putin to point that out despite what the Tailgunner Trolls say.

  49. Leland:

    You write:

    I also don’t doubt that a bitter war would have atrocities committed by both sides. Scale may be different, but they’ll still happen. Sometimes by orders and sometimes because of lack of discipline. With citizens fighting back even with small arms, because they want to protect their homes; I’d expect Russian troops to fire back. Such is war.

    Scale is important. A few rogue actors versus an official modus operandi, and everything in between. It matters greatly what the scale is and what the details are.

    Also, the allegations in the video are not about Russian soldiers shooting citizens who are fighting back. They about Russian soldiers shooting fleeing citizens who are either unarmed or who have their hands up (in the drone video).

    Lastly, one more big difference which seems to get lost here is that every Russian in Ukraine is there because Russia invaded the country and none of those Russians are civilians. Therefore no Ukrainians are killing Russian civilians.

  50. Frederick is entirely predictable in Falluja.

    IIRC the media were all over that war as imbeds, as hostile actors, as neutral observers, putting up any and all footage that painted the US as war criminals. There were also JAGS ready and willing to hang troops for violating ROEs. And of course the hostility of the Democrats in Congress.

    Just like Vlad and his excellent, perfectly understandable, liberation of Ukraine from the clutches of NATO.

    Urban combat. It is the most dangerous kind. Read some of that old timey stuff called history.

  51. Every Russian in Ukraine is there because Russia invaded the country and none of those Russians are civilians. Therefore no Ukrainians are killing Russian civilians.

    Replace Russian with American and Ukraine with Iraq or Afghanistan and these sentences are still true. And yet I believe that there was no American policy to commit war crimes or intentionally target civilians, and that any that happened were a few rogue actors.

    It’s not wrong or pro-Putin to wait until there are real facts before coming to a conclusion.

    (And of course for America, we’ve done drone strikes in a lot of countries we didn’t invade, and sometimes killed civilians we knew for a fact were there because we were trying to get somebody else–just had one come out in the New York Times in January of this year. Again, Putin = evil and bad, America = humane and good. I get that. I get that we try not to do it. Yet we sometimes we do it. Pretty easy to make a damning video montage, all I’m saying.)

  52. charles:

    I think you have a good point about the Japanese. This is the way it might work with the Russian soldiers in Ukraine: they’ve been told (a) the Ukrainians are their brothers, practically Russians themselves, and the real Ukrainians will welcome them with open arms; and (b) there are many Nazis there who are enemies. Therefore, on encountering someone who is resisting or even fleeing, by definition that’s a Nazi who must be treated harshly and/or destroyed.

  53. Turtler:

    That’s interesting about partisans. I always thought they were irregular and yet somewhat organized fighters, mostly living together as a group (perhaps in the forest or other place where they can rest and shelter away from the fighting) and not in their regular homes and not individual citizens. Also, I thought that partisans were part of “the resistance” during an enemy occupation rather than citizens fighting an ongoing invasion.

    Actually, looking it up just this minute, it seems that the usual definition does involve fighting in an occupied country. Russia does not occupy Ukraine – yet, and perhaps never.

    Military law and/or the law of war is certainly not my field of expertise, though.

  54. Turtler wrote:

    Now, where we diverse is that while sending weapons and aid to Ukraine is the more important benefit we can provide from Ukraine’s POV, imprisoning the corrupt and authoritarian oligarchs in our midst is the best we can do from OUR POV. Since I am not a Ukrainian but an American, I prefer the latter, even if I have little faith it will actually be done.

    I agree. America First. Fascism reigns in the USA, but since the fascist MSM doesn’t cover it, we need to get all whipped up about Ukraine instead. 🙁

  55. F: I suffered through that YouTube video. No.
    From 2019 “According to a new report by Russia’s state statistical agency, Rosstat, 35 million Russians live in houses or apartments without indoor toilets, 47 million do not have hot water, 29 million don’t have any running water inside their residences, and 22 million do not have central heating (ehorussia.com/new/node/17679)
    So that’s Putin’s Russia. And it’s not the case that Russians did have indoor plumbing and then evil Americans came in and ripped it all out.
    That’s roughly one fourth of the population. That’s communism for you, that’s Putin for you.

  56. Neo, I am not justifying. I am pointing out that civilian militia is legal. What I saw looked liked murder.

  57. Eva Marie: yes, communism was not an effective way to run an economy. But after the Soviet Union fell western banking interests did in fact hook up with the remnants of the communist leaders and strip Russia of its wealth. This crippled Russia’s ability to recover from the devastating effects of communist mis-management.

    Read about it here https://library.solari.com/testimony-of-anne-williamson/

  58. CBDenver: Don’t fall for this. If you had talked to a Russian commie in the 1970s and asked him why the USSR was so poor, he would have told you it was all America’s fault. As far as stripping Russia of its wealth – you don’t think Putin is responsible? And with this absolutely idiotic excursion into Ukraine? How about spending all that money he’s throwing (figuratively) down the toilet into (literally) building toilets?

  59. War is hell! As a person who has lost friends and relatives in war time, I can tell you the agony and grief are enormous. Lives lost and lives ruined. Abd for what? Because a psychopath feels the need to restore an empire or because he feels threatened by NATO in Ukraine.? Was there a legitimate casus belli?

    In this day of instant communications, speedy travel, and global trade one would think that building peaceful relationships with all nations would be a good idea. But we are now in a new antagonistic era. Democracies and free markets versus dictatorships and rigged markets seem to be the opponents. Both sides see the other as a danger to them. And with good reason. Dictatorships are always expansive – eyeing new gains in territory or wealth or both. Democracies are always looking to spread the gospel of freedom, which is dangerous to dictatorships. Dictators can’t afford to have people see a different, better way of government. So, antagonism between nations and systems seems to be boiled into human nature.

    This unnecessary (IMO) war fills me with sadness. I had my days as a warrior and believed I was helping make the world safe for democracy. But right now, there is too much killing, too much grief, and too much loss. And Democracy is still not safe.

    Just the musings of an old man with a heavy heart.

  60. And by the way CBDenver: I disagree with you – communism is an absolutely brilliant way to run an economy to benefit those in power – which is the whole point. Don’t ever think that Communist leaders don’t understand what they’re doing.

  61. Neo
    Eva Marie did a wonderful job of quoting from my summary conclusion and main point: Prosecuting and imprisoning corrupt Americans involved with Ukraine is the most we can effectively do to help them. The billions appropriated so far will only fortify the corruption – similar to how fake and illegitimate ballots fortified the 2020 presidential election.

    I don’t care about Russia’s motives. Whether Ukraine would merit our support if it was not so notoriously corrupt would be a worthwhile debate – perhaps taking place at this moment in a parallel universe. Or not because in that universe Russia might not have invaded. Corruption has a similar effect to what Trump said about “everything woke”. Corruption karma is very bad – sometimes lethal.

    Speaking of which, True the Vote found evidence (as one might expect) that 2020 rioters were also involved in illicit ballot trafficking. Whatever concerns we have about the Russia/Ukraine conflict ought to be overshadowed by our problem with zips in the wire here at home. See also https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/03/revealed-14-ballot-harvesters-wisconsin-also-participated-one-violent-riots-2020/

  62. @Geoffrey Britain

    I have never said that “Russia had a right and valid reason for invading Ukraine.” It is a mistake to imagine that I have even implied that “Russia had a right and valid reason for invading Ukraine.”

    Ok, I’ll take your word on that.

    What I have consistently maintained is that, from a strategic military rationale, Russia’s reason for invading the Ukraine is understandable.

    Sure, understandable. Though understandable does not mean justifiable as you well know, or even particularly understandable/sensible. Few today would argue that Temujin was justified setting a third of the world’s largest continent on fire and killing dozens of millions of people in the name of raw conquest and booty for his henchmen. Few would argue that Hitler’s berserk state of rage over Yugoslavia overthrowing its own government and BRIEFLY reneging on its signature in the Axis would justify the invasion of Yugoslavia, especially in the brutal and inflammatory ways it was conducted, even if it is somewhat understandable (And I stress SOMEWHAT because of how extreme it was and how heavily it stretched Axis resources during a crucial moment in the war, just as he was preparing for Barbarossa and dealing with the Italians being routed across the Med).

    Putin is similar. In particular a lot of people like you have pointedly ignored how so much of this war can be traced back to his throwing a glorified temper tantrum at learning one of his vassals was actually somewhat serious at his campaign promises to sign an EU Association Agreement, leading to him publicly browbeating Yanukovych and forcing him to do a humiliating and destructive 180 in exchange for token concessions. And then responding to how this went down BADLY with the Ukrainian public (including many blocs of Yanukovych’s support base as well as his established opposition) by basically shouting for Yanukovych to make them go away By Any Means Necessary.

    Which escalated the situation until “riot police” had gunned down lots of people in legitimately “Mostly Peaceful Protests” and Yanukovych was trying to sic the military regulars on Euromaidan, which unsurprisingly the military refused. Moreover, when Yanukovych responded to a challenge from *his own Rada* to explain what he had done, he panicked and fled, stealing a bunch of stuff on the way out. And Putin not only obliged this, but responded to the really-predictable further move of the Rada taking steps to remove him from office by launching a war in two of the most thinly disguised invasions on the historical record.

    I can understand Putin’s actions quite well, but that does not make them either justifiable nor PARTICULARLY understandable. I

    And that Russia, after decades of trying to get the West’s political leadership to finally take seriously how unacceptable the prospect of the Ukraine joining NATO is for Russia and in their view, watching a steady progress toward that eventuality,

    Except as I already established, if the Russian political leadership found such a thing truly unacceptable, it monumentally FUCKED UP doing so on multiple levels by sending Mixed Message on that matter, particularly on omnibus international agreements like the Helsinki Final Accord (something so utterly damning and invalidating of the idea that the Russian regime had a right to prevent Ukraine from entering NATO you tried to argue it NO LONGER APPLIED, which is simply FALSE) and the Astana Agreement, which I had to outline in God Damn CRAYON how it establishes that Ukraine has an “inherent right” to consider entering NATO, which you downplayed because apparently for all your posturing about globalists you don’t understand what the term “inherent right” is supposed to mean in terms of legal interpretation and how your attempts to interpret a caveat onto it were both self-defeating and could be shown to be fallacious by both jurisprudence and basic thought experiments.

    Had Putin and his regime truly found it unacceptable for Ukraine to join NATO or even the EU, they should NEVER Have ratified the Soviet signing of the Helsinki Final Accord, NOR signed things like Astana.

    But they did. Again, probably in bad faith and without seriously considering the ramifications of what those agreements meant or seriously intending to honor them, but that doesn’t change the supposedly binding nature of the agreements.

    Putin faced a choice of effectively capitulating to the West or going to war to prevent it.

    Or he could’ve made better fucking offers to Ukrainian politicos in order to muddy the waters, encourage defections and disillusionment within the “Orange” camp, and generally worked to regain lost favor in Ukraine’s political factions so he could continue dragging this out for years to come.

    Of course the fact that at no point in your writings have you EVER apparently considered this or even( if we grant the idea that such a policy was unworkable or would not be accepted- itself unlikely given how even after the invasions of 2014 Russian political and economic influence remained, albeit in a diminished and diminishing way) CONSIDERING it says nothing good about your analysis of the situation or your peddling of false dichotomies.

    Of course, considering I had to point out how you didn’t even know what fucking side of the COUNTRY Odessa is on we’ve already established your analytical process on this topic is rather poor.

    Because regardless of whatever delusionary justifications Putin may proclaim, NATO on his border presents a potential strategic threat that no competent military strategist would dismiss.

    This is true, but it’s also diversionary chaff.

    NATO is already ON his border in the form of the Baltic Three- Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania- and would CONTINUE to be on his border even if the proposed union-state with Belarus or even Ukraine went through due to Poland. Nothing he did in Ukraine will CHANGE that.

    Moreover, Ukraine did NOT see any prospect of being incorporated into NATO yet, and indeed would not even START that probably-decadenal process for years and years to come.

    Putin started this war not due to the imminent threat of Ukraine joining NATO forcing him to reach for his guns or “capitulate” but because of his over-reactions to an EU Association Agreement and domestic Ukrainian politics, as can CLEARLY be established by the timeline showing how he largely brushed off things like the much-balleyhoed Bucharest Agreement but went in guns blazing after Yanukovych was deposed by his own parliament (largely as a result of the policy demands Putin made on him).

    That many here entirely dismiss that POV only reveals how their biases prevent them from placing themselves in Putin’s shoes for even a moment.

    Again, this is disingenious poppycock and Neo was correct for you.

    I dismiss this interpretation of Putin’s POV not because I cannot place myself in Putin’s shoes, but because a basic understanding of the events shows it to be NOT PARTICULARLY RELEVANT to the events as they unfolded, for the reasons I have stated ad farqing infinitum to you by this point, ranging from the mixed messages the Kremlin sent about Ukraine in NATO and the EU, to the overkill response to Yanukovych seeking an EU Association Agreement.

    Trying to emphasis Muh NATO in this equation while ignoring the fact that the events that led Putin to decide to invade- especially in 2014- were primarily NOT about NATO is ignorant to the point of being disingenuous.

    I assure you that I have deeply considered the arguments those who disagree with me have advanced. Given the vehemence with which I’ve been pilloried*, I rather doubt if the reverse is true.

    *that’s an observation not a complaint.

    Mate, you couldn’t even research where the fuck ODESSA is in the country. Which led you to claim that part of the reason Zelenskyy (ignoring the previous Ukrainian governments fought in this war) would not give the Donbas up was because they contained Ukraine’s “only” major port.

    Which underlined how apparently you never took a cursory look at the map of Ukraine, nor understood where the name “the Donbas” comes from (Donetsk and Lughansk Oblasts), nor how Odessa Oblast was NOT IN either of those in the same way that New York is not in Virginia.

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/03/26/remember-that-reset-with-russia/

    So drop the faux-pious posturing about how you have “deeply considered” the counter-arguments of people like me, and how you “doubt” people like me have done the same. It’s annoying, it’s uncalled for, and in this case it is manifestly insincere.

    Especially since I put in a rather huge effort to addressing and responding to your points previously.

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/03/22/siege/

    So much of the reason you’ve been pilloried comes not only from having the “wrong opinion” but also because of how you’ve advanced transparently ludicrous arguments and claims, many of which are OBJECTIVELY false (because no matter how much we sit in Putin’s shoes, the position of Odessa won’t move across the length of the country), and have generally refused to acknowledge this critique or to revise it.

    It’s getting tedious.

    I get it. Schwab, Biden, Trudeau, Macron, etc. are well intentioned and the West’s political leadership have no plans for global dominance in a Unipolar New World Order and haven’t long been working toward that end with the Ukraine a focus since at least 2014. Right.

    If you have to strawman your opponent’s arguments, your probably don’t have good responses to them.

    Which is one reason I format my posts like this, so that people can SEE if I’m misconstruing someone’s points.

    Just quit while you’re behind, take the L, and go back to “deeply considering” our arguments or at least some basic facts so that if you ever DO return to this argument, You will not be making transparently invalid claims based on Odessa being in the Donbas.

  63. @Neo

    Lastly, one more big difference which seems to get lost here is that every Russian in Ukraine is there because Russia invaded the country and none of those Russians are civilians.

    Even if I believe none of THOSE Russians are civilians, I struggle to imagine that “every Russian in Ukraine” is there because Russia invaded the country. One of the few cases where Putin’s propaganda is more or less in line with reality is the point that Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine are fraternal nations with sizable shared histories and economic acts. Even after the invasion of 2014 Russian civilians periodically visited Ukraine. It boggles the mind to imagine that absolutely no Russian in Ukraine is there because of-say- having business only to be caught up in the war.

    That isn’t particularly relevant, but I think it is worth stating.

    Therefore no Ukrainians are killing Russian civilians.

    So far. We’ll see how it goes. And this is before we talk about the sticky and ugly issues of Russia tryign to extend its nationality into the Donbas and Crimea.

    That’s interesting about partisans. I always thought they were irregular and yet somewhat organized fighters, mostly living together as a group (perhaps in the forest or other place where they can rest and shelter away from the fighting) and not in their regular homes and not individual citizens.

    That’s the common definition and I might have somewhat overstated (since not every civilian that is not a partisan is also an invalid target; for instance if a Just Guy Civilian uninformed in resistance Ops got drunk and started violently wrestling with a soldier for their gun for unrelated reasons, they would be a valid target and the soldiers would have a legal right under the laws of war to detain or eliminate them under grounds like self-defense, keeping order, etc). But it’s not all that. Moreover, many partisan units do not operate in the woods all day long or otherwise outside of society, but blending in and out of civilian life. Sneaking out into the woods or Pripyet Marshes to shoot the troops, then taking off their weapons and clothes and sneaking into the village as “Just Civilians” in order to do stuff like barter or rest.

    The French Marquis certainly didn’t have all of its members slumming it during an invaison.

    Also, I thought that partisans were part of “the resistance” during an enemy occupation rather than citizens fighting an ongoing invasion.

    Occupation, resistance, and invasion are often relative terms, especially in the rear areas where invader control is more or less solidified. It’s also worth noting that our friends the Soviets helped form much of modern doctrine about the role of partisans or guerillas in contrast and complement with regular military forces, with guerillas helping to pave the way for (counter)attacks or provide intelligence to the military. Moreover this wasn’t entirely new; Hitler used and abused the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (the actual precursors to the likes of Azov Battalion) as scouts for the coming invasion of the USSR before betraying them, and the Western Allied invasion of Vichy North Africa was complimented by a Free French decapitation strike against Vichy command in Algiers.

    Actually, looking it up just this minute, it seems that the usual definition does involve fighting in an occupied country. Russia does not occupy Ukraine – yet, and perhaps never.

    No, but it occupies part of the country which is all that is necessary under the law. For instance, even if Russia does not occupy “Ukraine” as a whole, it certainly occupies “Ukraine” in part, such as Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, etc.

  64. @Banned Lizard

    Eva Marie did a wonderful job of quoting from my summary conclusion and main point: Prosecuting and imprisoning corrupt Americans involved with Ukraine is the most we can effectively do to help them. The billions appropriated so far will only fortify the corruption – similar to how fake and illegitimate ballots fortified the 2020 presidential election.

    That’s what I thought your point was. And I already tried to explain why I flatly reject it as being the best way we can help UKRAINE, for the simple fact that the average infantryman fighting outside Kyiv will care much less about the legitimacy of their government or the state of US corruption and much more if they will have the weapons to do things like blow up Russian motorized, mechanized, aerial, and armored units.

    Cracking down on corrupt and authoritarian American leaders is the best way we can help AMERICA and other Western Countries, which I think is the emphasis, but that is by definition going to be secondary on most Ukrainian’s minds during a state of seemingly existential hot war. Which is why I propose doing both, with a focus on arresting the corrupt (since I am an American and not a Ukrainian).

    I don’t care about Russia’s motives.

    I do but mostly in an academic sense.

    Whether Ukraine would merit our support if it was not so notoriously corrupt would be a worthwhile debate – perhaps taking place at this moment in a parallel universe. Or not because in that universe Russia might not have invaded. Corruption has a similar effect to what Trump said about “everything woke”. Corruption karma is very bad – sometimes lethal.

    This, as I mentioned before, is simply utter overreach, bordering slightly on delusion.

    I also frankly do not think it is PARTICULARLY worthwhile if Ukraine would warrant our support if it were not so corrupt, because as you correctly noted it is, and people like myself and Neo argue that it does warrant support even though it IS So corrupt.

    Moreover, the simple fact of the matter is that the Russian regime DID NOT invade Ukraine because of how corrupt it was…. IF I’m being generous. And if I’m not, I can make a good argument that it invaded Ukraine in part because of efforts to stem corruption or at least increase accountability (such as of Presidents like Yanukovych violating the Ukrainian Constitution) making it harder for Russia to win the influence game.

    In any case, does anybody on this PLANET think that the Ukrainian government now is more corrupt or authoritarian- or even JUST as corrupt or authoritarian- as Jiang’s KMT government in China or Mao’s Narco-Marxists in Yenan? Because if you do I would SORELY disagree with you, because I have yet to see even the Russians allege Ukraine has a figure like Dai Li, the “Chinese Himmler”, ruling over the KMT’s security apparatus for about 20 years.

    But as corrupt and despotic as the Chinese factions undoubtedly were in the 1920s onwards, that did nothing to change the fact that the Japanese invasions against them upended international law, the balance of power, and not only made the likes of the Chinese Himmler look good in comparison but also presented the West with a significant problem.

    Now sure, you’ll argue- and correctly so- that Putin’s Russia is nowhere near as rabid or bad as the Imperial Japan of the Rape of Nanjing or the Bataan Death March. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is behaving very similarly to it in things like its “special military operations” or “incidents” and its attempt to destabilize regional politics and international law by illegally balkanizing a country at bayonetpoint, establishing regional client dictatorships that aren’t any better and threatening Western interests, even for those who aren’t corrupt.

    And I DARE you to argue that the Chinese did not deserve help in WWII or the leadup to it, even with the likes of Jiang, Mao, and the Chinese Himmler.

    Speaking of which, True the Vote found evidence (as one might expect) that 2020 rioters were also involved in illicit ballot trafficking. Whatever concerns we have about the Russia/Ukraine conflict ought to be overshadowed by our problem with zips in the wire here at home. See also https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/03/revealed-14-ballot-harvesters-wisconsin-also-participated-one-violent-riots-2020/

    Largely agreed there, but this also feels somewhat like a diversion. If we’re going to focus on arresting corrupt and authoritarian US and other Western politicians- as we SHOULD- all that is necessary or proper to justify it is pointing to the benefits the US will get out of it. Trying to claim that is the best way we can help Ukraine strikes me as both superfluous and false, for the reasons I mentioned above. Which is why I’d advocate for both.

  65. @F

    It would be a lot easier to believe “we’re right and the Russians are wrong” if the Biden family and our own State Department had not been stirring the witches’ brew in Ukraine for the past decade or longer. Alas, they have been, and that sure muddies the clarity of our position.

    Not as much as you say, especially given how much of the muddied and corrupt nonsense had Putin involved in it or at least tacitly accepting it, as the Biolabs agreements show (which could not have endured without approval from Yanukovych, who came into power about half a decade after they were signed).

    If you have not seen it, I recommend a long You Tube video by Gonzalo Lira, a Chilean-American, who recounts the history of Victoria Nuland and the Bidens in Ukraine. It is not a pretty story.

    I’ll consider it, and I’m not surprised it is not a pretty story. Not much regarding the left or Biden’s career is, and not much involving Former Soviet politics is. So the intersection of them is predictably ugly.

    Whenever I am in a discussion with someone, particularly one where we disagree fundamentally, I try very hard to understand the other party’s perspective.

    Sensible.

    I am trying very hard to understand where Vladimir Putin is coming from in this dispute.

    Fair enough. Though I also think it is important to draw a distinction between understanding a position and viewpoint or where they’re coming from, and defending that position. One thing I have quarreled with Geoffrey Britain over is that I think they hopped over that line and never looked back, such as emphasizing the role of NATO in Putin’s decision to invade when the immediate causes of the invasion show that it was not such a major concern, especially in terms of the proximate trigger for the decision to go in.

    I believe it is fair to say he and many of the people around him distrust the USA. Talk of Ukraine joining NATO would only heighten that distrust.

    Sure, but Putin does not trust a lot of people and is not very trustworthy in his own right. Every single US President in my lifetime has started their first term making overtures to mend Russo-Western Relations and every single one has ended their terms thwarted and frustrated on that grounds, including Biden. That tells me that there is only so much of that which can be blamed on the West.

    And having Nuland give his Foreign Secretary an ultimatum on Ukraine (as Lira claims) could only exacerbate the situation.

    What kind of ultimatum would this be? I honestly struggle to imagine it.

    This is not to excuse Russia’s invasion, it is to try to understand what prompted it. Lira claims it was the threat by Ukraine to take back Crimea and the Donbas. That might seem reasonable to us — they were originally part of Ukraine — but it takes away Russia’s access to Sevastopol and the Black Sea. Again, no justification for Putin’s invasion, but a little insight into it.

    The issue I have with this is fourfold.

    Firstly: the only reason why Ukraine has to “take back” Crimea and the Donbas is because of the repercussions of the Russian invasion in 2014, which Putin now acknowledges was the work of Russian military forces operating under his command in Crimea (he has remained more ambiguous in regards to the Donbas probably in order to not undercut the claims it was an organic pro-Russian sensation and not at all the result of the same Little Green Men that worked in Crimea).

    Secondly: it doesn’t pass the smell test; the Ukrainians had already retaken most of the Donbas prior to this invasion and had no immediate interest in trying to retake Crimea, because of how heavily defended it is, how the Kremlin claims it is now territory of Russia proper, and how it would be all but impossible to push past the Isthmus with Russian naval superiority.

    Thirdly: Even a hypothetical Russian reconquest of the Donbas and Crimea would not cut off Russian access to the Black Sea due to other Black Sea ports like Novorossiysk, though it WOULD greatly limit and reduce it.

    Fourthly: The only reason Russia retaking Crimea and the Donbas would endanger Russian access to the Crimean Naval Bases is because the Kremlin violated the treaties and agreements allowing it to lease and base out of Sevastopol etc. al., which had been renewed for decades in the Pact of Kharkhiv back in 2010. Meaning that had the Kremlin just sat pretty it would have little grounds to fear access to Sevastopol (and if by some reason the Ukrainian government took steps to repudiate the pact or the like it would have forewarning and could act then), but its actions back in 2014 provided all the justification the Ukrainians needed to claim the Russians are in violation of the deal and so can be evicted if/when the force and situation becomes available.

  66. @Turtler

    The logic of my take on Ukraine is similar to that found in Matthew 7:5 – “…first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”

    Our “zips in the wire”: Antifa, BLM, woke corporations, woke media.

    The biggest log in our eye is our own fraudulently installed illegitimate government. Until that outrage is remedied, we are in no position to fix anything outside our borders – borders our illegitimate government deliberately invites invaders to breach.

  67. Well to throw Bible quotes about one might also consider (not) to ‘turn the other cheek’ in response to a Vlad first strike with only a small set of nukes.

    That Brandon “limited invasion” policy worked so well, as did the “sacking of Kyiv,” or the offer to Zelensky to play “brave, brave, Sir Robin.”

    But to beat a dead horse, we have Geoffrey playing “The Black Knight” of eastern Europe.

  68. The biggest log in our eye is our own fraudulently installed illegitimate government. Until that outrage is remedied, we are in no position to fix anything outside our borders – borders our illegitimate government deliberately invites invaders to breach.

    Non sequitur. That aside, we’re not fixing anything at all, just participating in a campaign to get weapons to the Ukraine and take care of some refugees.

  69. Keegan, in “The Face of Battle” refers to killing by “hand strokes”. This is to say you feel down to your spine the impact of the mace on the enemy’s skull. And…..
    Robert Hardy in “The Great War Bow” says that archers were confessed differently from the line guys because…they meant to kill but couldn’t say for sure they had. Or something.
    Obviously, a lot of guys got used to it, not least because being raised in agriculture, they’d killed mammals routinely, some they’d known.
    But to deal death across the street with the twitch of a lever…..And you don’t, as is the case with hand strokes, have to worry about coming out of guard in order to get a good swing.

    Lots of talk about various items which may or may not have justified Vlad’s actions. As in justified from Vlad’s POV. Or from the POV of another speaker. Or from the POV of another speaker about Vlad’s POV, or what Vlad’s POV should have been.
    In each case, the speaker assigns weight or importance to one factor or another. And if Vlad didn’t do it that way….Vlad was right. Or wrong.

    Is “irrespectively” a word? Irrespectively, Vlad did something stupid, not to mention illegal and likely counterproductive. His tanks came rumbling out of the word salad of those who know so much…and didn’t interrupt the word salad about whether they should have, or even actually did.

    Now what?

    As with the Germans in two world wars, they could have stayed home. Post war justifications–not by Germans, I mean–echoing Balck (the best German general nobody ever heard of) “poor Germany, always surrounded by stronger powers and forced to strike first” referring to a couple of centuries of Prussian actions as well.

    Putin could have stayed home. The idea that NATO was going to be anything more than another mirror about how to do things the western way (as West German was to East Germany)is so stupid as to force one to believe that not even Putin could believe it. And if he’s that stupid we need NATO on his border because of some other item he might think up. No, wait…. Huh.
    Call it a canny offering for the west to blame themselves–intellectuals love that–and any other victims.
    What remains to be seen is what Vlad does with his catastrophe.

    The issue of corruption is interesting in that it seems to be so interesting to people talking about the war. Did Vlad invade to cut Biden et al off from more money?

    Long time ago, a sci fi novel about a war begun to cover up corruption. The regime’s enemies were the “little men with briefcases”. But that was in the day when a typewriter which had the muscle to make TWO carbons was quite something. And getting a copy made required authorization from the office manager, it was so expensive.

    Today, when a competent hacker can get into Biden’s shorts, financially speaking and put it on the web, such considerations are meaningless.

    Okay, we all hate Romney and Biden and Nuland and the other corruptocrats. Now what?

  70. A lot of people keep making the same mistake by presuming Russia to be a fully sovereign country on par with the US and other Western nations. It is not.

    It has utterly failed the democratic reform. It has, for all intents and purposes, turned into a dictatorship. It has failed to disengage from the remnants of the Communist regime and refused to pay any reparations to the nations affected by the Communist crimes.

    Therefore, the sovereignty of Russian Federation is conditional. It has no right to demand any security – no security for dictatorships. It is not allowed to have any interests outside of its own borders as defined in December 1991. It has no claim to any lands outside of these borders. It has now voice in the international law and affairs.

    The world order has been, is and will remain unipolar, with the US and its allies being the supreme boss and Russia being one of the countries who must obey and comply. Never forget this and never let anyone representing Russian state to feel an equal.

    Here is a thing: make China an offer it cannot refuse. If it assists the West, economically and diplomatically, in regime change in Russia and taking all the Russian nuclear weapons away under IAEA control, the US will unilaterally give IAEA its nuclear weapons in excess to what China currently has. Having Russia completely de-fanged while maintaining nuclear parity between US and China is, I believe, an excellent solution for all.

  71. The bottom line is this – War is hell. Also, my opinion of Putin’s war is wholly irrelevant. Spilling gallons of digital ink to establish who is more righteously opposed to Putin’s war is pointless. None of it matters. Its all virtue signalling.

    The time for your opinion to matter was long before now and the fact is, nobody cared. Least of all the people we elected to represent us that were pillaging BOTH Russia and Ukraine to line their own pockets AND continuing to do so right now.

  72. Neo: I’m sorry your misunderstood what I wrote. I’m really surprised by your “Lastly”, because simple substitution creates a situation damning of US troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan. No Iraqi or Afghani citizen was involved in 9-11, yet the US invaded both countries. The logic of your argument seems to suggest that then any violence against Afghani or Iraqi citizens was wrong, and my view is if they took up arms as patriots to defend their country, then I would expect our troops to defend themselves including firing back. I’d hope we would be proportional about it (yeah “scale”, which I used intentionally because of the notion that popped into your head), and I don’t think Russians would be, but my point earlier and now, such is war.

  73. Eva Marie:

    You don’t need to convince me Marxism and Communism are bad. I have lived and worked in countries that are avowedly Marxist-Leninist or socialist. That system is a justification of oppression, graft and corruption, and I am not defending what Putin has done. I am hoping that our own hands are clean enough that the rest of the world can make a rational and honest comparison between who we are and who the Russians are. The fact that Biden’s election does not pass the small test, added to his (and others’) corruption only makes it harder to make that comparison without a wink and a nod.

    Turtler:

    I don’t think we are disagreeing. As I said above, I only wish our own hands were clean, and I fear they are not.

    You might want to listen to Lira’s video (thanks to Eva Marie for the link, which I did not provide). If you do, run it at higher than normal speed: it is almost two hours long. One thing he claims in that video is that Nuland gave Lavrov an ultimatum, in the Kremlin, and in very crude (but grammatically correct Russian), that Russia had to give back the Donbas and Crimea. Lavrov’s English, BTW, is as good as mine. But Nuland’s Russian is as good as Lavrov’s. She wanted to make her point very emphatically.

    In any case, I am not defending Putin’s attack on Ukraine. But I would note (with sadness) that his popularity inside Russia is at a new high.

    One final note: Russia has now attacked Odessa with cruise missiles. If they take that port city, Ukraine’s export shipping capacity will be severely reduced. Since they presumably did so using their own equivalent of our own GPS system, it appears that system works as well as our own. There was reporting early in the invasion that Russian pilots were carrying hand-held GPS units in the cockpit because they did not trust their own system.

  74. deadroddy kills some pixels to say ….. nothing really matters? The beauty of nihilism?

  75. Regarding the poisioning pigeons in the tank park.

    Could be true or could be bad vodka, or maybe it was peanut allergies.

    Not like Nerve Gas in London; was that a song?

  76. F: “ I am hoping that our own hands are clean enough that the rest of the world can make a rational and honest comparison between who we are and who the Russians are.”
    You don’t need to hope. Compare how many people want to immigrate to the US and how many are trying to immigrate to Russia. How many American chains are in Russian malls and how many Russian chain stores are in the US. Only Americans would think that Russia could compare to the US.
    As far as that video is concerned, there was too much nonsense and too many lies for me to believe anything especially that any ultimatum Nuland gave or didn’t give would have any impact on Putin.

  77. Some fine people here believe that Putin had sort of good reasons to invade Ukraine. One of these reasons – perhaps the main one – is that in 2014 there was an (alleged) “coup” supported by the USA. I disagree. Putin sponsors, in the heaviest way, a list of politicians of his liking in several countries bordering with Russia; foremost among them, Belarus’ Lukashenko, a dictator of the worst kind straight from the old Soviet school, whose abuse and crimes are well known (I hope). It’s not a case that most ex-Soviet nations have entered the NATO (Czech, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and some from the ex-Yugoslavia): the Russian presence is scary in a very tangible way, and Ukraine has the full right to protect its independence.

    The Maidan revolution in 2014 was indeed supported by the USA (in what manner, it’s not known, however) but it’s absolutely certain that the interference by Russia was on another level and that the vast majority of the country was against Yanukovych’s alignment with Putin; in fact, the revolt happened because Yanukovych enacted a policy of detachment from the West and affiliation with Russia: the prospective for millions of Ukrainians is not happy, I believe that many here know about the Holomodor and the million of kulaks sent to Siberia, not to talk of decades of misery under the Soviet rule. I’ve been in Russia, believe me if I say that corruption and harshness there is unbelievable.

    I see – also among some of my friends here in Italy – a desire to see Putin in a favorable light, mainly as a consequence of the hypocrisy and corruption of our elites – an establishment able (among many other things) to bomb and destabilize Lybia for no reason at all, and now parading as stainless supporters of freedom. I share this sentiment, but one evil does not justify another one.

  78. Well, since war crimes / atrocities have always been a part of war, that should totally excuse the Russians for shooting civilians; what is an interesting line of thought.
    By this sort of thinking, then any and all crimes, wartime or otherwise, should be excused because, let’s face it, it’s all happened before.

    The Russian military has a long and well documented history of brutalizing and murdering civilians; for them it’s no big deal. It’s what they do.

    For those claiming that Russia “had no choice” due to NATO expansion, that they were justified in invading Ukraine, I suppose we should accept the foregone conclusion that Russia has every right to invade Poland, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Albania, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Romania, + a few others.

    Note that some of the nations I have cited here were either former members of the Warsaw Pact or former republics within the USSR.
    Geez, I wonder why they all decided to voluntarily and willingly join NATO.
    What do they understand about the Russian character / goals / aims that American /European Russian-excuse-nits, just don’t get?
    For the life of me, I just can’t figure that out

    And if Sweden and Finland decide to join NATO, well then, they too deserve to be invaded, right?

    During the benevolent reign of that magnanimous proponent of individual liberty and representative democracy, “Uncle” Joe Stalin (a good pal of FDR) , there were many useful idiots in the USA and Europe that were adept at excusing and rationalizing any of Stalin’s “excesses” (as Molotov put it); some of these useful idiots even spied for Uncle Joe, notwithstanding his extermination of 20 to 50 million souls.
    So it’s no surprise that the inconsequential crimes of Putin should also find an plethora of folks justifying the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the murder of civilians.

    Recall that Ukraine has no right to exist as an independent nation and it has ALWAYS been part of a Greater Imperial Russia, according to Herr Putin.
    I just cannot imagine that his worldview, re: Ukraine, had any influence upon his decision to invade Ukraine.

  79. Paolo Pagliaro:

    Agreed.

    It initially was very surprising as well as disappointing to me that so many people seemed to be, if not exactly on Putin’s side, at least apologists and/or excuse-makers and/or false equivalency-ers for him. I’ve thought a lot about the reasons so many people (not the majority, but many) seem to be doing that, and plan to write a post about it.

  80. Leland:

    I was merely making a distinction, but I was neither justifying nor not justifying either action. The point is that there is a difference between the unjustified killing of soldiers who have invaded your country and the unjustified killing of non-combatant civilians such as women and children. They are both wrong but different degrees of wrong.

    If someone – even a citizen – is firing at a soldier, the soldier is going to fire back. Self-defense is available even to soldiers. However, when civilians are involved, there’s always the possible fake excuse that the person was armed and firing. However, that “they were firing at me” excuse doesn’t apply to mass graves or bound and hooded victims or ordinarily to women and children, as have all been reported killed in Ukraine by Russian soldiers. These reports seem to be corroborated by Western media, at least so far.

    Regarding Iraq, the reason we invaded was not they that perpetrated 9/11. That wasn’t even the reason for invading Afghanistan. For the latter country, it was that they refused to surrender the al Qaeda heads (who HAD perpetrated 9/11) they were harboring, even after being warned that they needed to give them up or be invaded. For Iraq, it had to do with violations of sanctions from the previous war, a war of aggression that Iraq had started through invasion.

  81. An account of events leading up to the war. I’d say the viewpoint is more favorable to the Russian side. Or, at least, balanced. This has relatively little commentary on the war itself, mostly on the events preceding.

    https://www.thepostil.com/author/jacques-baud/
    This is a decent but not exceptional translation from the original French version at Centre Français de Recherche sur le Renseignement, Paris

    Jacques Baud is a former colonel of the General Staff, ex-member of the Swiss strategic intelligence, specialist on Eastern countries. He was trained in the American and British intelligence services. He has served as Policy Chief for United Nations Peace Operations. As a UN expert on rule of law and security institutions, he designed and led the first multidimensional UN intelligence unit in the Sudan. He has worked for the African Union and was for 5 years responsible for the fight, at NATO, against the proliferation of small arms. He was involved in discussions with the highest Russian military and intelligence officials just after the fall of the USSR. Within NATO, he followed the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and later participated in programs to assist the Ukraine. He is the author of several books on intelligence, war and terrorism

    https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacques-baud-20227614b/

  82. Neo expresses my opinion well here.

    In addition, you seem to think this is an either/or choice. It is not, “either see Putin’s point of view like me or regard Biden and Schwab and Trudeau as good guys with good intentions, and think their plans for the Great Reset are non-existent.”

    It can be both that I object to the Great Reset and also that I object to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

  83. That’s quite an article (the link to thepostil…).

    The guy seems like he knows what he’s talking about but then it all turns—or seems to turn—a bit wonky.

    So who is this guy? Swiss career soldier involved in peace-keeping among other things. Seems like he has all the right credentials, experience and sober professionalism….

    So one looks him up on Wikipedia and while there’s no information on the English site, there is something on the French; so one does a “google-translate” and…presto!

    Same guy, same credentials, experience, professionalism…but there’s a section on “Conspiracy Theory” which translates as follows:

    ‘Conspirationnisme [that is, “Conpiracy Theorizing” or “Conspiricizing”, etc.]
    ?’According to journalist Antoine Hasday, published by “Conspiracy Watch”, an interview with Jacques Baud given to “RT France”[!] “ticks all the boxes of geopolitical conspiracy”(18). The latter, sometimes invited by the traditional media, has also intervened on the far-right web-television “TV Libertés”, as well as previously on “RT France”(18). Interviewed on this last channel by “Frédéric Taddeï” in September 2020, he minimizes the human toll of the war in Darfur, which he reduces to 2,500 deaths (against 300,000 according to the UN) and denies the responsibility of the Syrian army in the massacres in Homs in 2011 and in the chemical attacks in Ghouta, of Khan Sheikhoun and Douma between 2013 and 2018(18). Taking up the official arguments of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, he also claims that the photographs taken by the military photographer “Caesar” are not those of political opponents who died under torture, but of soldiers of the Syrian army.(18). Jacques Baud also whitewashes Russia by considering that the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal was caused by “food poisoning” and that the poisoning of Alexei Navalny is probably “the work of the mafia”.(18).
    [Footnote 18: ?Antoine Hasday, ??On RT France, Jacques Baud ticks all the boxes of geopolitical conspiracy?? [??archive??]??, ??Conspiracy Watch??, September 7, 2020.?]’
    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Baud

    And so, here it is, but he’s not around to be able to defend himself—and after all, it IS Wikipedia (and who the heck is Antoine Hasday?), with all that that connotes. Is it true? Maybe. Maybe not. Who knows….

    And so, once again: WHO IS THIS GUY!!!

    Col. Caveat Emptor?…

  84. Barry Meislin:

    I find that 99.99% of the time when some person I’ve never heard of has “the real scoop” – they don’t.

  85. Sure, it’s completely fair game to check on the guy.
    What I found interesting in his account was the description of Minsk1, Minsk2, the Normandy proposal and the account of how the Russian speakers in the Donbas were treated prior to the current hostilities. With that in mind, the RU response (not the war, the whole span of response over the years) becomes (potentially) more than a mad lashing-out by mentally ill Putin.
    If we move beyond the “mentally ill Putin” viewpoint, we can cold bloodedly examine the concern of RU invading Poland, the Baltic states and so on (reconstitution of the USSR borders). Personally, I don’t rank that threat very highly.
    If this comes down to RU vs UA, not proto-Hitler Putin, we can condemn the invasion yet decide it doesn’t rise to the level of justifying WWIII.

  86. Still, this guy seem pretty impressive…until….

    …and yet, NOT ALL of it can be false…or can it? Sounds plausible, possible, but…hold on, no. But maybe. After all, he’s the “expert”…right?

    Maybe it’s just a question of “emphasis”? Or is it slick-sounding garbage through and through…?

    But that’s how this “stuff” works….

    (…and why they call it—and for good reason—“planting the worm of doubt….)

  87. btw, if the ONLY knock on this guy is that some leftie put a disparaging paragraph into Wiki … well, not persuaded.

    I’d be interested to hear the folks that have done a deep dive on the past few years and compare his viewpoint on Minsk1, Minsk2, Normandy and the treatment of Russian speakers in those eastern districts with theirs.
    Did RU “stay out of it” because Minsk 1/2 were internal UA negotiations?
    Were Russian speakers oppressed and forbidden use of their native tongue?
    Or is his viewpoint all made up?

  88. And SWISS!!

    Which ought to be really impressive…until one starts to recall some of those extraordinary Credit Suisse shenanigans over the past several years. Sheesh….

    (…somewhere Heidi weeps….)

  89. JimNorCal:

    Ordinarily, Wiki entries have a lot of footnotes.Those footnotes go to sources. You might consider those sources to be suspect or generally trusted. Wiki sometimes slants to the left, for sure, but it also generally insists on documentation, and the documentation can be checked.

  90. And who specifically and repeatedly has been raising the prospect of WWIII and or nuclear strikes? Not the regieme that has invaded Ukraine?

    It is a deep profound mystery what and who is at the root of all this bloody business. Or maybe is is plainly obvious, Vlad?

  91. All I’m saying is that it’s very bizarre (I used the more scientific term, “wonky”).

    I would imagine that all of those questions can be verified (though at the end of the day whom might one believe?)

    I do find his consistent defense of Putin—in spite of all—quite remarkable (and not in an “admirable” kind of way).

    Hence “wonky”.

    On the other hand, things there are truly bizarre and I have a few theories of my own, which are likely pure conspiracy-theory-sounding. E.g., I’m convinced that there is—or was—some kind of sub-rosa agreement between “Biden” and Putin about this whole affair(!) and that either that agreement is, in spite of EVERYTHING (or because of it?—“EVERYTHING” being essentially a smokescreen), still “on” (I consider that the likely scenario, actually) or it’s been blown to smithereens because one or the other party (or both) has betrayed the other—or one another (though I consider this less likely…since the stakes for both are far too high).

    But then…who the hell am I? (Right?)

  92. I can recall a number of folks who doubted the moral and legal justifications for pursuing the VC/NVA into Cambodia. Not to mention going into Panama, Grenada, Iraq and Afghanistan.
    I’d be surprised–actually, I’m kidding–if the labored justifications for Putin’s attack on Ukraine were not disproportionately spread among the groups mentioned in the above paragraph.
    Point is, we don’t know what he was thinking. We can only judge from what he said which has no necessity to be what he was truly thinking. And the infinitely complex shenanigans of the last, say, twenty years in the area and involving some of the same figures admit of infinite conclusions, depending on which have more oomph and which less–subject to endless debate–and which are considered and which not.

    He invaded a neighboring country. Shouldn’t do that. If you use the US’ justifications for its actions in the last fifty years, they were far more solid–WMD yes or no, Taliban as guests, Cuban air base in Grenada, etc–than airy references to one or another document which Putin may or may not consider worth the paper it’s written on back when he was stretching for his next promotion..

  93. But Richard, don’t forget (gift-that-doesn’t-stop-giving) Hunter’s bio-labs(!)…

    Actually, that’s something I’m willing to believe…simply because the denials by “the good guys” seem to be a case of “the lady doth protest too much”…. (Having said that, I would dearly prefer those claims to be false, of course, i.e., that “the good guys” were in fact just doing experiments/R&D for the “good of mankind”(TM)…but…Hunter just had to creep into the story (“Hunter creep”?)…so all bets are off.

  94. This is Sundance today at https://theconservativetreehouse.com/

    Much like the U.S. supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan during their fight against Russia, so too is the U.S. supporting factions within Ukraine in their current insurgent fight against Russia.

    Ukraine is to the United States as North Korea is to China. As we have well documented on a granular level, Chairman Kim is held hostage by Chairman Xi. Now we see a similar dynamic, Comrade Zelenskyy is held hostage by Comrade Biden.

    If you look at Zelenskyy’s position more as a public relations figure, a front man for the U.S. operation in Ukraine, then much of the weirdness starts to make sense. From all appearances, the U.S. State Dept/CIA provide Zelenskyy with the framework they need him to promote, and Zelenskyy has no option right now other than play along. It can be argued this outlook makes Zelenskyy a puppet, but when you consider the scale of influence and in country activity the U.S. was controlling prior to the Russian invasion, his current status is simply a logical outcome.

  95. Eva Marie, may I point out that the Taliban did not exist as an organization until 1994. The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989. I am sure that there were Afghans who fought the Russians and later joined the Taliban. However the idea that the US created or funded the Taliban is a myth.

  96. John+F etc.: good point.
    Although, “ The roots of the Taliban movement started in 1979, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. The Soviets were there to prop up a communist Afghan government that was supported by a minority of mostly urban residents. But the vast majority of Afghans lived in rural areas, where authority came from tribal and ethnic groups, and life revolved around conservative practices of Islam.”
    So that was at least sloppy writing by Sundance.

  97. Were Russian speakers oppressed and forbidden use of their native tongue?

    Why are you asking this? Zelensky, his predecessor Petro Poroshenko, and his predecessor Victor Yanukovich are all Russian speakers.

  98. Ukraine is to the United States as North Korea is to China. As we have well documented on a granular level, Chairman Kim is held hostage by Chairman Xi. Now we see a similar dynamic, Comrade Zelenskyy is held hostage by Comrade Biden.

    The North Korean regime has been famously recalcitrant for > 60 years and the notion that Biden’s in charge of anything but his pudding does not pass the chuckle test. You should be less gullible.

  99. Kim Jong-Un has been in power since 2012. And that’s who Sundance is specifically referring to. BTW the Jerk store called . . .

  100. “I I do find his consistent defense of Putin—in spite of all …”

    I don’t see him backing the invasion, do you? I think he claims MSM coverage of pre war events is wrong/biased in some areas. Here are 2 examples:
    1) pre war RU arming of rebels. He says minor to none
    2) RU non participation in negotiations. He says RU consistently said the Minsk documents were internal to UA between the central gov and the rebel areas. Therefore there was no reason for RU to be involved.

    Art Deco: ok, you say 2 or 3 UA leaders are native Russian speakers. Therefore no oppression occurred.
    Baud claims the districts were attacked militarily. Readers can do more research and decide which of the two of you is a jackass.

    Does any of this excuse invasion of another country? Personally I would say no, but that all these details make a difference in the proper US response.
    The most shameful of all would be if this turned out to be a US scheme to humble Russia and that we are prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian in order to see it through.

  101. RichardA: “WMD yes or no, Taliban as guests, Cuban air base in Grenada”

    OK, some of those might be sketch. But how about the Gulf of Tonkin?
    Surely all the damage to the US ship convinces you that the provocation was sufficient to launch military operations? j/k

  102. Jim. I’d forgotten that one.
    As to “sketch”, I take that to mean reasonably valid as a point for acting. I recall Noriega’s cops hijacked a school bus full of US dependents. Not sure how long they were held, but more than ten seconds would get my attention. And then…what are we required to do if the kids are held? Whatever gyrations are required to get them back, about 49% of the population would insist it was a valid treaty binding us in perpetuity.

    From my POV, the Tonkin hoax was unnecessary. You can’t win a war when the other side has a sanctuary, as has been proven since several times. So if the other side has a sanctuary, desanctuary it. Perfectly legit under laws of war and common sense.

  103. Art Deco: ok, you say 2 or 3 UA leaders are native Russian speakers. Therefore no oppression occurred.

    Um, JimNorCal, half the population consists of native Russian speakers, including the last three presidents. The notion that Russian-speaking officials are ‘persecuting’ people who speak Russian is one outlandish enough that it should have triggered your smell detector.

  104. The most shameful of all would be if this turned out to be a US scheme to humble Russia and that we are prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian in order to see it through.

    The Ukraine’s resistance to being conquered is a ‘U.S. scheme’?

  105. JimNorCal:

    It seems the Ukranians are quite willing to fight Vlad’s gentle emissaries of de-Nazification.

    Poor Vlad humbled by the USA after 4 years of being Trump’s boss, and the prior 8 of being treated to Reset and Flexibility under BHO. Now Vlad looks to get big bucks under the Iran deal but those F’en Ukranians just wouldn’t play along and roll over. Poor Vlad humbled by the US? Looks like a fine mess Vlad has gotten himself into, but blame the US, eh Jim?

    Best laid plans go agley. When you start a war Vlad, you may loose many things.

    Lots of those little people getting killed Jim; they were alive before Vlad chose war.
    Seems like the occupation by the Russian Army is a decidely unhealthy prospect for Ukrainians. Surprise!

  106. Kim Jong-Un has been in power since 2012. And that’s who Sundance is specifically referring to.

    He’s a third generation loose cannon. He isn’t something other than that just because Sundance has some apercu.

  107. Baud claims the districts were attacked militarily.

    Russia seized parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in 2014, recruiting local brigands to hold them. Yes, the Ukraine is willing to use force contra said brigands to get their territory back.

  108. tcrosse said:
    “The experience of two World Wars should have taught us not to dismiss atrocity stories out of hand.”

    The experience of the last 6 years should have taught us not to believe everything the MSM feeds us…..yet, here we are.

  109. Yes here we are.

    Roosia reporting mistreatment, torture, murder of Russian POWs. The posionimg of Russian soldiers by Ukrainian civilians and the western media showing video of what appears to be executed civilians, burned bodies in civilian cars littering the roads, drone footage of civilians being shot down by AFVs. Yes, here we are.

    Thanks Vlad. The world is in your debt.

  110. bifjamod:

    You write: “the experience of the last 6 years should have taught us not to believe everything the MSM feeds us…..yet, here we are.”

    In my case, the experience of the last 25 years has taught me not to believe everything the MSM feeds us. And I would wager that most people who comment here feel just about the same way.

    But it’s a huge and erroneous and very dangerous leap from that to “don’t believe anything the MSM feeds us.” That’s the leap I see a lot of people on the right making.

    I am skeptical of everything I read and I evaluate each item on a case by case basis. In the current war I think that so far there is far more reason to believe the Ukrainians than the Russians, for a host of reasons I’ve explained in previous posts. That does not mean that the Ukrainians always tell the truth and Russia always lies, either. But the balance of lying is on the Russian side, and they have no valid reason for being in Ukraine and waging war. None.

  111. The alternate explanation is that this was carried out by the Azov Battalion. The evidence is:

    1. The timeline, nothing was mentioned about a massacre after the Russians first left. The Azov Battalion passed through later.

    2. The Azov commander is caught on tape giving the OK for shootings.

    3. Some of the bodies have a white armband (pro Russian), not the blue (pro Ukrainian) armband.

    What is the truth? I withhold judgement. I am not a fan of either side.

  112. JimNorCal; Art Deco:

    Actually, historically it was Russia that suppressed Ukranian speakers in Ukraine when Russia was in charge. What happened later has been an attempt to reassert Ukrainian:

    The 19th century saw a dramatic increase in the urban Russian population in present-day Ukraine, as ethnic Russian settlers moved into and populated the newly industrialised and growing towns.[citation needed] At the beginning of the 20th century the Russians formed the largest ethnic group in almost all large cities within Ukraine’s modern borders, including Kiev (54.2%), Kharkiv (63.1%), Odessa (49.09%), Mykolaiv (66.33%), Mariupol (63.22%), Luhansk, (68.16%), Kherson (47.21%), Melitopol (42.8%), Ekaterinoslav, (41.78%), Kropyvnytskyi (34.64%), Simferopol (45.64%), Yalta (66.17%), Kerch (57.8%), Sevastopol (63.46%).[10] The Ukrainian migrants who settled in these cities entered a Russian-speaking milieu (particularly with Russian-speaking administration) and needed to adopt the Russian language.

    The Russian Empire promoted the spread of the Russian language among the native Ukrainian population, actively refusing to acknowledge the existence of a Ukrainian language.

    Alarmed by the threat of Ukrainian separatism (in its turn influenced by the 1863 demands of Polish nationalists), the Russian Minister of Internal Affairs Pyotr Valuev in 1863 issued a secret decree that banned the publication of religious texts and educational texts written in the Ukrainian language as non-grammatical, but allowed all other texts, including fiction. The Emperor Alexander II in 1876 expanded this ban by issuing the Ems Ukaz (which lapsed in 1905). The Ukaz banned all Ukrainian-language books and song-lyrics, as well as the importation of such works. Furthermore, Ukrainian-language public performances, plays, and lectures were forbidden. In 1881 the decree was amended[by whom?] to allow the publishing of lyrics and dictionaries, and the performances of some plays in the Ukrainian language with local officials’ approval. Ukrainian-only troupes were, however, forbidden. Approximately 9% of the population[which?] spoke Russian at the time of the Russian Empire Census of 1897.[citation needed] as opposed to 44.31% of the total population of the Empire.

    In 1918 the Soviet Council of People’s Commissars decreed that nationalities under their control had the right to education in their own language. Thus Ukrainians in the Soviet era were entitled to study and learn in the Ukrainian language. During the Soviet times, the attitude to Ukrainian language and culture went through periods of promotion (policy of “korenization”, c.? 1923 to c.? 1933), suppression (during the subsequent period of Stalinism), and renewed Ukrainization (notably in the epoch of Khrushchev, c.? 1953 to 1964). Ukrainian cultural organizations, such as theatres or the Writers’ Union, were funded by the central administration.[which?] While officially there was no state language in the Soviet Union until 1990, Russian in practice had an implicitly privileged position as the only language widely spoken across the country…The Ukrainian language, despite official encouragement and government funding, like other regional languages, was often frowned upon or quietly discouraged, which led to a gradual decline in its usage.

    Since the Euromaidan of 2013-2014, the Ukrainian government has issued several laws aimed at encouraging Ukrainization in the media, in education and in other spheres.

    In February 2017, the Ukrainian government banned the commercial importation of books from Russia, which had accounted for up to 60% of all titles sold in Ukraine.

    On May 23, 2017, the Ukrainian parliament approved the law that most broadcast content should be in Ukrainian (75% of national carriers and 50% of local carriers).

    The 2017 law on education provides that Ukrainian language is the language of education at all levels except for one or more subjects that are allowed to be taught in two or more languages, namely English or one of the other official languages of the European Union (i.e. excluding Russian). The law does state that persons belonging to the indigenous peoples of Ukraine are guaranteed the right to study at public pre-school institutes and primary schools in “the language of instruction of the respective indigenous people, along with the state language of instruction” in separate classes or groups. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has expressed concern with this measure and with the lack of “real consultation” with the representatives of national minorities. In July 2018, The Mykolaiv Okrug Administrative Court liquidated the status of Russian as a regional language, on the suit (bringing to the norms of the national legislation due to the recognition of the law “On the principles of the state language policy” by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine as unconstitutional) of the First Deputy Prosecutor of the Mykolaiv Oblast. In October and December 2018, parliaments of the city of Kherson and of Kharkiv Oblast also abolished the status of the Russian language as a regional one.

    In January 2022, a law requiring all print media to be published in Ukrainian came into force. It did not ban publication in Russian, however it stipulated that a Ukrainian version of equivalent circulation and scope must be published – which is not a profitable option for publishers. Critics argue that the law could disenfranchise the country’s Russian-speakers.

    At no point were Russian speakers not allowed to speak Russian. It’s half the country. But it has a long history in which it was Ukrainian that was suppressed.

    In addition, as far as Zelensky goes:

    Zelenskyy opposes targeting the Russian language in Ukraine and banning artists for their political opinions (such as those viewed by the Government as anti-Ukrainian). In April 2019, he stated that he was not against a Ukrainian language quota (on radio and TV), although he noted they could be tweaked. He also said that Russian artists “who have turned into (anti-Ukrainian) politicians” should remain banned from entering Ukraine.

    Zelenskyy is Ukrainian but is a native Russian speaker. Russian is his first language but he also speaks Ukrainian.

  113. om —

    It seems the Ukranians are quite willing to fight Vlad’s gentle emissaries of de-Nazification.

    But see, de-Nazification is good and holy, so if someone is resisting de-Nazification that just proves that they’re a Nazi, and it’s okay to kill Nazis…

    /eyeroll

    This seems to be the self-justification for what’s going on, as per some anti-war Russians I’ve been following.

    As for American conservative circles, I’ve been really disappointed by a lot of people (like Tucker Carlson and sundry commenters in the usual places) who are actually rooting for Russia. Their thesis seems to be Putin says (!) he’s upholding Christian values and is against globalism and wokeism, and besides Ukraine was in bed with Biden, and we hate Biden, so boo Ukraine and go Russia!

    Or somehow, invading Ukraine is scoring a goal against the US Deep State and the WEF. Seriously?

    And as for the “our government is illegitimate/not defending the southern border/degrading our military so we shouldn’t be sending money to Ukraine”, that sounds an awful lot like saying in 1940 “FDR tried to pack the Court, so no Lend-Lease for Britain.” Non sequitur much?

  114. Chuck:

    Links, please.

    I read a totally different timeline, in which the Russians retreated and the European press came in the same day to document the carnage.

    From RedState:

    Ukrainian troops didn’t enter Bucha until March 31, and as late as April 1, the city was still the scene of combat operations to drive out Russian stragglers and looters. Independent media arrived on April 1, when the first reports from Bucha started appearing on social media.

    In addition, this resembles Russian action in Chechnya and Syria.

  115. neo —

    But it’s a huge and erroneous and very dangerous leap from that to “don’t believe anything the MSM feeds us.” That’s the leap I see a lot of people on the right making.

    I see a lot of people on the right making the leap from that to “whatever the MSM says, the opposite is true.”

    I generally assume that any breaking story out of the MSM with any political implication is a lie or at least willfully negligent, so if they said the sky is blue I would go outside to check. But I wouldn’t rush around screeching “Nuh-uh! The MSM lies! It’s green!”

  116. IIRC that Azov Batallions down by the Black Sea Donna’s / Mariopol area not Kyiv. Ukraine is about the size of Texas, kind of big Chuck.

    It would be convenient for Roosia to shift the blame to the Azov Battailion; that dog that ate Vlad’s homework.

  117. Bryan Lovely:

    I think Vlad ought to be recruiting from the legions of Antifa in the NW to join his army fighting the Jewish led “Nazis” in Ukraine. One way tickets only. GoFundMe for their air fares? (sarc)

  118. This is a very long thread with 129 comments. At the risk of duplication, the Daily Mail online’s lead story alleges genocide and mass murder of civilians in a variety of places by Russian troops, including rapes if no mass rapes. Reportedly, some or many surviving civilians are too fearful or possibly traumatised to talk, yet. It’s pretty compelling horror. Photos are described and not published, because too gruesome.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10682581/Some-Ukraine-towns-WORSE-Bucha-Locals-say-Russian-troops-killed-children.html

    “Genocide” gets overused in the world today. But this is targeted murder of civilians like mass terror, leading to democide. Words claimed spoken by troops or officers sure seem to aim at wipe-the-earth of Ukrainians strategy, too close to genocide for any comfort. And a pre-war practice of mass grave digging training by Russian soldiers certainly appears to support the worst fears.

    “Game-changer,” anyone?

  119. Art Deco, Apparently you don’t have time or interest to actually read the article so you have to refute it based on guesses you have of what it might have said. Got it.

    RichardA: sketch is short for sketchy, “of doubtful virtue”. Via our teen. Typical usage: “That neighborhood is sketchy; we don’t go there after dark” or “He says he did no wrong but he’s pretty sketch.”
    Plus another one for our list “Remember the Maine!”

  120. “I don’t see him backing the invasion, do you?”

    Well, um, er…I suppose one could say he’s “merely” defending it.
    Justifying it.
    Rationalizing it.

    (Trying to “enable us” to “understand” it—which is a distinct challenge without any Versailles Compiègne Wagon for ballast—and “to understand is, of course, to…”)

    …But is he “backing” it. Hmmm. Excellent question! I’ll have to think about that one…

    Got it!! He’s one slippery Swiss.
    (But he’s trying a tad too hard and so…a Swiss miss…)

  121. TJ:

    Katyn 2 near Kyiv?

    One would expect far, far worse in the Donbas and the regions along the Black Sea where the Vlad’s Roosian forces have held ground and not retreated. Satellite images would be telling if available. I would expect threats of nuclear retaliation against any “foreign interventionists” contemplating genocide towards Roosia will be made.

    Ethnic cleansing, genocide, mass murder, are all perfectly understandable from a strategic point of view once you walk about in Vlad’s shoes. Those knee boots tend to be a bit bloody in practice, not so clean as in theory.

    But, but, but NATO.

  122. JimNorCal doesn’t remember Cambodia or Rwanda. Or even condider the Uighurs.

    Ukraine?

    Nothing to see, nothing to see.

  123. “Satellite images would be telling if available.”

    Satellite images show the mass grave in Bucha containing 280 bodies was already there on 21 March, so those claiming the Ukrainians did it are wrong. Disturbingly, satellite images allegedly show over 800 new graves in Kherson, a city held by the Russians for weeks. I suspect Bucha is not unique.

  124. Yes, mkent. The LINK above from April 3rd, time stamped after 8PM in London, is the best overview of the newstories coming out from Bucha and Irwin, Ukraine. The MSNBC as well as the AP is referenced, and the BBC video story beginning this thread is silently drawn on a few times.

    Yes, this is game changing, explosive information of wartime atrocities, involving summary execution, mass terror of civilians, reviving the worst memories of European history.

    That’s the minimum. Yet various mayors and Ukraine ministers allege genocide, as does Human Rights Watch — stating that worse news is yet to come. If this also come with more bound bodies with head shots, more eyewitness testimony, mass graves (forensically examined), and more evidence of planned Russian assaults on not just men, but women and children like here, then these charges will move beyond the BBCs careful claims of out of control and criminal troops to something worse.

    In any case, Russian officials sweeping claims of faked photos will not stand.

    The most recent comparable living memories involve the Serbian war, like Srebrenica, Bosnia, where some 8,000 civilians died in July 1995, as well as Russia’s prosecution of the Second War in Chechnya, 1999-2000.
    ============================== PULL QUOTE:

    Fears of a genocidal plot grew as it was claimed Russia adopted a ‘state technical standard for digging and maintaining mass graves’ weeks before the invasion.

    Troops were taught how to build the huge burial grounds for 1,000 corpses in just three days in a policy that came into effect on February 1 – three weeks before they marched on Ukraine.

    Observers fear it could suggest Putin had ‘planned genocide’ in Ukraine on a scale ‘unseen since World War Two’.

    Russia pulled out of the cities of Kyiv and Chernihiv on Friday, retreating up to 25 miles in places and losing more than 30 towns in a significant victory for Ukraine.
    But as the survivors emerged from their hiding places underground, their stories and the untold destruction surrounding them laid bare the horrors of the Russian occupation.
    —————————————————————

    Like Brian Lovely, I’ve been witness to doubtful denials and twisted rationalisations on our side. Well folks, here’s you’re Gates of Damascus moment to get facts straight and motives right. Since even a broken clock is correct twice a day, this isn’t a tough concession to make.

    I recall that during the 1990s, Russian memories of Stalin’s crimes in Ukraine were forgotten, together with Stalin himself. Until, during the 00s, when Putin revived Stalin as the Great Patriotic War’s essential hero, while sanitising any teaching of his many heinous crimes.

    The outrage that’s going to build will lead to international demands that Russia change her nation’s teachings before normalization can go forward. But this worthy agenda might never be accepted until a post-Putin government is in place.

    “Never forget” is not just a Jewish lesson against German fascism. The reckoning with communist crimes against humanity is both past overdue in the present day. (This ‘teachable moment’ has long lasting potential to right wrongs within US education, too. SEE “In denial : historians, communism and espionage” by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, 2003)

    Thus, “is this a game-changer?” Or not? I say “yes.” There’s too much physical evidence and eyewitness testimony to deny the Russian’s problem for the world to go-along to get-along denial to prevail.

    I expect more stories and more coverage of this leading news coverage this week.
    And over the months to come.

  125. Glad isn’t a word that fits at all, but thank God for satellite coverage, clouds can still be a problem hiding Vlad’s crimes. Don’t know if synthetic aperture radar satellites have the resolution to record what the Roosian Armed forces and the Wagner Group (?) have been up to.

  126. “ Regarding Iraq, the reason we invaded”

    We invaded Iraq because we didn’t trust the corrupt leader and considered him a threat.

  127. om: JimNorCal doesn’t remember Cambodia or Rwanda. Or even condider the Uighurs.

    om has forgotten that you check the contents of Hunter’s laptop before classifying it as “Russian disinformation”.
    Just kidding. om doesn’t make coherent arguments, they just act belligerent and disagreeable. Mission accomplished, om.

  128. JimNorCal:

    Genocide, look it up. It isn’t in Hunter’s laptop. And is Vlad consulting Hunter’s laptop.

    Just a few examples of genocide to save you the trouble of having to delve deep into those old timey days.

  129. While we wait for the next shoe to drop on the House of Biden, we watch Ukraine reap its own bitter harvest. The question was posed whether or not those meting out the punishment are directly motivated by Ukrainian corruption. This is like asking what motivates winds and solar flares. On the long journey of many lifetimes, fortunate are those who can own the karma they created for themselves with equanimity. Everyone does this eventually. It’s only a question of how many lifetimes it takes.

    Today is the day for Ukraine to (1) be honest about the corruption and (2) defend the nation by accepting terms that bring peace. The success of #2 would be greatly enhanced by #1. The harshness of dishonesty karma knows no limit. If you manage to temporarily assuage it by crying woe are we, an unpaid balance will carry into the future.

    Meanwhile, we hope that passivity in the face of Democrat corruption does not bring a passive (“mostly peaceful”) end to our own republic.

  130. Never heard so much concern about corruption. Taken as normal, as acceptable, as part of doing business in other countries, worth a joke or two…..
    Suddenly….corruption is a BIG DEAL and we can have peace if the Ukes fess up to having been corrupt. Or, if we don’t have peace, we can justify leaving them out to dry. Or if Putin isn’t mollified by the Ukes’ abject confessions…it’s their own damn’ fault for giving Biden and crew a lot of money which became an issue all of a sudden about six weeks ago.
    Jeebus. Visualize transparency.

  131. Horrifying, om (the RedState link). And these things were published in Russia, where at this point nobody publishes without approval of the regime.

  132. With respect to corruption, all signals I see indicate that Russia is significantly worse than Ukraine.

  133. Satellite photos show that the dead were there when the Russians were there.

    That said, we have multiple videos now of Russians shooting civilians. I recall at least 4 incidences, none justified. And nothing whatsoever like Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Someone who is willing to gun down an unarmed civilian for walking on the street would shoot someone in the back of the head or rape if it suits him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>