Cheers for posting that, gives the most believable case for why Russia has kept this a "special" and the risks of general mobilization.
A largely apathetic population at present might not be tomorrow.
This was also an interesting take and somewhat a contrary to blaming the west.
That’s another common, but understandable mistake in Western analysis: thinking that the war is rooted in geopolitics. I think that international politics played a very secondary role, if any, in the decision. It was mostly preconditioned by the domestic situation, which explains why it happened so suddenly and failed so miserably. It was not prepared, there was no diplomacy behind it, because it was not about foreign policy, it was about domestic policies.
It also shows the lie perpetrated by Guardian journalist Jenkins, that Putin has increased his stranglehold on the Russian population.
Interesting read, 👍
So, China and Russia might not be the besties that tankies imagine.
Kolker was detained on state treason charges for allegedly collaborating with China's security services, Reuters reported.
Kolker, who was diagnosed with stage four cancer, died while being transferred from the pre-trial detention center.
"It also shows the lie perpetrated by Guardian journalist Jenkins, that Putin has increased his stranglehold on the Russian population."
Not necessarily, if I were a Russian citizen I'd certainly feel like Putin was had his hands around my throat right now. The article does outline the possibility of some kind of resistance emerging but is rather vague about how that is going to happen, something underlined by the author's observation that 80% of the population is apolitical and completely disconnected from each other.
There is also the possibility that some other villain steps up to fill Putin's shoes. Really interesting article though..
It also shows the lie perpetrated by Guardian journalist Jenkins...snip
If you're talking about Simon Jenkins (as 2 days ago ^^) then he seems to suffer the occasional misunderstanding, such as this example from March 2020, "Why I’m taking the coronavirus hype with a pinch of salt"
He's made the sanctions argument at least twice (in May and July)
He also argues that “there were no Celts, just sociable sailors”
I don't know how seriously to take this, but just the fact that Russians are talking about it shows how desperate they are.
https://twitter.com/Aviation_Intel/status/1556054280137674752
Amnesty really screwed the dog with their report. Trying to argue nuance in the face of Russian trolls is unbelievably stupid.
It’s given the Russian authorities something to beat the Ukrainians with, for sure:
https://twitter.com/chriso_wiki/status/1555964462112317442?s=21
Not sure how the Ukrainian fighters can stay out of “Civilian Areas” while defending the country really.
thols2
Free Member
I don’t know how seriously to take this, but just the fact that Russians are talking about it shows how desperate they are.
Could be a sign of low munitions stocks in russia tbh. It's unlikely you are going to see 100k north koreans storming Ukraine, but I'd imagine they are after their stockpiles and anything interesting they've developed, if anything. Been reading snippets last few days, seems an opportunity for north korea in the short term anyhow. Energy and Grain is the other side of the bargain.
North Korean volunteers- now there’s an oxymoron 🤣
The broader point I took from the article above was that Putin is afraid of declaring an actual war, precisely because he is afraid of the reaction of the general population. Doesn’t exactly suggest a total and increasing control of the population, as claimed by Jenkins. I would say the Chinese authorities have a much stronger control.
Add to that the oil price has dramatically fallen! And you begin to see that Jenkins article is utter blx.
Jenkins also claimed that sanctions didn’t work in Iran, but it was sanctions that drove Iran to the negotiating table for the Nuclear deal (subsequently ruined by Trump).
Not sure how the Ukrainian fighters can stay out of “Civilian Areas” while defending the country really.
I'm getting the feeling that the Amnesty view is that Ukraine shouldn't defend itself at all. Seems to be just a rehash of the "quickest way for the war to end is for Ukraine to surrender" argument.
Not sure wether to believe the narrative that Russia has used up all its smart weapons and is therefore using old stock?
The counter narrative would be that munitions have a shelf life. Could it be that conflicts are often seen as an opportunity to dispose of ageing munitions first, it being cheaper to put a shell in a barrel and fire it at you enemy than dispose of it responsibly or keep paying for its storage / maintenance.
Likewise with the tank count. Russia has lost a lot of them but so has Ukraine and the Ukranians aren't being resupplied with modern tanks. I wonder what quantity of ageing dumb munitions are stockpiled in China, North Korea etc that they'd let go to Russia for a price?
The Russian strategy is not as dependent on smart weapons as the Ukranians, for whom smart weapons compensate for numerical disadvantages.
Not sure wether to believe the narrative that Russia has used up all its smart weapons and is therefore using old stock?
After the first couple of days had passed I find it hard to believe Russia would be holding back on anything that might turn a battle in their favour.
Maybe, just maybe at the start, but as soon as various fronts stalled, collapsed, good will gestured, slowed to a crawl I dont think itd continue.
Ukranians aren’t being resupplied with modern tanks.
Depends what you mean by modern tanks? The PT91s from Poland, are they modern, relative to what theyre facing?
These are American anti-radar missiles launched from aircraft. Question is, how did Ukraine launch them? Ukrainian Migs would need upgrading to launch them and NATO hasn't officially supplied any Western aircraft.
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1556286863236808704
Drone launched harm missiles.?
Haven't the usa given some uav's capable of launching munitions?
No need to mod your migs if a predator drone can do what needs doing from 30,000ft.
Just get the PlayStation generation to pilot the plane remotely.
Bit of a stretch though, linking what looks like a tailfin or canard with some random numbers to an actual weapon. Plus, so what. You got hit by an air to mud missile, as opposed to a mud to mud
Hope it took out what it was targeting and killed the operators.
It’s given the Russian authorities something to beat the Ukrainians with, for sure:
The Israelis have been using this excuse successfully for decades - bomb an apartment building (or a school, or a hospital) and then blame the Palestinians. Works for them, why not the Russiands?
Strange how NATO are not sanctioning apartheid Israel & arming the Palestinians…
I think you'll find that the constant Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians means that Western countries don't want to arm them. Attacking civilians is a war-crime. That doesn't mean I support Israel's policies, but it does mean that arming Palestinians is off the table and that Palestinian complaints about Israel are extremely hypocritical.
Let’s not derail the thread eh. 🤷♂️
Not wanting to stray too far off topic, but can you clarify which of Israel's policies you don't support?
https://twitter.com/protestencil/status/1556232568479137793
can you clarify which of Israel’s policies you don’t support?
There seemed to be a genuine chance of a peace settlement back in the 1990s. Hardliners on both sides worked to destroy that possibility. The Israeli right wanted to keep building settlements and the Palestinian hard-liners refused to acknowledge Israel and wanted to keep fighting. That made it impossible for moderates on either side to work toward the necessary compromises that would be necessary for a peace deal.
The result of that is that the Israeli right have made it impossible for Palestinians to form a viable Palestinian state and the Palestinian extremists have made it impossible for Israel to accept a one-state solution. The extremists on both sides benefit from continuing the hostilities. So, what we have is constant Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians and constant Israeli retaliation for those attacks. The right-wing government in Israel has used those Palestinian terrorist attacks as justification for draconian military crackdowns against Palestinians. They are extremely careful about how they do that so they can argue that they are responding to terrorist attacks, not attacking civilians. On that narrow legal ground, Israel has a strong argument, the Palestinian attacks are gross violations of human rights. However, looking at the larger picture, Israel has used that as a pretext for making it impossible for any Palestinian state to function, they simply don't seem to care at all about the plight of Palestinian civilians. So, what I think is wrong about Israel's behaviour isn't really answered by a list of policies, it the strategy of making it impossible for a Palestinian state to succeed, along with the network of polices that contribute to that.
I think that Western human-rights organizations are right to condemn Israel for that, but it's also important to condemn Palestinian terror attacks against Israeli citizens. Israelis see a double-standard where Israel is criticized but Palestinian attacks against citizens are ignored. That makes Israelis convinced that they are in a battle for survival and genocide would be the result if they relaxed their vigilance. (They have the Holocaust to point to as evidence of this.) When people are that afraid for their survival, they are not going to compromise or negotiate. That's why it's important to recognize that Palestinian attacks against Israeli citizens are terrorism and that supplying weapons to Palestinians would be an incredibly stupid policy.
Not wanting to stray too far off topic
You clearly are wanting to.
Maybe if the US supplied Palestine with tanks and HIMARS the Palestinians would not be reduced to attacking civilians. Note also that the attacks on civilians produce far fewer casualties than "surgical" attacks on Palestinians.
And , indeed, let's not get into how the Israelis ended up in Palestine to begin with............
Why not start a new thread on Palestinian Israeli conflict?
In an attempt to get this back on topic
Interesting Twitter post
https://twitter.com/Frank_Stones/status/1556234494205730816
Why not start a new thread on Palestinian Israeli conflict?
Let's not, but it is interesting to consider why Ukraine has become such a cause for many people when horrors have been happening for ages and nobody sold cakes for refugees at the WI, or asked around for furniture for refugees houses, or put up flags in their gardens, or filled their FB page with supportive comments.
Maybe if the US supplied Palestine with tanks and HIMARS the Palestinians would not be reduced to attacking civilians. Note also that the attacks on civilians produce far fewer casualties than “surgical” attacks on Palestinians.
So, you're saying it's ok for Palestinians to attack civilians? Saying silly things like that is why Israelis don't trust other countries to help them in the face of threatened genocide.
it is interesting to consider why Ukraine has become such a cause for many people
I think a large part of it is because it's rare to see such a black-and-white case of aggression and attempted genocide and to see the victim successfully fight back.
So, you’re saying it’s ok for Palestinians to attack civilians?
No, I'm not saying that, and nor did I write that. I am saying that it is perverse to fixate on that single aspect without considering the wider context, as it is perverse to blame Ukraine for resisting invasion from civilian areas.
https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1556298504070381569?s=20&t=GzY7vEFfTgPYf29q5ikdMQ
Seems optimistic, any able to counter this?
I think a large part of it is because it’s rare to see such a black-and-white case of aggression and attempted genocide and to see the victim successfully fight back.
There are countless examples of naked aggression (depending on which propaganda you choose to believe) and Ukraine fought back as a result of training and arming by NATO. So it's a bit chicken and egg.
I am saying that it is perverse to fixate on that single aspect without considering the wider context,
I explained my view of the wider context. An incredibly important part of the situation is that Palestinians have been attacking Israeli civilians for many decades and Israelis perceive a double standard where people ignore crimes by Palestinians but criticize Israel for responding. If you want Israelis to trust in a peace settlement, it is essential that terror attacks by Palestinians are acknowledged as terrorism, not brushed aside.
Ukraine fought back as a result of training and arming by NATO.
Ukraine is now receiving a lot of NATO gear. When Russia invaded, their equipment was mostly of Warsaw Pact origin. Ukraine did this mostly on their own, that is remarkable.
Ukraine did this mostly on their own
After years of training by US and UK "advisors". Regardless, I don't see why that makes Ukraininan refugees special? I don't think it's (e.g.) the Rohingya's fault that they weren't able to fight back?
(p.s. I am not pursuing the Palestine discussion here)
Attacking civilians is a war-crime.
As far as I am aware Israel is the only country in the world which in 2022 has "settlers".
These often armed civilians are used as instruments of conquest, in clear violation of international law - the Geneva convention specifically prohibits the movement of civilians into occupied territories.
Israeli governments have repeatedly ignored condemnations from the United Nations, an organisation specifically set up in pursuit of global peace, for moving settlers into occupied territories.
When armed civilians move into your home and the world sits back and does nothing, beyond expressing disapproval, taking the matter into your own hands seems a logical response.
The double standards of just our own government are clear to see for everyone. There was a puff piece in this weekends Guardian about a wee town in the south east that had taken in hundreds of Ukrainian refugee families, and while all were heart-warming stories by themselves, the obvious (not to be too on point about it) whiteness of everyone was hard to miss. It's difficult to look past the ability of Ukrainians to get on an airplane to Gatwick, when Eritrean, Somali and Sudanese are risking their lives in teeny inflatables.
As far as I am aware Israel is the only country in the world which in 2022 has “settlers”.
China effectively has them in certain regions where the undesirable natives are corralled up and suitable replacements imported.
As far as I am aware Israel is the only country in the world which in 2022 has “settlers”.
You might want to take a look at what China's been doing for the last few decades, plus Myanmar, plus numerous other countries.
When armed civilians move into your home and the world sits back and does nothing, beyond expressing disapproval, taking the matter into your own hands seems a logical response.
I'm adamantly opposed to the Israeli settler policy, it's appalling and does nothing to make Israel more secure. However, launching rocket attacks against Israeli civilians is still a crime, regardless of the settlements being effectively an invasion of Palestinian territory. If you believe that it's ok for Palestinians to respond to Israeli actions with terror attacks then Israelis will say that it must be ok for them to murder innocent Palestinians in retaliation. I'm extremely pessimistic that any settlement can be reached because I think Israelis have seen that other countries ignore terror attacks against Israel and conclude that there is no point in even trying to reach a peace deal. The only way that Israelis will ever be persuaded differently is to recognize terror attacks against Israeli citizens as crimes and condemn those responsible. If the West won't do that, Israel will never sign any peace treaty.
terror attacks
I've yet to see an example of using the word "terrorism" do anything other than expose the prejudices of the writer.
When armed civilians move into your home and the world sits back and does nothing
Hamas avowed "covenant" is the destruction of Israel, when armed terrorist extremists continue to attack civilians, it can hardly be a surprise when there are continual entrenched disagreements and a mutual distrust that either side would be able to stick to any agreement. In polling both sides generally see further violence as the best means to end the conflict the with 55% support, whereas negotiation and peace gets only 21%.
I'll condemn the violence of successive Israeli Govts, but I don't hold up much hope in a change in policy
I think a large part of people taking in Ukrainian refugees vs those from African countries isn't 'whiteness' it's that everyone is hoping/assuming the Ukrainian refugee crisis is temporary and they'll be returning home 'soon', that's not the case for the majority of African refugees. That doesn't mean they should be any less welcome but it's a very different commitment when you're opening up your home for them to stay. I don't think it will be long before there's problems with the Homes for Ukrainian refugees scheme - I expect a lot of people that initially signed up thought it would be for a few months.
Hamas avowed “covenant” is the destruction of Israel
Why do you think that is? And when was the last time that you heard an Israeli politician talk of "Palestine's right to exist"?
I've started a new thread for comparisons between Palestine and Ukraine...
So back to Ukraine; found this interesting:
https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1554101328237969409
With the events of Maidan in 2014, the Western camp prevailed, while Putin retaliated by taking Crimea and waging war in the Donbass. The developments marked the beginning of Ukraine’s “annexation” into the Euro-Atlantic economic sphere, described by Mousseau and Elisabeth Fraser in a 2014 report entitled The Corporate Takeover of Ukrainian Agriculture, which gives an account of the redoubled push by Western financial institutions to “throw open the nation’s vast agricultural sector to foreign corporations.”
From the West came arms and money in the form of assistance packages from the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. As usual, the cash was strongly tied to reforms that Ukraine was required to implement, all under the banner of fiscal restraint and austerity. Also according to Mousseau, the drive in Ukraine to privatize the land market is unprecedented in recent history. To limit unrestrained privatization, a moratorium on the sale of land to foreigners had been imposed in 2001. Since then, the repeal of this rule has been a main goal of Western institutions. As early as 2013, for instance, the World Bank provided an $89 million loan for the development of a deed and land title program needed for the commercialization of state-owned and cooperative land.
Furthermore, Western banks are imposing the optimization and consolidation of agribusinesses into large entities at the expense of small producers, who still constitute the majority in the country, with the goal of increasing “added value,” and, in the words of a 2019 World Bank paper, “accelerating private investment in agriculture.” The same report states that “a 30-percent productivity increase in agriculture could result in an additional 4.4 percent Ukrainian GDP growth in five years, and 12.5 percent growth over ten years.” It is safe to assume that the growth rates of private agricultural producers were expected to see far greater increases.
Edit. Moved to the other thread.
