NATO’s Scorched Earth in Ukraine | Consortium News

[T. A. Gardner]

Many reports that the Western "experts" are shocked at the sight of top rated Western Armour burning in Ukraine. Scott Ritter says that part of the problem is that the Ukrainians dont know how to use it, in part because they are almost out of trained soldiers, but part of the problem is as well that our stuff was never as good as we imagined it is, in part because we have not gone against a peer military in many decades. Following is the theory that f-16's will not see action in Ukraine because the West cant deal with seeing them ineffective and easily shot down.

If you give idiots nuclear bombs, don't expect good things to come of it.

While that's hyperbolic, giving morons an M1 Abrams tank means you lose the tank. We gave some to the Iraqi's. Same thing...

If you have a crew of really top notch quality in an inferior weapons system, they will beat a top notch weapons system with an inferior crew every time.

 

[Hawkeye10]

If you give idiots nuclear bombs, don't expect good things to come of it.

While that's hyperbolic, giving morons an M1 Abrams tank means you lose the tank. We gave some to the Iraqi's. Same thing...

If you have a crew of really top notch quality in an inferior weapons system, they will beat a top notch weapons system with an inferior crew every time.

The gear was never as good as we thought it was....and over the years it has gotten worse as the military became more about finding a way to send more money to military contractors than it was at either getting ready for or fighting wars. The stuff is too expensive, too complicated, too heavy and if it works at all (which has become more rare) it usually breaks down a lot....which is all really bad if we ever had to fight a war against a peer....because we will be slaughtered.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The gear was never as good as we thought it was....and over the years it has gotten worse as the military became more about finding a way to send more money to military contractors than it was at either getting read for or fighting wars. The stuff is too expensive, too complicated, too heavy and if it works at all (which has become more rare) it usually breaks down a lot....which is all really bad if we ever had to fight a war against a peer....because we will be slaughtered.

The gear is as good as the people who are using it. That's always been the case.

 

[Hawkeye10]

The gear is as good as the people who are using it. That's always been the case.

That's nonsense that only a true idiot would believe.

 

[Hawkeye10]

"We towed half of our stuff into Baghdad"
MacGregor

 

[Tinkerpeach]

It’s time for robot soldiers

 

[Hawkeye10]

It’s time for robot soldiers

The Globalists say that they are going to end war under their new global government. Nations will no longer be allowed to have militaries except for ceremonial units, all force will be under global government control, probably out of the UN.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

The Globalists say that they are going to end war under their new global government. Nations will no longer be allowed to have militaries except for ceremonial units, all force will be under global government control, probably out of the UN.

A global government is not possible until maybe we start colonizing space.

 

[Hawkeye10]

A global government is not possible until maybe we start colonizing space.

The UTOPIANS dream big.

News @ 11.

 

[Scott]

An article I found interesting published a few days ago on Consortium News by Tony Kevin, thought others here might be interested in reading it and perhaps offering a constructive comment or 2. Quoting from it:

**
July 5, 2023

The forthcoming NATO Summit in Vilnius on July 11-12 seems already infected by a strange policy fatalism, writes Tony Kevin.

By Tony Kevin

Hope of a policy breakthrough in Vilnius, Lithuania towards peace in Ukraine, spearheaded by the war-weary East Europeans, seems to have drained away.

There is general acceptance in NATO that the Ukrainian summer offensives in Zaporizhie and again now in Bakhmut have failed to dent Russian defences, with horrific mortality in Ukrainian manpower and enormous destruction of Western-supplied equipment.

The West seems content to let Zelensky go on wasting Ukraine’s increasingly scarce military-age men in a process described by writer Raúl Ilargi Meijer as NATO’s assisted suicide of the Ukrainian nation.

The NATO unspoken strategy seems to be: we know Russia is inevitably winning in Ukraine, but we will make sure we and our Kiev proxies destroy as much as possible of Ukraine’s manpower and national wealth before Russia takes control of the country.

The Kakhovka dam is gone, and what is left of Zaporizhie Nuclear Power Plant seems increasingly at risk of West-assisted Ukrainian sabotage. These two huge assets were the pivots of Ukraine’s industrial and agricultural potential and wealth.

When Russia wins political control over the ruined land of Ukraine, and after it repudiates Western carpetbagging claims to asset ownership there, it will face a huge rebuilding job, comparable to the situation the Soviet Union faced in Ukraine after the 1944-45 vengeful scorched-earth actions by the retreating Nazi divisions.

Meanwhile, Germany under its supine Scholz leadership is de-industrialising, following the loss of cheap Russian gas after the U.S.-conducted sabotage of the Baltic pipelines. German industrialists are taking their capital, management skills and intellectual property elsewhere. France is riven by serious rioting. The EU is distracted and aimless. Western Europe is shrinking in global influence.

In the U.S., only the military-industrial-information complex is doing well. Infrastructure continues to decay. The middle class is eroding and confused. The Democrats are the party of liberal imperialism and the Republicans are still riven between warmongers and America-first nationalist Trumpians. Who knows who will be the next U.S. president, and if he or she can arrest America’s relative decline.

[snip]

There is enough evidence now to satisfy the Global Majority that U.S. regime change and controlling operations in Ukraine since 2013 have been above all cynically aimed at weakening and destabilising Russia. Remembering their own viciously exploited colonial history, the Global Majority are glad these Western efforts are failing.

The Vilnius NATO meeting will produce no new miracles of salvation for the doomed Kiev regime. There will be a lot of tired rhetoric about continuing to defend democratic Ukraine.

Nobody – speakers or listeners – will believe it.
**

Full article:
NATO’s Scorched Earth in Ukraine | Consortium News

The war would be over in 48 hours if the Russian Invaders withdrew from internationally recognized Ukrainian sovereign territory.

I think you've said this line quite a few times now. Pretty sure you know that my general rebuttal to it is that Russia's counter to this is that they were protecting both its national security as well as the ethnic Russians which are predominantly in the eastern region of Ukraine. It should come as no surprise that most if not all of the territory that Russia has taken is composed of predominantly ethnic Russian and Russian speakers. Because of this, it shouldn't be surprising that the results of the referendums they held in the 4 regions they have some control of was that they all voted to join the Russian Federation.

If Russia were to leave these territories that voted to become part of Russia, it would be an abandonment of people who now generally consider themselves to be Russian citizens. It's just not going to happen. Furthermore, it's become increasingly evident that Ukraine vaunted "spring offensive" is a bust. It makes a lot more sense that Ukraine accept the fact that it's lost a significant portion of its country to Russia and try to acquire a ceasefire to try to avoid losing any more of it.

 

[Scott]

The war would be over in 48 hours if the Russian Invaders withdrew from internationally recognized Ukrainian sovereign territory.

According to Phoenix only Putin gets to determine what countries are sovereign.

That made me smile. It's the U.S. that has been going on "military adventures" far from home for some time now and stayed there for years or even decades. The 2 most recent examples would be Afghanistan and Iraq. They were no threat to the U.S. and they certainly didn't have a large percentage of their population being composed of ethnic Americans or even english speakers. Perhaps most importantly, they weren't right next to the U.S. and threatening to acquire nuclear weapons even as they were killing ethnic Americans in their country.

 

[Scott]

Ukraine is a corrupt piece of garbage, just ask Biden who blackmailed them.

Ukraine's government is, certainly. Its people have been suffering a great deal because of it. Had the U.S. not helped organize what amounted to a coup of the elected Ukrainian government back in 2014, their government might have been a lot better than it is now.

Putin is finishing the job Joe couldn't.

I think that's being too kind to Joe or perhaps more importantly, the people in the U.S. behind their foreign policy towards Ukraine. Those people, such as Victoria Nuland, have been instrumental in creating the circumstances that have led to this war in Ukraine and the immense suffering it has wrought.

 

[Scott]

I was surprised yesterday when I learned Erdogan supports Ukraine entry into NATO.

Same. I wonder why he decided to pivot that way.

 

[Scott]

Putin is finishing the job Joe couldn't.

In his attempt to make Ukraine as corrupt as Russia, the most corrupt country in the world.

I haven't seen any evidence that Putin's trying to make Ukraine corrupt. As To Russia being the "most corrupt country in the world", I haven't seen any survey claim that, although it is in the top 10 in one:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-corrupt-countries

The main issue as far as I'm concerned shouldn't be how corrupt Ukraine and Russia are, but rather, does it make sense that Russia would feel threatened by the 8 year civil war in Ukraine as well as its desire to reaquire nuclear weapons. I think a rather easy way to answer that question would be to ask what would the U.S. do if a neighbour that doesn't exactly get along with the U.S. were to acquire nuclear weapons. We already know the answer to that question- it's called the Cuban Missile Crisis.

 

[Cypress]

I think you've said this line quite a few times now. Pretty sure you know that my general rebuttal to it is that Russia's counter to this is that they were protecting both its national security as well as the ethnic Russians which are predominantly in the eastern region of Ukraine. It should come as no surprise that most if not all of the territory that Russia has taken is composed of predominantly ethnic Russian and Russian speakers. Because of this, it shouldn't be surprising that the results of the referendums they held in the 4 regions they have some control of was that they all voted to join the Russian Federation.

If Russia were to leave these territories that voted to become part of Russia, it would be an abandonment of people who now generally consider themselves to be Russian citizens. It's just not going to happen. Furthermore, it's become increasingly evident that Ukraine vaunted "spring offensive" is a bust. It makes a lot more sense that Ukraine accept the fact that it's lost a significant portion of its country to Russia and try to acquire a ceasefire to try to avoid losing any more of it.

Pirogzhin himself said the Kremlin was lying their ass off about NATO preparing to attack Russia. No person with a shred of integrity believes that horseshit.

Putin is an imperialist who sees a Eurasia dominated by Russian imperial control. He could not bear seeing Ukraine drift towards the European Union; as far as he is concerned Ukraine is part and parcel of the greater Russian empire.

Russia has proven themselves a threat to their neighbors sovereignty

That's why Finland and Sweden are joining NATO, and eventually Ukraine will be invited to join NATO.

NATO membership seems to be the only way for eastern European nations to deter Kremlin aggression

 

[Scott]

I was surprised yesterday when I learned Erdogan supports Ukraine entry into NATO.

That isn't going to happen.

This is one of the reasons the Russians are there right now.

Agreed.

Besides, NATO members strongly oppose this as it would lead to nothing but problems.

Clearly not -all- NATO members, Turkey being one of them. As I mentioned to anonymoose, I'm curious to know why Turkey has changed its stance.

 

[Scott]

think you've said this line quite a few times now. Pretty sure you know that my general rebuttal to it is that Russia's counter to this is that they were protecting both its national security as well as the ethnic Russians which are predominantly in the eastern region of Ukraine. It should come as no surprise that most if not all of the territory that Russia has taken is composed of predominantly ethnic Russian and Russian speakers. Because of this, it shouldn't be surprising that the results of the referendums they held in the 4 regions they have some control of was that they all voted to join the Russian Federation.

If Russia were to leave these territories that voted to become part of Russia, it would be an abandonment of people who now generally consider themselves to be Russian citizens. It's just not going to happen. Furthermore, it's become increasingly evident that Ukraine vaunted "spring offensive" is a bust. It makes a lot more sense that Ukraine accept the fact that it's lost a significant portion of its country to Russia and try to acquire a ceasefire to try to avoid losing any more of it.

Pirogzhin himself said the Kremlin was lying their ass off about NATO preparing to attack Russia. No person with a shred of integrity believes that horseshit.

No need to use obscene language in a civilized discussion. I haven't heard Prigozhin saying that the Kremlin was lying, but even if he did, you need to consider how reliable Prighozin is as a source of information. He's said a lot of things, some of which sound like he was attempting to pander to the west near the end of his reign as the ostensible chief of Wagner.

Putin is an imperialist who sees a Eurasia dominated by Russian imperial control. He could not bear seeing Ukraine drift towards the European Union; as far as he is concerned Ukraine is part and parcel of the greater Russian empire.

He has made it clear was that he couldn't bear to see the people of eastern the Donbass region suffer any longer. He said as much in the speech he gave on the day that he began Russia's military operation in Ukraine. I've quoted this part of his speech before, but just in case you missed it:

**
This brings me to the situation in Donbass. We can see that the forces that staged the coup in Ukraine in 2014 have seized power, are keeping it with the help of ornamental election procedures and have abandoned the path of a peaceful conflict settlement. For eight years, for eight endless years we have been doing everything possible to settle the situation by peaceful political means. Everything was in vain.

As I said in my previous address, you cannot look without compassion at what is happening there. It became impossible to tolerate it. We had to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia, on all of us. It is their aspirations, the feelings and pain of these people that were the main motivating force behind our decision to recognise the independence of the Donbass people’s republics.
**

Source:
Here Is the Full Text of Putin’s Speech This Morning, Feb 24, 2022 | paulcraigroberts.org

Russia has proven themselves a threat to their neighbors sovereignty

No, they've proven that they're tired of trying to resolve things in eastern Ukraine by simply talking to western powers, especially now that western powers have publicly stated that they were just pretending to try to work out a deal with Eastern Ukrainians and Russia when the truth was they were just building up Ukraine's army to take eastern Ukraine back by force. They may well have succeeded too if Russia hadn't put a stop to it.

That's why Finland and Sweden are joining NATO, and eventually Ukraine will be invited to join NATO.

Finland and Sweden don't have nearly as antagonistic a relationship with Russia as Ukraine does. That being said, I strongly suspect that joining NATO isn't doing the people of those nations any favours in the long run.

NATO membership seems to be the only way for eastern European nations to deter Kremlin aggression

People like John Mearsheimer have argued that it's NATO membership and the promise of it that has led to the mess in Ukraine that we have now. Mearsheimer had been predicting NATO's aggressive expansion east of Germany would have this effect eventually for years.

 

[anonymoose]

That made me smile.

Me too.

So, as to "recognizing the sovereignty of a sovereign state", the very first question you should be asking is, who determines the borders of a sovereign state? Russia decided…
I'm simply pointing out that it appears that Russia considers the breakaway state of Transnitria to be a sovereign state.

 

[anonymoose]

The main issue as far as I'm concerned shouldn't be how corrupt Ukraine and Russia are, but rather, does it make sense that Russia would feel threatened by the 8 year civil war in Ukraine

Nope. Nobody is threatening Russia. Not even NATO. If there was ever a justified time to do it, now would be it, to kick them out of Ukraine. Same as was done with kicking Iraq them out of Kuwait.

as well as its desire to reaquire nuclear weapons.

They can desire it all they want, they’re not getting any. What makes you think they would when no other recently added NATO countries didn’t ? Russian paranoia?

I think a rather easy way to answer that question would be to ask what would the U.S. do if a neighbour that doesn't exactly get along with the U.S. were to acquire nuclear weapons. We already know the answer to that question- it's called the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Yep and the other good thing that came out of that is Türkey gave up theirs. You seem to have a problem with that.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Agreed.



Clearly not -all- NATO members, Turkey being one of them. As I mentioned to anonymoose, I'm curious to know why Turkey has changed its stance.

I can't speak for Turkey as I am not familiar with their politics.