The War in Ukraine

[Scott]

It seems you're having a hard time denying the parallels between the Spanish American war and the Russian Ukrainian war.

Over a hundred years of difference there, Scott.

You're referring to the time that they occurred. You've yet to make any statements on how they were different in nature.

By your logic, we can justify slavery because it's in the Bible.

No, -that- would be a difference in kind, not a difference in time. I'm also not Christian, so while I can respect the bible as being apparently derived at least in part by historical records, that doesn't mean I think that what happens therein must be justified just because it's in there.

Sorry, dude, but while there are parallels what you are actually doing it saying Putin is 100 years behind the times.

No, what I'm trying to convey is that when a powerful nation feels that a neighbour is threatening them in some way, said neighbour generally tends to get invaded by its more powerful neighbour. The U.S. has gone to great lengths to portray nations that weren't a threat as a threat just to get its population on side. A good example is the Iraq invasion.

[Putin's] a thug and the sooner a Russian patriot pushes him out of a ten-story window, the better for the Russian people and also the Ukrainian people. Let peace reign over the land.

You honestly believe that if Putin were killed that Russia would decide to pack its bags in Ukraine and head home? If anything, I think his replacement would be even -more- fervent in their desire to deal with the Ukrainian problem, and this would be especially true if there was even a whiff of Ukraine being the cause of Putin's demise.

Going back to your Spanish-American War scenario, don't forget that GITMO was leased from the Cubans. Same for the US bases in the Philippines; we didn't take them, we leased them. Putin needed access to a warm water port. Specifically Sevastopol Naval Base and easy access to it. Why didn't he offer to work out a financial deal to lease the base and access to it or make a joint base?

He did, way back in 2010. American Professor and Statesman Jeffrey Sachs gets into this in the speech/article that I've quoted to you before. Quoting that specific part, colorizing the most important word in red:
**
As you know, Viktor Yanukovych was elected as president of Ukraine in 2010 on the platform of Ukraine’s neutrality. Russia had no territorial interests or designs in Ukraine at all. I know. I was there off-and-on during these years. What Russia was negotiating during 2010 was a 25-year lease to 2042 for Sevastopol naval base. That’s it. There were no Russian demands for Crimea, or for the Donbas. Nothing like that at all. The idea that Putin is reconstructing the Russian empire is childish propaganda. Excuse me.

If anyone knows the day-to-day and year-to-year history, this is childish stuff. Yet childish stuff seems to work better than adult stuff. So, there were no territorial demands at all before the 2014 coup [in Ukraine]. Yet the United States decided that Yanukovych must be overthrown because he favored neutrality and opposed NATO enlargement. It’s called a regime change operation.

There have been around one hundred regime-change operations by the U.S. since 1947, many in your countries [speaking to the MEPs] and many all over the world.

(Political scientist Lindsey O’Rourke documented 64 U.S. covert regime-change operations between 1947 and 1989, and concluded that “Regime change operations, especially those conducted covertly, have oft en led to prolonged instability, civil wars, and humanitarian crises in the affected regions.” See O’Rourke’s 2018 book, Covert Regime Change: America’s Secret Cold War. After 1989, there is ample evidence of the C.I.A. involved in Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Venezuela, and many other countries.)

That’s what the C.I.A. does for a living. Please know it. It’s a very unusual kind of foreign policy. In the American government, if you don’t like the other side, you don’t negotiate with them, you try to overthrow them, preferably, covertly. If it doesn’t work covertly, you do it overtly. You always say it’s not our fault. They’re the aggressor. They’re the other side.

They’re “Hitler.” That comes up every two or three years. Whether it’s Saddam Hussein, whether it’s [deposed Syrian President Bashar] al-Assad, whether it’s Putin, that’s very convenient. That’s the only foreign policy explanation the American people are ever given. Well, we’re facing Munich 1938. We can’t talk to the other side. They’re evil and implacable foes. That’s the only model of foreign policy we ever hear from our government and mass media. The mass media repeats it entirely because it’s completely suborned by the U.S. government.
**

Full article:

Jeffrey Sachs: The Geopolitics of Peace

The author explains manipulative U.S. post-war foreign policy to European MPs, explodes myths about Ukraine and urges an independent European foreign policy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjcMoDFU1xg&ab_channel=MichaelvonderSchulenburg This is an edited transcript of Professor Jeffrey Sachs’

consortiumnews.com

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You're referring to the time that they occurred. You've yet to make any statements on how they were different in nature.

I don't do text walls. Sorry you didn't get the hint. In the span of the 110+ years between the Spanish-American War and Putin's attack on Ukraine there were two world wars, the rise and fall of the USSR, nuclear weapons, flight, the Moon landing and, in general, the advancement of the human race beyond the Colonial age. Well, all except for Russia which is backwards in comparison and run by a dictator with early 20th century values.

Putin is a thug. The sooner a Russian patriot takes him out, the better for the Russians, Europe and the rest of the world.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Putin flying into Kursk on a copter during NATO's massive drone attack (a complete failure, as with almost everything NATO attempts in Ukraine) gets more interesting as I think about it.

I wonder if there is another shoe to drop.

 

[Scott]

You're referring to the time that they occurred. You've yet to make any statements on how they were different in nature.

I don't do text walls. Sorry you didn't get the hint. In the span of the 110+ years between the Spanish-American War and Putin's attack on Ukraine there were two world wars, the rise and fall of the USSR, nuclear weapons, flight, the Moon landing and, in general, the advancement of the human race beyond the Colonial age.

True, but you've yet to mention any significant differences between the Spanish-American War and the Russian-Ukrainian one. At this point, I decided I should actually try to look at the war in more detail and found that yes, there were some significant differences. A much better example would be the Cuban missile crisis.

Putin is a thug. The sooner a Russian patriot takes him out, the better for the Russians, Europe and the rest of the world.

You keep on repeating that line, or something similar, so I'll just respond the same way I responded last time:
"You honestly believe that if Putin were killed that Russia would decide to pack its bags in Ukraine and head home? If anything, I think his replacement would be even -more- fervent in their desire to deal with the Ukrainian problem, and this would be especially true if there was even a whiff of Ukraine being the cause of Putin's demise."

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Putin flying into Kursk on a copter during NATO's massive drone attack (a complete failure, as with almost everything NATO attempts in Ukraine) gets more interesting as I think about it.

I wonder if there is another shoe to drop.

Better to simply drop Vlad out of a ten-story window.

 

[Walt]

Ukraine attacked the Donbass Republics literally days before Russia decided to start its military operation/war in Ukraine.

Isn't that a bizarre coincidence? The Russians put years of planning into an invasion of Ukraine, and then days before the invasion of Ukraine made actions that justified the attack, without putting the attack in any jeopardy? And we know this is true, because the Russians tell us it is true...

It almost sounds like the Gleiwitz Radio Station attack all over again. That was another one of history's bizarre coincidences. Right before German invaded Poland, for some reason Poland decided to attack a minor radio station for no definable reason. It justified the whole planned invasion of Poland. We know that was true, because the Nazi propaganda division says it was, and would Nazis lie to us?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Isn't that a bizarre coincidence? The Russians put years of planning into an invasion of Ukraine, and then days before the invasion of Ukraine made actions that justified the attack, without putting the attack in any jeopardy? And we know this is true, because the Russians tell us it is true...

It almost sounds like the Gleiwitz Radio Station attack all over again. That was another one of history's bizarre coincidences. Right before German invaded Poland, for some reason Poland decided to attack a minor radio station for no definable reason. It justified the whole planned invasion of Poland. We know that was true, because the Nazi propaganda division says it was, and would Nazis lie to us?

Russian bots are going to be disappointed you don't take them seriously. LOL

 

[Hawkeye10]

Everyday the Imperial Empire faces the choice of admit that it has lost yet another war or escalate.

Escalate is always the answer.

Russia Won the War - John Mearsheimer, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen​

 

[Hawkeye10]

"Trump is finally beginning to learn what Ukraine is all about but it is too late....now he is stuck"
Alexander

"Then Trump was really dumb ...this never took a triple digit IQ to figure out "
Mearsheimer

 

[Hawkeye10]

WW3 HERE WE COME

 

[Hawkeye10]

"The delusion that they have not lost is necessary because the West cant admit that it is loading the meat grinder's with Ukrainians to hurt Russia"
Glenn

 

[Hawkeye10]

"Militarily the Russians are much stronger than they were three years ago, the Europeans are however much weaker....the calendar is working in Russias favor"
Alexander

 

[Hawkeye10]

"We (Europe) screwed up...... Ukraine is Europe.....when the Americans showed up with bad ideas we needed to tell them no."
Alexander

 

[Hawkeye10]

"Trump clearly has a good understanding of America, but of other lands and other people he knows almost nothing"
Alexander

 

[goat]

Russia will occupy Odesa and put that final nail in natos coffin. Whoever replaces Putin will not be kind to the west. The EU is bankrupt and pretending to be relevant. Blackrock Merz wants to be the new Hitler by forcing Russia to target Eastern European cities, but Poland is negotiating to regain its land in Ukraine. Americans are clueless to what's going on.

​

 

[Scott]

Ukraine attacked the Donbass Republics literally days before Russia decided to start its military operation/war in Ukraine.

Isn't that a bizarre coincidence?

From what I've read, it wasn't a coincidence at all- it was the last straw. Russia had already come to the conclusion that the U.S. was never going to agree to bar Ukraine into NATO. American Professor and Statesman Jeffrey Sachs got into that part in a speech he gave to European Parliament earlier this year:
**
At the end of 2021, Putin put on the table a last effort to reach a modus operandi with the U.S., in two security agreement drafts, one with Europe and one with the United States. He put the Russia-U.S. draft agreement on the table on Dec. 15, 2021.

Following that, I had an hour-long call with [National Security Advisor] Jake Sullivan in the White House, begging, “Jake, avoid the war. You can avoid the war. All the U.S. has to do is say, ‘NATO will not enlarge to Ukraine.’” And he said to me, “Oh, NATO’s not going to enlarge to Ukraine. Don’t worry about it.”

I said, “Jake, say it publicly.”

“No. No. No. We can’t say it publicly.”

I said, “Jake, you’re going to have a war over something that isn’t even going to happen?”

He said, “Don’t worry, Jeff. There will be no war.”

These are not very bright people. I’m telling you, if I can give you my honest view, they’re not very bright people. They talk to themselves. They don’t talk to anybody else. They play game theory. In noncooperative game theory, you don’t talk to the other side. You just make your strategy. This is the essence of non-cooperative game theory. It’s not negotiation theory. It’s not peacemaking theory. It is unilateral, noncooperative theory, if you know formal game theory.

That’s what they play. That kind of game theory started [in application] at the RAND Corporation. That’s what they still play. In 2019, there’s a paper by RAND, “Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground.”

Incredibly, the paper, in the public domain, asks how the U.S. should annoy, antagonize, and weaken Russia. That’s literally the strategy. We’re trying to provoke Russia, trying to make Russia break apart, perhaps have regime change, maybe unrest, maybe an economic crisis.

That’s what you in Europe call your ally. So, there I was with my frustrating phone call with Sullivan, standing out in the freezing cold. I happened to be trying to have a ski day.

“Oh, there’ll be no war, Jeff.”

We know what happened next: the Biden administration refused to negotiate over NATO enlargement. The stupidest idea of NATO is the so-called open-door policy, based on Article 10 of the NATO Treaty (1949). NATO reserves the right to go where it wants, as long as the host government agrees, without any neighbor – such as Russia — having any say whatsoever.
**

Full article:

Jeffrey Sachs: The Geopolitics of Peace

The author explains manipulative U.S. post-war foreign policy to European MPs, explodes myths about Ukraine and urges an independent European foreign policy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjcMoDFU1xg&ab_channel=MichaelvonderSchulenburg This is an edited transcript of Professor Jeffrey Sachs’

consortiumnews.com

The Russians put years of planning into an invasion of Ukraine

Where did you get that notion?

The Russians put years of planning into an invasion of Ukraine, and then days before the invasion of Ukraine made actions that justified the attack, without putting the attack in any jeopardy? And we know this is true, because the Russians tell us it is true...

Putin actually didn't mention the renewed assault on the Donbass at all in the speech he gave on the day of the military operation. If I'd relied solely on his speech, I wouldn't have known. I do believe I read a Russian article somewhere that does bring it up, but my main source of information wasn't Russian at all. It was the article written by former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud. I've asked you to take a look at it, but I doubt you've clicked on the link, so I'll quote the relevant portion:
**
In fact, as early as February 16 [2022], Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers from the Donbass being run over.

If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21.

That day, he acceded to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Republics of Donbass and, in the process, he signed treaties of friendship and assistance with them.

The Ukrainian artillery bombardments on the populations of Donbass continued and, on February 23, the two Republics requested military aid from Russia. On the 24th, Vladimir Putin invokes Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for mutual military assistance within the framework of a defensive alliance.

In order to make the Russian intervention totally illegal in the eyes of the public we deliberately obscure the fact that the war actually started on February 16th. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as certain Russian and European intelligence services were well aware… The lawyers will judge.
**

Full article:

Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative

Jacques Baud, a NATO expert, denounces western coverage of the Ukraine invasion.

scheerpost.com

It almost sounds like the Gleiwitz Radio Station attack all over again. That was another one of history's bizarre coincidences. Right before German invaded Poland, for some reason Poland decided to attack a minor radio station for no definable reason. It justified the whole planned invasion of Poland. We know that was true, because the Nazi propaganda division says it was, and would Nazis lie to us?

I can certainly agree that there are false flag attacks. It's just that in the case of Ukraine, it really was the Ukrainian army that attacked the Donbass Republics. The sad thing is that even -after- Russia essentially warned Ukraine to back off on February 21, 2022, the Ukrainian army continued its assault. And they even continued when, shortly after Russia's miltary operation in Ukraine began and a peace treaty was almost at hand, they decided to shred it and continue the war. From the same article from Jeffrey Sachs that I quoted earlier in this post:
**
When Zelensky said a few days after Russia’s invasion that Ukraine was ready for neutrality, a peace agreement was in reach. I know the details of this because I talked to key negotiators and mediators in detail and have learned much from public pronouncements of others. Shortly after the start of negotiations in March 2022, a document was exchanged between the parties that President Putin had approved, and that Lavrov had presented. This was being managed by the Turkish mediators. I flew to Ankara in the spring of 2022 to hear first-hand and in detail what happened in the mediation. The bottom-line is this: Ukraine walked away, unilaterally, from a near agreement.

End of the Ukraine War
Why did Ukraine walk away from the negotiations? Because the United States told them to and because the U.K. added icing to the cake by having BoJo [Boris Johnson, the former U.K. prime minister] go to Kyiv in early April to Ukraine to make the same point.

[U.K Prime Minister] Keir Starmer turns out to be even worse, even more of a warmonger. It’s unimaginable, but it is true. Boris Johnson explained, and you can find it on the web, that what’s at stake here is nothing less than Western hegemony! Not Ukraine but Western hegemony.

Michael von der Schulenberg and I met at the Vatican with a group of experts in Spring 2022, and we wrote a document explaining that nothing good can come out of continued war. (The meeting at the Vatican was the Fraternal Economy Session on Jubilee 2025: “Hope in the Signs of the Times.”)

Our group argued strenuously, but to no avail, that Ukraine should negotiate immediately, because delays will mean massive deaths, risk of nuclear escalation, and possibly an outright loss of the war.

I wouldn’t want to change one word from what we wrote then. Nothing was wrong in that document. Since the U.S. talked Ukraine out of the negotiations, perhaps one million Ukrainians have died or been severely wounded.

And American senators who are as nasty and cynical as imaginable say this is a wonderful expenditure of U.S. money because no Americans are dying. It’s the pure proxy war. One of our senators nearby New York State, Connecticut’s Richard Blumenthal, said this out loud. Mitt Romney said this out loud. It’s the best money America can spend. No Americans are dying. It’s unreal.
**

Full article:

Jeffrey Sachs: The Geopolitics of Peace

The author explains manipulative U.S. post-war foreign policy to European MPs, explodes myths about Ukraine and urges an independent European foreign policy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjcMoDFU1xg&ab_channel=MichaelvonderSchulenburg This is an edited transcript of Professor Jeffrey Sachs’

consortiumnews.com

 

[Walt]

Russia will occupy Odesa and put that final nail in natos coffin.

They would need to cross the Dnieper River, and a lot of space, and also attack from the sea at the same time. They have shown no sign of being able to cross the Dnieper River, and what remains of their navy is in hiding. As a reminder, they cannot move more ships into the Black Sea as long as the war goes on.

Whoever replaces Putin will not be kind to the west.

You already have Putin dying? OK, so you have Putin failing so much that he is killed, and then the next leader immediately saying he wants to fail even worse than Putin?

Blackrock Merz wants to be the new Hitler by forcing Russia to target Eastern European cities

Merz is "forcing" Putin to target civilians? How is he doing that?

 

[Hawkeye10]

Russia will occupy Odesa and put that final nail in natos coffin. Whoever replaces Putin will not be kind to the west. The EU is bankrupt and pretending to be relevant. Blackrock Merz wants to be the new Hitler by forcing Russia to target Eastern European cities, but Poland is negotiating to regain its land in Ukraine. Americans are clueless to what's going on.

​

Well currently the Russians have 100,000 ready to take Kiev, and we are almost certainly going to deal with NATO trying to strike Russia with Taurus....and if there is a significant strike Putin has pretty much no choice (the Russian people will allow no choice) but to launch Oreshnics at Europe....so I dont think Odessa happens anytime soon.

 

[Scott]

Well currently the Russians have 100,000 ready to take Kiev, and we are almost certainly going to deal with NATO trying to strike Russia with Taurus....and if there is a significant strike Putin has pretty much no choice (the Russian people will allow no choice) but to launch Oreshnics at Europe....so I dont think Odessa happens anytime soon.

Where did you hear the bit about 100,000 ready to take Kiev?

 

[Scott]

Blackrock Merz wants to be the new Hitler by forcing Russia to target Eastern European cities

Merz is "forcing" Putin to target civilians?

goat made no mention of civilians.