I’ve seen this idea expressed a couple of times in the last day. Here’s Nigel Farage:
I always thought that we were dealing with somebody who was actually very logical. But I now begin to wonder whether he is.
The Daily Sceptic, which is really branching out now that most Covid-related restrictions have ended – and in ways I tend to agree with – has a whole article speculating that Putin is paranoid about his health and further speculating that this has sent Putin a bit mad.
I don’t think we have to assume a lunatic in the Kremlin to explain what is going on. Imagine for a minute, you are a Russian imperialist. You have no time for this democracy crap. You have no time for this self-determination crap, or this international law crap. You regard it as Russia’s manifest destiny to rule over Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States and a few other places. You look at your opposition, the West. These are people who are bankrupt. They argue about whether men should be allowed to use women’s toilets. They have elites who despise the populations they govern and the customs and traditions that made their countries strong. They have universities that have become communist re-education camps. They fritter away their prosperity on wind farms and useless railways and welfare. They spend little on defence and when they do it is mostly on making sure that their forces embrace diversity. Almost all of them are to a greater or lesser extent dependent on your natural resources. And the “leader” of this rabble is at best a stubborn, wishy-washy, incompetent. And you say to yourself “Why shouldn’t I go to war? Who is going to stop me?”
P.S. Having drafted this I tuned into YouTube to find that David Starkey has made much the same point but much more eloquently than I ever could.
It is obvious that Putin is insane: we all are.
The only question is: to what extent is this particular action due to his insanity?
I cannot think of anything else that he did that made me wonder about that.
But “insane” is usually defined in some manner relative to a “normal”. If there’s no “normal”, the word “insane” becomes meaningless.
Re the OP: All of those calculations make sense, but you still need to be aware of the basic balance of forces, not just leadership ability. It’s that balance that might say “here’s why not.”
The whole ***kin’ world seems to have gone insane.
Libertarians are actually seriously reciting last years CNN talking points about Trump being insane and it being necssary to invoke the twenty fifth ammendment.
To which i object that “normal” is not the same as “average”.
As i have remarked before, i regard as “normal” (tentatively) a brain that has never been exposed to grains, refined sugars, or seed oils.
Okinawans might be normal, since, as i understand, their staple food is sweet potatoes, rather than rice as in mainland Japan.
Incidentally, has anyone noticed the deafening silence from feminists about the fact that Ukraine has banned men aged between 18 and 60 from fleeing the country, while the women are free to leave if they wish?
Where’s the equality in that?
APL:
It’s a cumulative effect.
I believe that women should detox for at least 2 years before having children.
Can anyone point to (believable) casualty figures?
I listened right through Starkey’s video. Good, if depressing stuff. He paints the picture dark – but the west can so do with the warning. Sadly, those who most need to hear it almost certainly won’t.
The reckless US foreign policy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZVIaXFN2lU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mCzbiF5TmQ
He doesn’t think Putin is unstable. He thinks he is strategic.
Nigel Farage would do well to watch this entire video, if he really meant the horseshit he said (which I rather doubt).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If61baWF4GE&feature=emb_title
It is clear that by invading Ukraine Putin is seeking to protect what he views as the long-term financial, political, security, and economic interests of Russia.
Everyone here, including OP, should watch the entire video. 1.5X speed is recommended.
I have to say this was painful to read.
When an intelligent and ignorant person sees something happening that he does not understand, he often ascribes irrational motives to the active aggressor.
I will say that anyone who thinks Putin is doing what he is doing out of madness or manifest destiny or paranoia should research the topic more. Making such claims without first discussing, at the very least, the matters brought up in the below video betrays not only ignorance but also a lack of basic curiosity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If61baWF4GE&feature=emb_title
The bottom line is simple. If Ukraine is permitted to join NATO then Russia’s entire ruling class would lose the main source of its power and wealth. And that’s just the start of it. Russia would probably become ungovernable in its current state too.
My apologies to OP for probably coming across slightly rude in my last comment. The lack of basic curiosity and ignorance about the Ukraine-Russia conflict appears to be shared by most people at this site so OP is in lots of good company. And the lack of curiosity and ignorance is also of course shared by most people in the western world. So it’s not exactly rare.
The idea that Putin is simply acting out of paranoia or madness or some irrational delusion just stretches credulity – or at least should. The Russian ruling class and billionaire oligarchs of Russia are mostly in lockstep support of Putin’s actions despite being harmed financially (and in many other ways) by the (mostly very predictable) consequences of the invasion. This does not in itself preclude the possibility that Putin is acting out of delusion or paranoia or madness or “manifest destiny”, but might there be another explanation that is not only plausible but actually logical, natural, and even… obvious?
As usual, the media’s most harmful lies are mostly lies of omission.
Watch the video.
Incidentally, has anyone noticed the deafening silence from feminists about the fact that Ukraine has banned men aged between 18 and 60 from fleeing the country, while the women are free to leave if they wish?
Modern feminism requires that all aspects of male nature that do not support female primacy are toxic. So if men are forced to serve in the military, that’s fine. Remember, modern feminism is a supremacist movement, not about equality, and it hasn’t been about that for a while.
Starkey: “I am not going to utter rude names about Putin.” Well, at least he admits that VP is “bad”.
The danger here is that Prof. Starkey, by arguing that we should not try and judge people by any kind of moral standard, falls into relativism of a kind he’d be first to condemn if used by people in any other context. He is right of course of much of his analysis. When dealing with an ideologue and killer, it pays to have your wits about you.
I’m surprised that the Samizdataists are taking a lot of the mainstream propaganda at face value.
OK, let me set out my stall.
When the communists, especially Stalin, took over the various territories (Georgia, Ukraine, Armenia and the various ‘stans) he deported the population and replaced them with ethnic Russians (likewise in the Baltic countries – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania after WW2). For good or ill, they remain there today and are a sizeable part of the population.
The CIA/USA staged a coup in 2014 in Ukraine and installed the current regime, most recently with Zelenski as the president. It is fine of the USA stages a coup and overthrows a democratically elected government but if Putin does it, then he’s condemned for it.
The government was endemically corrupt and everything was for sale – police jobs, defence minister etc, including the gas producer. Joe Biden had his hands, never mind his finger, in the pie and aided and abetted the corruption. Hunter Biden was given a “job” on the board of the gas producer at $50,000 a month with of course, 10% “for the big man”.
There has been an ongoing civil war in Ukraine since then (as a minimum) and the ethnic Russian population is being harassed and shelled by Zelenski.
Now, watch this video:
https://bustednuckles.net/the-ukranians-just-formally-accused-the-bidens-of-stealing-millions/
Do you honestly believe that Zelenski would allow those media people to say that if he was no longer in power? If he HAS been creaming off $10 million a month since 2015 then he’ll have stashed away $840,000,000. A nice little earner while it lasted. He should be able to muddle through on that for a week or two, eh? No, Zelenski is gone and out of the country.
Putin has stopped the war and offered peace talks. WHAT IF HE HAS GAINED THE RESULT HE WANTED? That is, Zlenski gone and a more ethical and less corrupt government that will leave the ethnic Russians alone? Perhaps even letting them secede from Ukraine?
There is no point in continuing a war when a regime change that will work with Russia is imminent. It will be interesting to see what Putin offers and requires from the peace talks, IF (and it is a BIG IF) it is accurately reported in the western media. I’ve seen memes showing one woman who was injured in Berlin and now she’s sporting the same injuries in Ukraine. Similarly, the mainstream media used the video footage from a game (don’t know if it is something like a flight sim or Call of Duty) to depict a Russian aircraft attacking Ukraine and video from Knob Creek annual shoot to portray the awesome firepower being poured onto those poor defenceless people …
I have no doubt that the Russians have bought up plenty of the US weapons left in Afghanistan (encrypted radios, Blackhawk Helicopters, Abram tanks, night vision kit etc.) and no doubt the Russian laboratories are analysing the capabilities. Now he can add British/NATO kit to that collection, supplied by the UK and others.
Putin is not stupid. Neither is he mad. If he was like Stalin, then he would push men and equipment into the maw of battle until he either ran out of men and kit or the enemy gave way (see any Russian attack from WW2) but by stopping when his objective is reached, he’s the hero to the Russian people – relieved the pressure on the ethnic Ukrainian Russians, got rid of someone who is corrupt and wanted to invite NATO onto their territory (the analogy with the Cuban Missile crisis seems to have escaped the pearl clutchers) and has done that without prosecuting the war to its utmost, thereby saving the lives of his troops as well as the Ukrainians.
Martin Van Creveld predicts that street and guerilla fighting would be the result of a ful occupation and prolonged war:
http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/trouble-in-ukraine/
You think that Putin hasn’t considered that and decided to stop before he gets bogged down in that chaos? Credit the man with some political astuteness and skill.
The New Years Eve before last I spent with Russian friends and we were watching the Sydney fireworks show on the TV at midnight. It was excruciatingly embarrassing, with two shiny. glazed talking head type TV personalities trying to pretend they were super hyped to be at this spectacularly lame concert without an audience (covid) with overweight, completely shit pop music slags also pretending to be hyped, except with pre-recorded synthetic music throbbing and whining behind whatever godawful version of ‘singing’ they thought they were doing while lewdly gyrating to an empty space where the audience should have been, in shiny dresses that covered too little of their unfit physiques for anyone to feel comfortable watching it.
I hassled the russian hosts to stick the russian TV NYE thing on, and after a bit of cajoling they did. Suddenly we were watching Putin standing by himself in an overcoat with a backdrop of the Kremlin at night, sombrely paying condolences to all the people who’d lost loved ones to covid that year and thanking all the staff at hospitals and in the emergency services for their hard work. Then the Russian national anthem played, and all the Russians I was with actually sang it too, some not entirely seriously i have to say, but still with joy.
The contrast couldn’t have been more stark in that moment. The utterly appallingly stupid, plastic shallowness of my country (that probably cost 10’s of millions to put on display) compared to the simple reserve and dignity shown by the Russian state, achieved by one person standing in front of a camera and talking quietly for 10 minutes.
These were both state events to celebrate NYE and we watched both on the respective state broadcaster.
I’m pretty sure it’s not the russians that are going crazy.
It is unclear to me why Putin would be a “hero” in Latin America, as Prof Starkey claims, although the catastrophe that is hitting the Russian economy as a result of his actions does have a sort of Argentine-style clusterfuck quality about it.
Things are not going as well for Russian military as expected.
What he’s actually saying is that we should not assume that people do have our moral standards, because the assumption will make us think we can do without armed force to defend us against them, let alone make them respect our moral standards. He’s not preaching moral relativity as a philosophy. He’s saying that without police willing to enforce it and an army willing to fight for it, national law cannot stand, let alone any idea of international law. Starkey is ridiculing the idea that hashtags and vigils mean you can do without armies. This realistic understanding that all state power rests on a monopoly of force (and the will to exercise it) is not one that a libertarian blog needs to contest.
I said he painted the picture dark but the west so needs the warning:
– We might get lucky this time. This might (but it’s very early days) turn out to look less like Hitler’s invasion of Poland than Mussolini’s invasion of Greece – in which case runs on the ruble (Starkey notes Putin’s considerable cash reserves built up precisely to help him survive that), Russian civilians daring to dissent, Russian soldiers feeling less eager to die in a bogged-down cause, etc., can all contribute to an environment in which a hashtag too can pretend it’s doing something.
– But all this depends utterly on Putin’s invasion no longer looking like the swift overrun it was billed as (and I repeat, it is early days). We owe everything we have of that to courageous Ukrainians on the ground. The tanks in Tianenmen were delayed by a brave unarmed man, for a while – but we know how that ended. In Ukraine, we’ve seen an unarmed crowd make a tank column halt, and we’ve seen an AFV drive straight over a car. I admire the courage of the unarmed Ukrainians who bravely force Russian soldiers to face the question, but if enough Russian soldiers wait no longer than the Chinese army before providing the too common answer, only armed Ukrainians will provide enough space and time for the west’s action to have a hope of mattering.
All these people insisting that Putin is a brilliant man who’s calculated everything to a nicety remind me of all the people insisting that GW Bush was a brilliant man who’d calculated everything to a nicety.
It was emotional insecurity then, and it is emotional insecurity now. Leaders who do things you approve of are entirely capable of screwing up. Identifying yourself and your values with them just means you have trouble facing up to facts that don’t fit your desires.
GW had qualities that were admired by many, but I don’t remember him being praised much in those particular terms.
Ok, right there you simply don’t know what you are talking about. I know many people directly involved with the Maidan revolt & they just roll their eyes when this ‘Russia Today’ talking point gets rolled out yet again. Truly, it is the Americocentric delusion in pure form.
I know you think you are clever and well informed, but you are not well informed, you are propagandised and you have internalised it. The truth is you vastly overestimate the CIA’s ability to manipulate events and thinking they have the ability to orchestrate a mass political movement like Maidan in Ukraine is not just wrong, it is flat out propaganda that denies agency to the millions of Ukrainians who ejected Putin’s prefer puppet. America was at best a bit part player in the events of 2014, not their driver.
The ignorance of the internal dynamics involved is entirely yours, old chap. You just spout Russia’s preferred narrative because by your own admission like Putin.
Putin is not attacking a mountainous terrain at start of the winter with inferior forces…
Sorry Steve, but Putin’s feelgood NYE performance didn’t do anything for anyone. The Sydney fireworks were a calculated financial investment showing Sydney to best advantage to the rest of the world. They pay for themselves in Sydney in business on the day, and provide a lasting impression. Putin – not so much.
Maybe it’s wrong to value the commercial considerations? That’s a judgement call, but Putin’s tears don’t put cream on anyone’s cake.
Mr Putin has always been a statist – he closed down opposition television stations, he flung businessmen in prison (or had them murdered) for the “crime” of opposing him, he has stolen money and property – again and again and again. Neither private property rights or contracts mean anything to Mr Putin.
That element of the right that is pro Putin is, at best, horribly ignorant.
Putin might be upset about a few things-
A) The Ukrainians were supposed to be intimidated into negotiations.
B) As soon as Russia actually invaded, the Ukrainian army was supposed to roll over and let the Russians kick it.
C) The civilian population was not supposed to fight back- in fact, Putin seems to have imagined that they would welcome being incorporated (back) into Russia!
Does that mean Putin is mad? Maybe not? But I don’t think he is happy. Let us hope that he is sane, and chooses to not use his nuclear arsenal!
Germaphobe Putin might got off his rocker due to Covid.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220215-long-shot-putin-s-giant-table-sparks-jokes-and-speculation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/02/28/fears-washington-covid-isolation-has-unbalanced-vladimir-putin/
True (one of many reasons I emphasised might and spoke of ‘very early days’), but he is attacking in late winter, not long before the spring rasputitsa. I’m guessing his hope was for Germany to be particularly in need of his energy supplies, so particularly unable to endure sanctioning Russia for long. But if his tactics rely (or must change to rely) on armoured thrusts surrounding Ukrainian cities, and he finds the Ukrainian forces are strong enough to block the roads, he’ll want to take up those positions while the ground is still firm.
The idea that the CIA staged a coup in 2014 and have been manipulating Ukraine is a bit rich, given that, as the past few decades have shown us (Iraq being a prime case), the CIA could barely stage a block party, let alone major political change in a European country.
Perry,
Your claim and Phil B’s claim are not in any sense mutually incompatible. When the CIA conducts a coup or otherwise changes who is in charge of a country or significantly helps change who is in charge of a country, usually there are huge numbers of people (even at senior levels) who are involved in the effort to change who is in charge of the country who have no idea of any involvement by the CIA.
It does not really matter, in this context, if Mr Putin is “mad” or not.
I repeat – he was a statist from the start (right from when he gained power in 2000) and he has supported dictatorship at home and in other countries.
I am not an admirer of the CIA – most of them are Social Reformers, not my cup of tea politically (to put the matter mildly).
But to construct complex arguments to try and show that the CIA is to blame for the invasion of the Ukraine by Mr Putin will-not-do – it will not do at all.
Who is charge of the Ukraine was decided by the Ukrainian people a couple of years ago – NOT in 2014.
It is much harder to rig elections in the Ukraine than in the United States.
The President of Ukraine sometimes says things I do not like (for example his support for the European Union – but he was the choice of the Ukrainian people.
The Ukrainian people – NOT the CIA. Mr Putin’s invasion is unacceptable.
Mr Putin’s invasion is unacceptable – no “buts” or “howevers”.
“The CIA/USA staged a coup in 2014 in Ukraine and installed the current regime”
And there was me thinking it was Soros.
https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/george-soros-compares-ukrainians-to-german-nazis-under-sovie
Again the “current regime” was elected only a couple of years ago – NOT in 2014.
The Ukrainian government was “installed” by the Ukrainian people in elections a couple of years ago.
Can people please stop doing Peter Hitchens impressions.
Here is a question to our good experts: if Putin wants Crimea and the Donbass region which is about 5% of Ukraine’s area – why can’t he have them? Let him have them. (At least Crimea was always Russian, that is the Russians conquered it from the Turks).
Ukraine is more of a fiction than a state, it never was an independent state (thank Gd.), Putin has good reasons for these demands. Ukraine’s borders were created by URSS hacks. It says nowhere that every last inch of that big area (second only to Russia itself, in Europe) is a sacred part of an ancestral homeland. Of course, the reply would be that Putin will never compromise, and he actually wants all of Ukraine, and the Baltic states too… Maybe…
This seems a dispute between two nationalist, extreme and uncompromising parties.
Putin is obviously a thug, a nationalist imperialist, and was wrong to start the war. But you live with the neighbors you have. To also adopt an extreme, uncompromising nationalism (like Ukraine) vs. Putin is – let’s say, not very wise.
Of course when nationalist rhetoric takes over, people are rarely wise.
The most recent Ukrainian elections were held by a government that jailed its opponents, quashed the media that supported the opposition, and after being elected began discriminating against its Russian-speaking minorities. Some election. Some democracy. The US Democrats should have done so well in 2020; of course they are gearing up their election steal for 2022 midterms and terming it “election integrity”. Classic doublespeak.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/war-propaganda-about-ukraine-becoming?utm_source=url
There are NO good guys in this war. The drum-beating liberals in the West refuse to open their eyes or face facts. And pointing out the ridiculous assertions they are making on behalf of the Ukraine is NOT the same thing as supporting the Russians. Have a little intellectual integrity, please! It will save you a lot of embarrassment in the long run.
Does it really matter what history says about the area? If the people in a region overwhelmingly wish to secede, shouldn’t that be the deciding factor?
The question ought to be, do the people in that region actually overwhelmingly want to secede, or is that a fiction itself?
Having removed trump through fraud the western elites needed another bogeyman on whom to blame the ills of the world. Thus ‘Orange man bad’ becomes ‘Russian man bad’.
Nor were the 13 colonies at a certain point in history. So what is your point, apart from that you are ignorant of the basics of history and/or logic?
Tell me, what was the Ukraine People’s Republic from 1917 to 1920?
As good reason as he would have for demanding your house, car, money and kidneys. So if he asked you to oblige, would you let him have all that? If not, why not?
No, it’s an invasion of one by the other. It’s quite easy, one wants to be left alone, the other wants to dominate the other. You know that full well, so why do you pretend otherwise?
Your ‘thank God’ is quite a giveaway, Jacob. Why would you ‘thank God’ for it’s either being or not being a state in some century or other in the past?
The ‘republic on the waterfalls’ was a thing in its time and place, albeit virtually nothing of it survives in the western mind. If Charles XII of Sweden had handled his great northern war a bit better, it might have been quite a thing. Instead, Peter the Great won at Poltava and the Ukrainians who had offered alliance to Charles (from well-founded fear of Russian expansionism) went down with him. Catherine the Great completed the annexation of the area. She also terminated the Polish state (helped by a delighted Prussia and an Austro-Hungary whose statesmen insisted they could not afford to miss their share, despite their Empress Maria Theresa having a bad conscience about it). Thus the Polish state also ceased to be for over a century.
The Ukrainian and Polish states reappeared (and others too) as Russia, Germany and Austro-Hungary collapsed in the revolution and end of WWI. In a unique and bizarre situation, all the great empires in the region were simultaneously defeated, and the other peoples they’d ruled had their first chance for a long time to assert their own national aspirations. The communists swiftly moved to reconquer all they could. The Poles won a major victory, expanding their territory eastwards well beyond the Curzon line of Polish ethnicity. The Ukraine defeated two (IIRC) communist invasions but fell before the third. The earlier communist defeats, however, caused Lenin to offer a nominal form of Ukrainian state. Ukrainian resistance had made him think that ruling explicitly and immediately as agents of a foreign invader was not viable and some petty paper concessions to Ukrainian national feeling were advisable. (This followed from some earlier Leninist thinking on how to exploit, rather than simply fight, national feelings for communist purposes in the process of destroying the Russian empire – “The prison of the peoples” as it was called. Stalin was involved in developing these ideas.)
So it is not quite true that the Ukraine was never a state. It was not a state in its present borders but that is just as true of Poland. States in the good cavalry (later, good tank) country of Eastern Europe tended to have fluctuating borders.
That is Putin’s consolation prize. Obviously, if he abandons thoughts of conquering the whole Ukraine and just explicitly adds the whole Donbass to the Crimea (which he already has), it seems very unlikely the west will send an army to evict him and similarly unlikely the Ukraine could. He could have done that a fortnight ago, convincingly called it a victory, and likely had the west grumble but take none of the actions they have. Now, I think it is not just a question of whether he wants more. I think it would look like a defeat for him not to win more.
Putin can cut his losses any time, settle for Donbass, link it to Crimea, and somewhat secure Crimea’s water supply.
But perceptions being what they are, it would look like a defeat if he does that.
This video by the Covid guy Dr John Campbell is very interesting
Jacob – no offence meant to you Sir, but this is not 2014.
Mr Putin took Crimea and the Donbas in 2014 (under President Obama) – he is now trying to dominate the rest of the country.
“The Ukraine has never been an independent state” – not true Sir, it is has been a independent country for almost 30 years.
“I meant in history” – I refer you to the Cossack Brotherhood (which only accepted the rule of Moscow because of the threat of other lands) of the area and of the differences in language and culture.
Indeed, if one goes right back, Kiev was the centre of a powerful state when Moscow was a village.
“That is ancient history – I am talking of modern times” – if anyone comes out with that line, then the last 30 years are modern times.
Watching such films as “Bitter Harvest” will tell people that whilst the experience of Soviet terror (the millions of deaths) is NOT the start of Ukrainian Nationalism.
Ukrainian Nationalism was strong long before the horrors of “Lenin” and “Stalin”.
Ukrainians do not want to be controlled by Moscow – it is that basic Jacob.
Mr Putin has a long record of crimes – not just in the Ukraine, but all over the world.
Again no disrespect meant to Jacob (or anyone else) – but unless someone is prepared to do a bit of background research into Mr Putin (to understand what a vicious criminal he is), they really should not comment on these matters.
“Putin can cut his losses any time, settle for Donbass, link it to Crimea, and somewhat secure Crimea’s water supply.”
Well, he could, but he wants Ukraine to accept this, and thus to end Western sanctions.
Which – the Ukrainians refuse of course, because that’s their holy land….
“Mr Putin (to understand what a vicious criminal he is)”
Yes, he is a thug and a muzhik. Not a nice guy. Still he is a fact. Worse people ruled many nations, and still do…
The world is not perfect.
The question is how to navigate this world in the least harmful way.
Jacob – I repeat my comment of some moments ago.
Mr Putin has invaded the Ukraine.
Please try and grasp this Sir.
As for Mr Putin’s other crimes – he has, for example, had people murdered in my own country (the United Kingdom).
Nothing to do with “the Crimea” or “Donbass”.
Mr Putin is a vicious criminal who has been committing crimes (since he came to power – DECADES ago) for the purpose of staying in power.
“Ukrainians do not want to be controlled by Moscow – it is that basic Jacob.”
The Finns too didn’t want to be controlled by Moscow, and fought very hard for their independence. They finally managed to find some satisfactory accommodation… they didn’t get everything, still — they were ok.
Things are often complicated… the basics don’t cover real-world problems.
No Jacob – the basics do (not don’t) cover real-world problem.
This is NOT about Crimea and it is NOT about Donbass – this is about Mr Putin.
Please understand that.
Please (please Sir) stop writing as if it was 2014.
And, no, Mr Putin does not have the right to take over Finland either – and (no) I would not have voted for the present Social Democrat government in Finland.
This is not about a border dispute Jacob – this war has got nothing (nothing) to do with what you think it is about.
This war is about Mr Putin.
I am reminded (NOT by Jacob – but of some of the pro Putin types) of Mr Peter Hitchens – attacking Poland (the government and society – around 1939) with a horribly obvious agenda in his heart.
Or Mr Peter Hitchens claiming that Imperial German control of Europe in 1914 would not matter to Britain because “we would still have had the Royal Navy” – as if Imperial Germany would not have used to the industrial resources of Europe (of Belgium, France and so on) to build a force that would have utterly crushed the Royal Navy.
Or of the “Right Club” – the “super patriots”, “ultra patriots” who, for example, gave British military secrets to Imperial Japan.
A good test of a patriot is whether or not they side with the enemies of their country – if they do side with the enemies of their country, then they are NOT patriots.
Mr Putin is an enemy of the United Kingdom, he has had people murdered here. He has committed endless crimes for DECADES to stay in power.
Enough is enough. He must go.
The most coherent explanation of what Putin is doing is explained very well by journalist Glenn Greenwald. Cue into the 30 minute mark. Greenwald was an attorney and takes the time to forge his argument as though he were speaking to a jury. It’s part of a longer discussion on the current censorship in the service of the Biden regime’s narrative. Thoughts about the Ukraine situation that were once quite commonly expressed are now verboten.
https://rumble.com/vvrd3t-the-war-in-ukraine.html
Phil B,
Yes, I suspect that this may be the truth.
If one really looks holistically at the story we are being told about the war in Ukraine by the Western media at face value, the story looks more than a little suspicious.
According to the western media:
1. Russia is trying to gain control of multiple major cities including Kiev and Kharkiv
2. Ukraine’s military at least for the first 5 days have prevented Russia from gaining control of multiple major cities
3. Ukraine’s military at least for the first 5 days have successfully held off the Russians for multiple days at multiple important positions
4. The ceasefire/peace talks between Russia and Ukraine were requested by Russia
5. Through Feb 27 there have been approx 352 civilians killed
6. Russia has yet to gain control of any of the major cities
Two or three of these could certainly be true. Maybe even four of these, depending on which four, could conceivably be true.
But all six stretches credulity – at least to me.
The casualty figures in particular seem exceptionally low for a full fledged invasion of the nation of Ukraine by Russia on multiple fronts, particularly if Ukraine’s military is making a serious, brave effort at fighting back, and the casualty stats seem even more suspiciously low if Russia has been encountering any real difficulty taking control of Kiev, Kharkiv, etc. And why would ceasefire/peace talks be requested by Russia prior to Russia taking control of any major city? But the story in the western media is that this is exactly what Russia has done: requested talks with Ukraine after a mere 350 civilian deaths on the Ukrainian side and prior to taking control of any major city in Ukraine.
Look at the casualties in other wars for comparison. For examples, Israel’s wars with Hezbollah or Israel’s operations against Hamas in Gaza Strip.
And is Zelensky really in Ukraine defying the extraordinary military might of Russia?
Maybe. I don’t know.
But something smells.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/4786588/russia-bombing-campaign-ukraine-putin-2/
CARPET BOMBING conducted by Russia kills NINE in the second-largest city in Ukraine?? How is this even remotely plausible? Does “The Sun” not know what carpet bombing means? There would be thousands of deaths at a minimum.
Can someone please provide an example from history where carpet bombing of a major city led to fewer than a dozen deaths?
What makes this even more ridiculous is that the same media is saying that Russia still has not taken control of any major city in Ukraine due to the extraordinary bravery and effectiveness of Ukraine’s military. So Russia is having trouble taking Kharkiv, Kiev, and all the other major cities in Ukraine and decides to carpet bomb Kharkiv. And there are nine deaths?
Again, something smells.
Seems to me quite likely that either Russia is not really making a genuine effort to capture Kiev, Kharkiv etc OR Ukraine’s military is not really putting up much of a fight against Russia.
“This is NOT about Crimea and it is NOT about Donbass – this is about Mr Putin.”
That is your opinion. I don’t dispute your appraisal of Putin. But Putin is the leader of a major nuclear power, was elected several times by great majorities of Russian, and even if the last several elections were a scam, he still enjoys ample support of a great majority of Russians. And even if he didn’t – he controls Russia, and that is undisputable and unchangeable (except by natural processes).
So, what do you propose to do about Putin? Send the SAS?
Something to that effect, but ideally well paid Russian mobsters hired to kill another Russian mobster.
Summarise as I am not going to watch the video unless I have some idea what I am watching, just not worth the time otherwise.
Here is my peace plan for Putin’s Ukraine war:
1. Ukraine cedes the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces to Russia and recognizes Russia’s sovereignty in Crimea.
2. Ukraine renounces any future NATO membership.
3. No foreign military installations or personnel will ever be stationed in Ukraine.
4. Ukraine’s military force and equipment will be limited to defensive capabilities.
5. Russia recognizes Ukraine sovereignty and pledges not to interfere in internal political or economic matters.
I think this could be a workable and advantageous arrangement for a couple of decades or so. Next generations will deal with the problems later.
I don’t know if Putin will accept this, he may, at least judging by his declarations.
I have no doubt Ukraine will reject such a plan out of hand.
Which makes the situation tragic.
It sounds like you have not actually been listening to all his declarations. He opening described Ukraine as a ‘historical mistake’ and does not accept that Ukrainians can have a separate identity to Russians.
You analysis is Putin is a bit like trying to analyse Hitler’s likely actions in 1939 without having read Mine Kampf.
Yes, tragic, tragic. I am sure Herr Hitler will content himself with just the Sudetenland, thereby securing Peace in our Time.
No, but I could provide you with many of media reporting on military and other affairs in ways that show the media love dramatic headlines and are often ignorant of what the technical terms they throw around actually mean. Conversely, I’ve seen media coverage of big things, e.g. earthquakes, where details like number of confirmed deaths start small, then grow steadily.
There will be wars and rumours of wars – and lots of rumours during each war.
Perry, it must feel satisfying to cite old and worn clichés, but it is not practical.
There is nothing you or the UK, or the US, or Ukraine can do about Putin. It must be painful to think how impotent the West is, but it’s a fact. So you can howl and posture etc. but nothing more.
I’m not sure Putin will accept an arrangement as above, but it’s worth trying… Putin might try to intimidate or invade some Baltic country next, and then he might not. I don’t know.
You must try to outlive him somehow sustaining the least damage possible meanwhile. Nature will do it’s thing. He is 69.
The ardent desire to get rid of him now is laudable but impractical, impossible. A dogmatic, intransigent position like Ukraine’s can lead to much suffering.
Fortunately a critical mass of Ukrainians have listened to advice like yours and then happily told the person telling them to be ‘practical’ to go fuck themselves. Putin is only impossible to resist if no one tries to resist him.
Niall,
All good and logical points.
Given what I said in my other comment at March 1, 2022 at 2:47 pm and other things, I remain skeptical of the overarching story from the western media of what is actually happening in Ukraine.
Perry,
This seems like a superb way to send the Russian people into a ferocious rage and unite the entire Russian people behind the Russian military and whoever replaces Putin.
I’m not sure exactly what would happen but it would be very, very ugly and probably involve an enormous quantity of deaths across Europe. General mobilizations of most European militaries, mass starvations and genocides would all be real possibilities.
But hey, at least Vladimir Putin would be dead. Very much worth it!
Yeah, they might get so annoyed they invade neighbouring nations with a view to annexing them… oh, hang on.
No, they would shut off oil and gas to Europe first.
And I don’t think “annoyed” is an accurate description of what the feeling in Russia (both among the masses of ordinary people and also the ruling elite) would be.
The gloves would come off.
Assuming pursuing a regime change policy didn’t lead to World War 3 and extinction, it could easily lead to a civil war within Russia. The last Russian civil war ended pretty grimly, and I wouldn’t assume we’d see a Moscow 1991 outcome (which happened against a background of a period of good US-Soviet relations). Unlike in 1918-21, a civil war in Russia would mean several thousand nukes and stores of chemical and biological weapons are up for grabs. Plus boatloads of conventional military hardware.
Mr Putin does not care about Russia – Mr Putin cares about Mr Putin. Most of his victims (up till recently) were RUSSIAN.
Failing to grasp that Mr Putin is a criminal (a Mafia boss type) is at the root of a lot of the confusion.
Good. Europe need a bracing slap across the face to realise that it only needs to exert a fraction of its power to crush Russia in almost more ways than can be counted. But to get there, that will take a proper crisis that genuinely impacts people’s lives badly enough to make the wokesters and appeasers at home suddenly rather unfashionable.
You really hate Putin’s Russia, don’t you?
Is it Putin, or is it Russia?
‘They spend little on defense’
The problem with the entire paragraph is that this little phrase is not even close to true. The US spends far more on defense than Russia could ever dream to spend, more I believe than the next ten (or more than ten perhaps) countries combined. Does anyone actually think (especially after seeing the present conflict between Russia and Ukraine) that without nuclear weapons, Russia could last more than a few hours in direct combat with the US?
We would wipe them out in a small conflict that could be manned with our few highly-trained specialty units, if our goal was to wipe them out. (We don’t set goals well.) In a large-scale confrontation, I think we’d have our own set of inadequacies.
If China stands aside then yes you’re right.
If China stands with Russia then you’re wrong and we should all hope that in such a scenario Xi at least brings lube.
Wouldn’t he have to buy it from Putin first?
Perry – I think you greatly overestimate the strength of Europe and of the West generally.
True German industry (unlike British or American industry – where family ownership has been undermined by pro corporation government policy) is in fairly good shape – but it is also very dependent on Russian energy and raw materials.
Still I hope you are right about the West.
You see the West as strong – I see it as weak, indeed dying (unless the West changes course – changes course in a fundamental way and very soon).
We shall have to see.
“ruralcouncel” claims that the Ukrainian government rigged the last election.
The Ukrainian government LOST the last election. It lost overwhelmingly – about 3 to 1 against. Odd to rig an election to get yourselves OUT of office.
Just how stupid do these Putin apologists think we all are. Why come out with propaganda that is so pathetic.
Just STOP this – just STOP.
Stop trying to make excuses for Mr Putin.
No more “background” and the rest of this utter rubbish.
As for “the CIA” – as Jonathan Pearce has already pointed out…..
The CIA could not organise a p… up in a brewery.
Perry can speak for himself. Meanwhile, consider asking me, “You really hate Sturgeon’s Scotland, don’t you. Is it Sturgeon or is it Scotland?”. Or consider asking yourself, “You really hate Trudeau’s Canada, don’t you. Is it Trudeau or is it Canada?”
In all cases, the one-word answer is the politician. Many of my best friends are Scots! (I quite like myself as well.) But in all cases, the one-word answer could be replaced with a several-paragraph answer in which a discussion of what’s wrong with the heid-yin would naturally lead on to a discussion of things wrong with the culture and with a plurality or even majority of voters – things that present as the heid-yin’s being in charge, but also in other sad symptoms.
It’s definitely not a case of “embrace the healing power of ‘and’ “, but it’s not quite just exclusive-or, either.
“We would wipe them out in a small conflict that could be manned with our few highly-trained specialty units,”
That “we” probably refers to the mighty US which lost every war it engaged in since WW2. (Well, we could argue that Korea was a draw)
Jacob – I do not know if you have served, if so thank you for your service.
However, you are incorrect (as Mark Steyn is) in your sneering at the United States military – it has done everything it has been asked to do. Asked to by its own government – NOT by the enemy (which is “losing a war”).
For the civilian leadership to NOT ask the United States military to destroy the leadership of (for example) North Vietnam is not “losing a war”. Indeed the United States military were specifically forbidden to do so – which is not “losing a war”.
It is like saying the military “lost” in Iraq (which is a LIE – but a lie I have often heard), or “ran away” in Afghanistan (another lie – when they never even lost a engagement, and were TOLD to leave by Mr Biden).
I think, upon reflection Sir, you will withdraw (or at least reword) your comment about “losing wars”.
None of the wars have been lost – none of them. The political debates in Washington D.C. must not be confused with “losing wars”.
A DEFEATED military is not one which just follows the orders of its own government – a defeated military is one which is defeated by the OTHER SIDE.
I repeat.
Mr Putin is not concerned with Russia – he is not a Russian Nationalist.
Mr Putin is concerned with himself – most of his victims (up to recently) have been RUSSIAN.
The Ukrainian government was elected in 2019 – the elections were vastly more free and fair than anything seen in Russia under Mr Putin.
This is a conflict between a dictator, Mr Putin, who has no concern for the Russian people – and a democracy (Ukraine) which he considers a threat to his regime.
This is NOT really a conflict over the borders of Russia and the Ukraine – the threat is to the DICATORSHIP of Mr Putin.
Our position must be simple and clear.
We must condemn Mr Putin (no “buts”, no “howevers”) and we must do all we can to help both the Ukrainian and the RUSSIAN people – against the dictator Mr Putin.
Finis.
No, that’s why I said that the US has always had trouble setting goals. The military has usually accomplished what the civilian leadership allowed it to accomplish.
I don’t think not caring about your people precludes you from being a nationalist. A lot of ultra-nationalists didn’t give a toss about the ordinary folk. Putin is a nationalist in the sense he has a deranged idea of Russian greatness. If it costs the lives of millions of Russians then they have died in this epic patriotic struggle. That in reality (beyond Putindome) Russians would be much better off without him doesn’t occur to him for he believes he is the annointed one.
Many of the comments in this thread seem to deny basic facts of reality.
I believe the following are basic facts of reality:
1. Putin is wrong to have invaded Ukraine
2. Russia has had vital economic, security, water, energy, and military interests connected with Ukraine for at least the past 300 years and these interests have been essential to the stability of the governments of Russia, USSR, and the Russian Empire
3. USA/UK/NATO and Russia have both provoked each other repeatedly over Ukraine both recently and also for many, many years
4. Putin is not insane or mentally unstable
5. Ukraine has every legal and moral right to fight back against Russia
Does me believing these things make me a bad person, a Kremlin propagandist, a modern Neville Chamberlain, or a Putin apologist? Some here would say yes it does.
Call me whatever you want.
“5. Ukraine has every legal and moral right to fight back against Russia”
That my be so.
The question is what is the wises course, that minimizes suffering.
Jacob,
This may be the question that you and I think is important, but is this the question that others think is important?
For example:
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/
What do you think the goal of the US government and the UK government is?
“No, that’s why I said that the US has always had trouble setting goals. The military has usually accomplished what the civilian leadership allowed it to accomplish.”
Every failure has it’s explanations, tons of them. Not relevant. They failed.
“but is this the question that others think is important?”
If people were rational there would be less wars.
But Putin is insane and mentally unstable!!! We can’t trust him to act rationally!!
/s
“What do you think the goal of the US government and the UK government is?”
That is the most irrelevant aspect of this war. Who cares. What’s their influence? Null.
A protracted war will do immense economic damage to Ukraine and Russia, but also to Europe and some to the US.
And I can imagine no exit scenario that will benefit anybody.
The war will push the Ukrainians back to Holodomor level.
And the “West” will have a nice problem on it’s hands, 41 million to feed, tens of million refugees. (That’s ignoring the Russians who will need food too).
“But Putin is insane and mentally unstable!!! We can’t trust him to act rationally!!” Of course. Only the Ukrainians and the West are [rational]…
But… but… “Munich”… “Chamberlain”….
Not sure if you are being sarcastic, but just in case you are actually serious:
The goal of the US government and UK government matters because the actions of the US government and UK government matter.
For example, the actions of the US and UK governments impact directly the actions of the Russian government (actions directly related to the war and also actions not directly related to the war). The actions of the US and UK government also directly impact the actions of the Ukraine government on all types of matters, as well. In these and other ways, the actions of the US and UK governments impact directly what happens inside of Ukraine and inside of Russia.
If I am allowed I’ll interupt the Shlomo & Jacob Show (available for Birthdays, Weddings, Bar-Mitzahs etc) with this…
Jacob says:
The question is what is the wises [sic] course, that minimizes suffering.
No, it isn’t. That logic would have had the UK fold in 1914 and 1940. War is not nice but Ukraine never sought this war and certainly NATO, the UK, EU, USA et. al. bloody well didn’t either. We are just climbing out of a pandemic and the last thing we wanted was WWIII stepping-up to the plate. This does not serve “Western Interests” (however nebulously you define them) one iota. What this war is about is a naked act of aggression by a despot hell-bent on leaving a legacy of Making Russia Great Again. It is about a flagrant violation of the Minsk Accords which Russia signed in 1994. It is about the idea of sovereignty. It is about an evil man with a penchant for Botox and extremely long gilded tables having a last hurrah and not caring if this means orphanages get bombed. It is about Putin’s desire to be seen as a great Tsar and fuck the wider consequences.
And, yes, I used the word “Tsar” very deliberately.
NickM,
What the fuck are you talking about? What a dumb inane response.
Half the people who say this kind of moronic shit probably supported the 2003 American Invasion of Iraq.
It seems like for many people their analysis of international affairs is really profoundly simplistic and driven primarily by emotion.
For example, when an invasion that was not approved by the US State Department occurs then:
1. any attempt to understand the goals, interests, or motivations of the invading country is equivalent to appeasing Nazi Germany in 1940
2. any attempt to ask “what will minimize suffering?” is likewise equivalent to appeasing Nazi Germany in 1940
3. any attempt to negotiate a peaceful resolution that accounts for the interests of all parties involved is likewise equivalent to appeasing Nazi Germany in 1940
4. any attempt to inject some nuance into the discussion of the invasion is likewise equivalent to appeasing Nazi Germany in 1940
5. any attempt to understand why the aggressor nation invaded is likewise equivalent to appeasing Nazi Germany in 1940
I know many people in the English-speaking world still get erections from thinking about WWII, but not everything in international affairs comes down to a choice between “Churchill good” and Neville Chamberlain bad”. Some things do, but most things don’t.
Mr Putin has not “just” murdered people in Russia and the Ukraine – he has also murdered people inside the United Kingdom.
This Germany did not do before the wars 1914 or in 1939. I repeat Mr Putin has already had people murdered inside the United Kingdom – if people are not supportive of the opposition to Mr Putin, then there is not much more that can be said to them.
The Western World is united against Mr Putin – and I am glad to see that Israel is part of the Western World.
Sadly much of the non Western world has not stood against Mr Putin.
I my calculations of the United Nations General Assembly vote indicates that a majority of the population of the world is represented by either governments that voted with Mr Putin – or (mostly) abstained (did not make stand).
China, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan….. – these are not countries with small populations.
In Latin America Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia all did NOT vote against the invasion of Ukraine.
And neither did Bitcoin central – El Salvador. The Max Keiser linked government.
This is very much a open and shut case – if governments, or individuals, do not make a stand against Mr Putin after what he has done, then these are governments, and individuals, who really can not be trusted on other matters.
Earlier I said:
Let me fix that:
Does me believing these things make me a bad person, a Kremlin propagandist, a modern Neville Chamberlain, a Putin apologist, or someone who cannot be trusted on other matters? Some here would say yes it does.
Call me whatever you want.
Shlomo (March 2, 2022 at 6:50 pm), your problem is your claim number 2.
The Ukraine is not vital to the survival and prosperity of Russia today. The Ukraine is very important to Russia becoming once again a world power instead of a regional one, but it is not at all essential to its regional functioning.
In much the same way, the British Empire was essential to the British government in London acting as a world power. But it was not essential to Britain’s existence and prosperity; Margaret Thatcher managed to run her economy and protect her country without it.
For various reasons, the modern UK manages rather better than modern Russia to project what power it retains when it wants to. Britain is a sea and air power much more than a land one, and that power can be projected further at less effort. The odd island fragments of empire remaining, dotted around the oceans, help. We’ve remained on better terms with our former colonies than Russia, so they, like the islands, can sometimes help. Above all, we tend to project power in coalitions (mostly made up of these more ancient or more recent parts of the empire) for some purpose that is (or at least looks) reactive and/or shared. We are good at not looking like we have turned up with the ulterior motive of reassembling the empire.
Russia has none of this. Putin seems simply not to have tried to look as if he was moving into the Ukraine for any reason other than to reassemble the Russian Empire. Thanks to Stalin (not only him, but him above all), Russia’s neighbours have bitter memories and an easily-aroused dread of her. Even in the days of the Tsars, Russia was poor at making her rule look like the lesser evil even when she had a case (the Arabs would gladly have seen the Ukraine be a weak fragmented slave-raiding preserve, but the harsh imposition of serfdom and the aggressive Russification policy helped Ukrainians forget that). But communism, especially Stalinism, had (as I said in another comment) “so high a price that Russia has yet to pay it in full”.
And that is the problem. It’s impossible to sell the importance of the Ukraine to Russia because every explanation, every point, merely underscores that the meaning, stated or not, is not “important to Russia” but “important to Russia’s imperial vision of herself”. Russia’s neighbours hate that vision – and the western world in general does not care for it. So every explanation of why Russia had reason for what she did merely presents as a reason why the Ukrainians should go on fighting. I’m sure many more Russians than just Vlad really don’t want to give up the concept of Russia as one of those states that ‘should’ be a great power – but that is part of the price that “has yet to be paid in full”.
My 0.02p. FWIW.
Those with a knowledge of history will remember that Imperial Germany had people murdered inside the United States – before the American Declaration of War in 1917. It was not “just” submarine attacks that led the House and Senate to vote for war with Germany.
I have not called you anything Shlomo Maistre – in fact I explicitly welcomed Israel’s vote to condemn Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. I assume you support the Israeli vote and also condemn the invasion – in fact that is exactly what you have already said, that you condemn Mr Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine.
The places I condemned I listed – your name was not among them.
If I ever stab you, it will be in the front – not the back. If you annoy me – I will name you, and I did NOT name you.
Niall,
I did not say that the Ukraine is vital to the survival and prosperity of Russia today. I said that:
(emphasis added)
1. handed over the entire Crimea back to Ukraine
2. recognized that the exclusive economic zone in the Black Sea around Crimea belongs to Ukraine
3. recognized Ukrainian sovereignty over the Donbas region and over the Transnistria region
4. stopped funding the separatist movements of the donbas region (Donetsk and Luhansk) and stopped funding the separatist movement in Transnistria
5. recognized Ukraine’s sovereign right to join NATO and the EU
6. accepted energy deals made for fields within Ukraine with western oil companies like Exxon and Shell
If Putin and the Russian government had done these six things 6 months ago publicly and unequivocally, many things would result (some predictably and other things not so predictably).
If Putin and Russia’s government had done these six things 6 months ago publicly and unequivocally, then in the most optimistic scenario (from the perspective of Putin and the rest of the Mafia that runs Russia) that is also a realistic scenario, how long until Russia’s government collapses? 6 months? A few years? A decade?
At the very, very absolute least, doing those things would fundamentally threaten the security and stability of Russia’s ruling class and government for a very wide variety of major reasons. Doubt this? Fine, but the evidence indicates either that Putin is insane (he’s not) or that I’m right about this.
Shlomo,
What the fuck are you talking about? What a dumb inane response.
I have been called many things in my time. I suspect this is the first time I’ve been called “inane”. Most of the people who comment here would get a dry Martini if they came to my house*. You, sir, would get an extremely dry slap for that.
My point is, I shall repeat, because you clearly missed it**, this is a grotesque violation of the sovereignty of a nation. It is based upon a lie that said nation isn’t really a “nation” but a fiefdom of Putin’s Russia. It is about the depraved desires of man who wants to leave a legacy of Make Russia Great Again. It is dangerous because Ukraine is bad but this could get much worse. I have close relatives in Poland and they ain’t happy. This is an appalling act by an appalling man.
“The darkest places in Hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis” – Dante Alighieri
There are such things as right and wrong. There is also your path of least resistance which is the road to Hell.
In this World as much as those that might lie beyond.
*I am not BTW running an open bar here – it’s more a rhetorical flourish. Anyway, I’d need to get olives.
**best work on my aim.
Jacob – you will already know the following, but some people may not know it.
Minimising suffering is, sadly, not part of this world. That is not the human condition.
We all (apart from those who die young) age, suffer, and die.
This is true – but also not relevant.
A Dictator who invades, seeking to snuff out liberty, must be opposed. Mr Putin is not interested in a land dispute (he could not care less about Russia – or the Russian people) – this is an effort to extend his dictatorship, and it must be opposed.
“But that means death”.
Yes it does – but what is your point?
Humans are not Tolkien’s Elves (if only we were – but we are NOT) – we age (suffer) and die anyway.
What the Dictator Mr Putin has done is an insult – it must be answered.
It is time for Mr Putin’s own personal suffering to come to an end.
Perhaps (perhaps) there is part of Mr Putin, deep down, that will welcome that.
Paul Marks,
Did I say that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is wrong? Of course.
As an aside that should be irrelevant but I feel the need to mention it anyway – I personally know a couple people in Ukraine and I’m seriously worried about them.
All of history proves that governments tend to act in their perceived self interest, not based on morality or international law. Just a fact.
The governments of many countries (government of USA, government of Russia, government of Ukraine, government of UK, government of China, etc) and also corporations and other organizations (EU, NATO) have made decisions overtime for a variety of reasons. Those decisions have cumulatively created a set of circumstances in which it is arguably in Russia’s interests to invade Ukraine and very likely in the interests of Russia’s government to invade Ukraine.
And that’s what happened.
I support condemning Russia’s actions.
I also support seeking to understand why Russia invaded in order to come to a peaceful resolution to the immediate conflict.
I also support a dialogue with Russia that leads to an agreement that accounts for at least some of Russia’s vital interests in order to ensure long-term stability and peace in the region.
Instead we have this terrifying horse shit less than a week into this war:
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/
This is evil and wrong.
Paul,
It is an insult but it is also more than that. People have died over his vainglorious preening. I admire your Christian view that, at some level, Putin might welcome the release of death but I can’t find it in me to believe there is any redemption for such an utter cunt. I have previously stated how I want Putin to meet eternity and I shall not repeat it.
You are absolutely right that standing against Russia here is a non-negotiable point of principle. Without such principles we are buggered.
Let me be clear it’s right to condemn Russia’s actions – that’s the right thing to do. I condemn Russia’s invasion.
But when the governments of the USA and UK are not simply condemning the invasion but explicitly and publicly seeking to create an ongoing civil war inside of a foreign country, condemning the entire people of Ukraine to years (if not decades) of gunfire, bombings, misery, destruction, chaos, and death – that is wrong. And it’s evil.
I realize that Raytheon lobbyists support this but I fucking don’t.
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/
Those be-damned fence-sitters in Hell are standing on the shoulders of those underneath, the ones who picked a side just for the sake of picking a side, without the underlying knowledge that lets them pick the right side.
NickM,
I did not call you inane, I said that your response was inane.
Jacob said:
You responded with a long paragraph that began with:
It’s not only me and Jacob who have sought to inject a bit of nuance into the discussion of Ukraine to try to show that the situation is something less than an existential struggle against the evil love child of Lord Voldemort, Satan, and Adolf Hitler.
Ruralcounsel, APL, Phil B, Martin, ragingnick have also sought to do so – in various ways. And the response from many, many people (certainly the majority of the commenters, so you are in good company NickM) has basically been: you are appeasing Hitler.
I’m sick of it. It’s just not true.
FWIW, I obviously don’t think you are inane and your comments at this blog are typically interesting and well worth reading.
Shlomo Maistre (March 2, 2022 at 8:59 pm), Putin never had a hope of getting the inverse of all six of your points (I’ll skip the word ‘inverse’ from now on – assume it where I obviously mean it) by anything less than conquest. If indeed, his ability to stay in place as dictator required him to pursue all six then Russia’s internal politics gave him goals’ with internal contradictions. However I register my very strong doubts that these six were things Vlad had to do to stay in power.
It’s already been commented by me and others that if he’d aimed for 1-4 (keep the Crimea, annex the Donbass), he’d look like he was ahead at the moment – but of course would never get 6 (a fearful Ukraine will be all the more determined not let Putin control its major earners) or 5 as regards NATO (a fearful Ukraine will long all the more for NATO’s protection; past a very low point, every pressure he applies to make the Ukraine promise never to join NATO simply makes the Ukraine more aware that it wishes it already had, and it should the first chance it gets).
If he’d leveraged his position supplying German energy to obstruct the other half of 5 – either keeping the Ukraine wholly out of the EU or demanding no trade-barrier between Ukraine and Russia (using a Great Britain/Northern Ireland analogy of EU tariffs only being applied to Russian goods when and if they exited the Ukraine into the EU), then maybe he could have achieved that goal (maybe even have got some approval of it in Britain).
I do not think Vlad is mad. I do think he is not only bad but playing his hand badly because he is bad – because his wish to reconstruct the Russian empire makes him poor at understand why it’s not happening in hearts and minds.
This of course feeds into my rejection of your other point. It’s absurd to talk about the west “seeking to create an ongoing civil war inside a foreign country”. In form, the Ukraine was an independent nation at the start of this, and in substance, the ability of the war to persist depends wholly on the Ukrainians being willing to act as if that were true – to defend their country against a more powerful invader. If it were truly a civil war, there wouldn’t be a war (and the UK and US would likely have no power to start one and certainly no power without doing far more than they are).
Niall,
I agree and I never stated otherwise.
I never said that Vlad had to do the inverse of all those six things to stay in power.
My point was NOT that Putin had to do the inverse of those six things in order to stay in power.
What I said:
That was my point, and I think it’s true and valid.
There’s a lot I could say in response. But to avoid writing 30,000 words I’ll just revise as follows.
Originally I said:
That was a bit incorrect/clumsy phrasing on my part. This is the new version, which I stand by:
But when the governments of the USA and UK are not simply condemning the invasion but explicitly and publicly seeking to continue and to exacerbate ongoing violent conflict inside of a foreign country, condemning the entire people of Ukraine to years (if not decades) of gunfire, bombings, misery, destruction, chaos, and death – that is wrong.
I dispute this. Without support for the Ukrainian military/resistance from other countries like USA and UK, I think Russia would pacify the country pretty quickly, and bring peace, order, and stability.
You may think it’s preferable for Ukraine to experience something like what Syria had from 2011 until a couple years ago rather than to be under the thumb of the ruthless authoritarian Putin. We can agree to disagree on that.
But we surely agree that the Washington DC Blob (US State Department, Deep State, Media, and Intelligence Agencies of the Western World) is acting in the interests of Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, ExxonMobil, and Shell only by coincidence. We both obviously know that the Washington Blob has only the best interests of the Ukrainian People at heart. Nothing else.
Niall,
This really is the rub, isn’t it?
I more or less agree with this entire paragraph.
I guess my underlying point is not that Russia’s ruling class and government is worth defending. My underlying point is that Russia’s ruling class and government is going to defend itself.
Putin having 1 – 4 would, as you say, likely push Ukraine into NATO and even EU. NATO bases on Russia’s border is not exactly compatible with the security and stability of Russia’s government. And once NATO is in Ukraine how long until Putin loses 1 – 4?
So let me ask you, which and how many of those 6 items do you think Putin needs in order 1. to ensure that Putin is in power until natural death and 2. there is no fundamental threat to the security and stability of Russia’s mafia system of government and ruling class?
Shlomo,
You only know me via this website so I take that at face value as calling me “inane”. Within the only context we have that is a personal insult. I shall let it pass.
So what do you want? To throw Ukraine under the bus because it is simpler? My grandparent’s generation fought an existential war against that sort of thinking. Some died. Was that “inane”. We fought for civilization itself.
Unfortunately, we’ve got to do it, again.
I was talking with my brother yesterday and we had independently come to the same conclusion. There was a 40 mile log-jam of Russian supply trucks on a Ukrainian road. Unleash the A-10s! And this will all be over. This seriously need not be a long war and I hope it isn’t.
Here we stand. Here we fight. It is that simple. If Ukraine falls then God help us all.
NickM,
In this thread, I have mainly wanted to get across a few key points. Broadly speaking, I have sought to inject a bit of nuance into the discussion of Ukraine to try to show that the situation is something less than an existential struggle against the evil love child of Lord Voldemort, Satan, and Adolf Hitler.
No.
I don’t understand your thought process here. Have you considered how Vladimir Putin might respond to such an action? What’s your end game?
So do you oppose the following plan?
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/
Should have said once Ukraine is in NATO how long until Putin loses 1 – 4? Although I guess both versions basically work and are more or less one and the same anyway.
All Russia has to do to end the violent conflict is go the fuck home. That’s it. Failing that, I have never been happier to see my tax money being very well spent (NLAW is a fine weapon made in Belfast). I trust HMG will continue to supply them to Ukrainians until either hell freezes over or Russian forces depart an independent Ukraine, whichever happens first.
Without the presence of Russian forces in Donbas, the Ukrainians would have brought peace, order and stability years ago.
It’s pretty clear that from Putin’s perspective, the Ukraine question is an existential one, not just for him, but for Russia.
The problem is, how many Russians feel the same way?
Regarding the long Russian vehicle convoy stuck in the Ukraine, as well as reports of abandoned Russian combat vehicles, I’m reminded of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Joe Biden: Hah! I abandoned 85 billion USD worth of equipment in Afghanistan. Top that!
Putin: Hold my beer.
It’s easy to ‘unleash the A-10s’ when your side has a huge nuclear arsenal and the other side doesn’t (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc). When the other side also has over 5000 nukes, if you’re going to ‘unleash the A-10s’ you may as well start praying because armageddon will likely be the eventual outcome.
Martin (March 3, 2022 at 6:52 am), Donald Trump called that one right. When Kim said, “Hey, I have nukes”, Trump replied, “I have a bigger button on my desk”. The only sane reply to a ‘world leader’ who starts saying, “Hey, look, I have nukes, you know!”, is to reply, “Likewise”. If you want to channel English understatement rather than American overstatement in saying it, be my guest, but it needs to be said somehow – and, for all my UK–speech-style-chauvinism, I see an argument that Trump’s way of saying it is best for anyone it could need to be said to.
A central reason for why the “Is Vlad mad?” idea is being floated (wrong though I think it) is that when Vlad dropped nuke hints, he went well beyond failing to see how he is defeating his goals in the internal politics of the Ukraine. I’ve talked about that in almost all my comments so far, but let’s apply similar reasoning to the west and to Vlad’s attempt to improve his position by hinting about nukes.
Yeah, it simply scares some people – the chatty Waitrose cashier was really worried about it on Monday – but it has a political effect far beyond the west’s involvement in the Ukraine. For decades, the west has pursued nuclear non-proliferation. A key part of its strategy is to claim that the US, with a bit of help from Britain and France, will keep it safe for Japan, Germany, the middle east and others not to have them.
The Iran deal is already undermining that, but Ben Rhodes taught the media their story on that in good time, and the Mullahs more or less know to avoid making that story too impossible for the MSM to push. Now here, suddenly, with the media already opposed to him and unprepared, Vlad indirectly reminds everyone of old narrative they’d rather forget (“Give up your nukes, Ukraine – we’ll keep you safe”: Clinton) and then talks openly about nukes. Biden’s advisors would so like not to have to think about that – but it’s there and it may be another issue in the mid-terms. Here in the UK, I think Boris and his cabinet are foreseeing consequences.
Here, just as in Ukraine, Vlad is not showing sufficient awareness of how his methods may make the west feel cautious, even afraid, but also more involved. The west’s non-proliferation strategy now needs Putin to fail. Our pathetic woke weakness may make that far less of a cost to Putin that it might have been – but it cost him.
Shlomo said:
I don’t understand your thought process here. Have you considered how Vladimir Putin might respond to such an action? What’s your end game?
My end game is Russia totally humiliated as quickly as possible. That means Putin gets deposed and we get a new Russia. Whether that is better or worse is a spin I’m prepared to take. Because if Putin isn’t stopped here there will be two potentially lamentable results which are not entirely mutually exclusive. This goes on for years at some level (not good), we face the same choices again elsewhere and probably further West (really not good). Do you really want to recycle this discusion a couple of years from now about Estonia, Finland, Poland…
As to how Putin will react. Well, I dunno and neither does anyone. Probably not even him right now but at some level we can’t care about that. Yes, it is tricky dealing with a man-child who might throw his nuclear toys out of the pram any time but sometimes things need to be done and shredding that convoy with A-10s (or similar) is one of them. Pussy-footing this one just prolongs the agony. Wars ought to be quick and decisive. I learned that from Norman Schwarzkopf and Sid Meier.
Shlomo – as I said you condemn Mr Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine. So do I.
We know why Russia invaded – because Mr Putin ordered it (to the shock of Russian Generals – let alone ordinary soldiers).
Do I support the international “soft” Fascism of the Davos Crowd (the “international community” – the Corporate State), of course I do NOT support them – I oppose them. Mr Putin’s National Fascism has played into the hands of the International Fascism forces.
I oppose Fascism (I oppose the Corporate State) – whether it is national or international.
I am not an idiot – I do not confuse the system that now seeks to dominate the Western world with the free market. It is nothing to do with freedom, nothing to do with liberty.
And Mr Putin, the National Fascist, has just given the International “Soft” Fascist forces a massive BOOST.
Mr Putin is a wicked fool – he has done exactly what they hoped (yes hoped) he would do. How now can someone, for example, stand for clear divide between politics and banking?
Anyone who now says that private bank accounts should remain PRIVATE will now be denounced as an “agent of Putin” (and some of them actually will be agents of Putin). This is the dream of the “Great Reset” forces – Mr Putin (in his wickedness – and his stupidity) has given them exactly what they wanted, the perfect excuse for the international political control of what is left of the free economy.
And how would you do that?
We are not talking about some third-rate backwater country. This is Russia.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-happened-russias-air-force-us-officials-experts-stumped-2022-03-01/
Russia has not even used its air force…
Do you oppose the following plan?
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/
NickM – my thoughts were not Christian.
They were much darker. My thoughts often are dark – especially now when the economic consequences of the insane Keynesian polices of the West can now be blamed on “Putin” and “Agents of Putin”. Guess how I feel about that.
Have a look at the Meditations of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius – that is the situation we are now in.
Trapped between the National Fascism of Mr Putin – and the “Soft” International Fascism of the Great Reset (“paranoid conspiracy theorist” – if anyone says that I will just show them Dr Schwab’s book).
Heads we lose – and tails we also lose.
I also have no illusions about the President of Ukraine – I know he is NOT the libertarian he claimed to be in 2019 (I did not believe him then). I know he has forced people to sell television stations (in the name of an “anti Oligarch” law – remember an “Oligarch” is a large scale businessman who does NOT go along with Davos, no one accuses Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos of being “Oligarchs” because they DO go along with the line of the “international community”). President Z is a person of the “creative centre” like Tony Blair (you can guess what I think about Tony Blair). But he is still democratically elected (in a free and fair election) – and he is fighting an invasion by the National Fascist Mr Putin.
We are trapped between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea – with a “choice” between the Frying Pan and the Fire.
But we must oppose the invasion – and we must oppose the National Fascism of Mr Putin. Mr Putin does not care about Russia or the Russian people – and he is not particularly interested in land disputes with the Ukraine. He wants to expand his dictatorship – he was always an evil man, but now Mr Putin has become a STUPID man as well.
“But that plays into the hands of the “Soft Fascism” of the international community” – if anyone says that I ALREADY KNOW THAT.
Not opposing Mr Putin (totally opposing him) plays into the hands of the “international community” (the Corporate State) even more.
Schlomo.
“How would you humiliate Russia?” – Mr Putin has already humiliated Russia, he has turned Russia into a de facto colony of the People’s Republic of China. And the international elite (the Davos crowd) are PRIVATELY delighted with what Mr Putin has done by invading Ukraine.
Mr Putin has given them the perfect excuse for their agenda – international political control of the economy (an end to the last bits of liberty).
They do not have to invent an excuse – because Mr Putin has GIVEN them an excuse, a perfect excuse.
Mr Putin has always been an evil man – but he has become STUPID as well.
Mr Putin has, by his invasion of Ukraine, done terrible harm to RUSSIA (to the Russian people),
And he may well have sunk us as well.
We must now support international action – even though we know that the invasion of the Ukraine is being used as an excuse for the growth of power for the International Community (the Davos Crowd).
The finally irony is that the Davos Crowd (the International Community) are ALSO dependent on the People’s Republic of China.
The People’s Republic of China manufacturing output DWARFS that of the United States. It is vastly greater.
Dr Klaus Schwab and his son think they control China – they do NOT, it controls them.
The “soft” Fascism of the International Community will not stay “soft”.
China will, in the end, control it.
Xi (or some other PRC leader) stands behind Putin – and he also stands behind the ENEMIES of Putin.
Heads we lose – tails we also lose.
“Paul – sometimes a coin lands on its edge”.
Yes – but very rarely.
Perry,
And that’s my point. The decision to end the violent conflict is not the people of Ukraine’s to make. And by publicly and explicitly seeking to continue and to exacerbate ongoing violent conflict inside of Ukraine, the West is condemning the people of Ukraine to years if not decades of gunfire, bombings, misery, destruction, chaos, and death.
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/
Do you support the West implementing this plan by supplying funding, supplies, and weapons to the Ukrainian military/resistance? Yes or no.
If yes, then do you think it is in the interests of the people of Ukraine for the West to implement such a plan? Yes or no.
There is a difference between supporting this plan because one thinks it is in the interests of the West for the West to implement it versus supporting this plan because one thinks it is in the interests of the people of Ukraine for the West to implement it.
Paul Marks,
I don’t see how Russia has been humiliated. At least not yet. But yes it is certainly possible, particularly if the Russian government collapses at some point.
I totally disagree and I think that’s absolutely absurd.