Posted on 11/08/2024 7:45:59 AM PST by marcusmaximus
President Vladimir Putin is ready to discuss Ukraine with Donald Trump but that does not mean he is willing to alter Moscow's demands, the Kremlin said on Friday.
Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov made the remarks after being asked at his daily news briefing if Putin's readiness to talk to the Republican president-elect reflected a willingness to change those demands.
"The president has never said that the goals of the special military operation are changing. On the contrary, he has repeatedly said that they remain the same," Peskov said.
-snip-
Putin on June 14 set out his terms for an end to the war: Ukraine would have to drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw all of its troops from all of the territory of four regions claimed by Russia.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
Should read, crawlings up our back.
Regards the media, it’s no different here, i.e. Trump 2020, Hunters laptop, J6 and how that was covered, how the msm protected dementia Joe for the last 4 years, this war in Ukraine where our msm refuses to run any derogatory story and cheerleads for Ukraine 23-7...
We have a few major media conglomerates that are ALL politically aligned: https://youtu.be/ksb3KD6DfSI?si=pPMBE7qwpklPfzv4
Really? In Russia, being a reporter who investigates Putin and his government is a lethal risk. Numerous reporters have been killed in Russia by state action in one form or another, while opposition news outlets have all been gradually shut down. In the US, after Trump’s win and collapsing ratings, it is the lapdog media that are in trouble, with conservative news outlets, reporters, and opinion writers and presenters in the ascendant.
Yes, really: https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/world-int/24744-the-tragic-end-of-gonzalo-lira-a-voice-silenced-in-ukraine.html (where’s your outrage?)
Only reporters that report as we like and get killed by Russians are long stories repeated and quoted, and mentioned by political figures. Those that don’t play along, we won’t mention even if beat to an inch of death and then denied medical attention, dying later of their injuries sustained by our benevolent and moral friends the Ukrainians and where our State Department drug their feet coming to help.
Do you really think Epstein was a suicide? What is the probability of all those coincidences coming together?
Do you really think Whitewater was just a bunch of “coincidences?”
How many attempts on Trumps life have we had thus far?
Somehow when it’s oneself, we see it differently. But yes, we have a lot of questionable deaths in the US as well.
There is of course a prudential case to be made that we should not have helped Ukraine, but we long ago became committed to their cause. The collapse of Ukraine now would risk far worse evils and would call into question America's credibility around the world.
When someone runs out of arguments, naturally they resort to personal attacks and fallacies.
Yes, we kill people we don’t “like” if they get to close for comfort for the right folks in power.
But as usual, it’s always different when we do it. Our corruption is different, our torture is for the right reason, our kidnapping is for the right cause, our censorship serves humanity and democracy, bla bla bla.
And if you disagree, you’re a communist!
Today, the US and Russia are nearly indistinguishable. Both are oligarchies where you have a few very rich people run the show, are above the law (HRC, Hunter, etc), and you have a “sham” democracy.
Our credibility went out the window starting 2003 (WMD and terrorist lies) with our invasion of Iraq. Since then it’s only been a downhill slide.
Ukraine is a war for the rich.
It’s a war where you can not truly articulate a national security interest for us or NATO.
It’s a war where you can not tell an average American how it makes them more safe, free or wealthy.
But it is a war that feeds the war industrial complex, it is a war that serves the interests of all the big investors in Ukraine who wanted EU and NATO membership.
Sadly, when folks like you believe the horse shit about democracy, human rights or sovereignty (none of which describe Ukraine), it’s not just your children that are sent to die.
That is off the rails crazy, especially after the recent election put Trump and MAGA in charge. No such turn of events is possible in Russia, where strong candidates who run against Putin and reporters who investigate him end up dead.
As in Soviet times, Putin and his circle of gangsters, oligarchs, and siloviki came to power with a view of the US as the main enemy. That makes helping Ukraine in the US national interest. Blather about Ukraine being a "war for the rich" is foolish.
What troops, it would go nuclear pretty quick and we will all be dea.
Today, we are not on the defensive as in the Cold War, and our military campaigns usually have a political or economic nexus.
Iraq: Offensive
Syria: Offensive
Libya: Offensive
The concept of a “Just War” is not on our side today, not by a long shot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory
Offensive, expeditionary and economically motivated campaigns are hard to justify even with the most open concept of a just war theory.
That is why, as in Ukraine, outside of some imaginary argument merely based on vapid cliche's and Cold War boogieman arguments, you nor anyone else can provide a national security argument for our involvement in this war.
This is a war for the rich, the oligarchs who wanted Ukraine in the EU and NATO, since these organizations no difference than an insurance underwriter provide certain tools to manage risk and offer even greater future growth. Many Americans still don't know if the blue or yellow is up on the Ukrainian flag, nor would they be able to find it on an unmarked globe... This is not a war where the average American has any sort of benefit to his wealth (it's actually costing them!), where it's making them more safe (it's actually putting them at greater risk), or making them more free. If this war is not benefiting the average American, who is benefiting from it?
Our deteriorating Modus Aparandi-
The Cold War ended 1989-1991 and we were left as the only remaining worlds superpower. China had not entered the stage yet as a power.
American policy makers quickly learned that military force could easily be applied to achieve a desired outcome and we became fast to use force and quick to break our promises, our own laws, etc.
When you look at our MO, it is the same as the former Soviets and only with polemics can one attempt to create some difference, i.e. we torture, kidnap, assassinate, side step our Constitution, mass censor, mass use proxy forces and mercenaries...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamal_Derwish This was the first time (that I know of) where a US citizen was “executed” by his own government (in modern times) without a trial. You had a bunch of face/nameless bureaucrats target this individual and a politician somewhere in the process give the green light. If the Russians had done this, people like you would use that as an example of how they are brutal and lawless, a bunch that have no regard for life.
Post 2001 (Patriot Act, changes in the NDAA, etc) led to significant changes in how we operate and a massive bloat in the IC. Torture became enhanced interrogations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_interrogation_techniques), kidnapping became extraordinary rendition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition)... And somehow with euphemisms it all became OK.
When we do it, there is ALWAYS a justification in our own mind: https://www.dw.com/en/kidnapped-by-the-cia-the-case-of-khaled-el-masri/a-61205120 (kidnapping a foreign citizen from a NATO allied nation and torturing him - figuring out it was just a similar name, wooops)
I can provide you hundreds of examples and none of these matter because you want to live in your Disney parallel universe which feels good to you. But maybe you should consider the underlying principals that are at work here, and what a republic with a Constitution means and how military force should be applied.
Bottom line: This isn't the Cold War anymore, the paradigm your entire world view obviously hinges on. We aren't defensive and our MO has deteriorated to lows unimaginable in 1984.
Sometimes war is a necessary evil, but when you unnecessarily cause this war (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/), and it was a real probability that you knew this would cause a war (https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5009529/user-clip-biden-1997-nato-expansion) and it's not for any true self defense but rather economic reasons, pretending to have some moral high ground is idiotic.
The US and Russia are nations that are similar in how they are oligarchies (a word we only apply to them but is also well suited for us: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B). These oligarchs have a disproportionate influence on our political system and what we call democracy only sort of works in the way it was intended. Both nations are similar in that they are world powers (political, economic and military influence on a global scale), with a similar share of government in their GDP, and the only two nations (direct competitors) which really control the entire worlds energy supply (1/3 Russia, 2/3rds US). Both nations Russia and the US engage in dispicable acts (torture, kidnapping, assasignations, mass censorship, propgandizing ones own population, violatioins of ones own basic laws...) which should land the decision makers and those executing these orders in prison. Both nations are nuclear powers with parity, and it is both of these nations that essentially drive military arms development and are the worlds largest arms exporters. But sure, we are entirely different than them.
As to Trump, he's an anomaly and we've have better pray that they weren't able to get to him (buy him) or that his head doesn't explode in the next four years if they didn't.
Independently wealthy (a billionaire), with media experience, a huge mouth, ability to be beat on relentlessly and be unphased by such, someone like that is hard to keep down.
Usually, we do not even get that option presented to us, as all the candidates on the stage only differ in the pop culture topics but are in agreement on the real and serious topics that actually matter, since they all serve the same masters (oligarchs).
It does not matter if you vote for a Bill Clinton or a George H. Bush, a McCain or Obama, a Kerry or Bush W., on issues such as big tech, the massive subsidies, big pharma, trade with China, it's “hands off!”
China can literally run tanks over pro-democracy students on Tienanmen square, and we will give them most favored trade status and support their permanent membership in the WTO, may that be Bush H. or Clinton. The oligarchs in the West want access to this labor, market, and in terms of enviroinmental and tax policies favorable area.
Our political system runs on votes in the store front, but is managed by money in the background.
You need money to run campaigns, a party, create PACs, hire lobbying firms, take legal action in the courts, and politicians and their families like to become wealthy beyond what their public servants salaries earn them. The same oligarchs also outright own or influence the MSM and big tech, which largely drives public perceptions.
What that means is those with the money are the real influencers and you see this in practice where the opinions of the majority of Americans diverge from what their nations actual policies are. Ask most Americans if we should allow our manufacturing to offshore to China or allow even most favored trade status and guess what answer you'd get? If you ask if multi-billion dollar agra giants should get federal subsidies, guess what the majority would say? If you ask if there's a problem with big pharma gauging consumers, guess what answer you'd hear?
An example of this in action: https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/how-disney-routinely-exerted-influence-on-the-us-copyright-law-to-keep-its-greatest-asset-mickey-mouse-549141
How this applies to Ukraine. EU and NATO membership is something our oligarchs in the West (EU and North America) wanted. The average American didn't care nor knows anything about that place and is fed some horse shit about democracy, human rights, and sovereignty. We already owned/controlled Ukraine, ever since 2014 where we sponsored a coups and over threw a democratically elected government and installed our own. While very unpleasant and getting push back by the Russians, they essentially acquiescenced to this reality. Even EU membership was in reach for Ukraine before the war since this posed no real threat to Russia. However, NATO expansion, and this is crucial for the US since we run that show and it is how we have a large degree of our influence in Europe was unacceptable to Russia.
You have a fixation on Putin but the truth is, even if he were not there, any other Russian leader or even YOU (if in his shoes) would have done the same exact thing. For Russia, NATO expansion into Ukraine poses a national security threat, ESPECIALLY the way it was done by us (ram rodding the issue without any agreements regards Russian security interests in that region). So now we have a war, and we can pretend (the sales pitch to the public) that the Russians caused this, and we're defending democracy, human rights and Ukraine's sovereignty...
This caused the war, and it was our call, unnecessary, and predictable that it would cause a war and how it will end: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/
With the advantages of numbers, the ballot box, and the rule of law and bill of rights, the people in America beat money and bend public policy and decisions toward their interest. Eras of elite dominance in American history alternate with periods of populism, often with different ideas vying for popular appeal as critiques of elite rule.
As for Russia and NATO, the objectives of Putin and his backers in the KGB were known from the start. Their intentions and plan were stated in various writings, including Putin's infamous KGB ghost authored doctor of law dissertation on how Russia could reclaim the power that it had under the Soviet system.
With Putin's KGB facilitated accession to supreme power in Russia, a confrontation with NATO became inevitable in that he aimed for control of Ukraine and then putting Central and Eastern Europe under the Russian thumb. Toward that end, Putin rebuilt the Russian nuclear arsenal and delivery systems at immense cost. Otherwise, the world was evolving toward much reduced nuclear weapons stockpiles and a potential for enduring peace between Russian and the West.
As it was, Yeltsin and his group of democratic reformers were undone by Yelstin's age, alcoholism, and family corruption. Was that inevitable? I think not. There continues to be a current of democratic reformism in Russia. This reflects the broad appeal of democracy and rule of law based on America's success.
This appeal can be seen in domestic politics in continental Europe from the early 19th century onward, broadly moving from west to east. As often happened, revolution, war, and succession crises finished off Europe's national systems of aristocratic rule. If nothing else, when Putin dies, his system of rule will die with him.
We already had 90% of what we wanted.
We overthrew the more neutral government in Ukraine in 2014 and installed our own people. Literally hand picking who comes to power: https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/feb/07/eu-us-diplomat-victoria-nuland-phonecall-leaked-video (the real story isn't Nuland saying the F word like the retard media focuses in on, it's the fact that her and the US ambassador are hand picking who is in Ukraine's government.)
Ukraine was already politically our satellite, economically tied to the West, militarily getting our aid... You already had Western firms setting up in Ukraine...
The Russian influence (even though there is a Russian ethnic component in Ukraine) was being “purged” in Ukraine's government.
Ukraine was even on the path to total EU membership and already enjoying a special status with the EU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union%E2%80%93Ukraine_Association_Agreement
This isn't a case of Russian “aggression,” it's a case of us not knowing when to stop.
It already was a win-lose situation where we had won and Russia had lost.
Sometimes, getting 90% of what you want, is better than going for 100% by risking everything like we did. Knowing when you're a winner and when to walk away from the gambling table with your winnings is a good trait.
Think about it like this:
—When this war ends, not just the Russians, we also will have blown through hundreds of billions and large stockpiles of weapons. Ukraine will not be in NATO, lose land, part of its population, a major industrial area, port city and the heart of its steel industry, EU membership slipped from their hands, and Ukraine is a total economic basket case with a severely damaged infrastructure. Ukraine today is double F’ed, because unlike 2014, the economic interests today will not be interested in coming back.
—We will face repercussions from this conflict around the world since Russia will return the favor regards arming those belligerent to us, BRICS will have massively expanded in influence both in membership and scope of powers (diminishing our economic influence on the world stage long term), and the dollar will have lost some more ground in what has become a slow but gradual de-dollarization as a world reserve and trade currency. This you want to sell as a victory!
This war was bad for Ukraine, bad for us, bad for the EU, bad for Russia.
It was a war where we PUSHED Russia into a corner and pretend like we're the defensive ones when they finally strike at us.
You do realize that prior to Ukraine 2021 we attempted to do the same in 2014 (which Russia blocked with force), and in the Republic of Georgia 2008 (which Russia blocked with force). Russia does not want our missiles, missile defense, nukes, fighters, bombers, tanks and troops, on their border. Do we like Russian missile on our border? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis
Here's the most horrible part of it all! Ukraine may someday even be in NATO, in years to come, but it will only do so after we make certain assurances to the Russians regards what we do there, and we could have approached it like that in 2021 as well.
Trying to force the issue and basically giving Russia the middle finger, wasn't smart. This whole war wasn't smart.
This war is a result of people in leadership positions that were rabid anti-Russian like Nuland, massive influence by economic interests that wanted EU and NATO expansion into Ukraine, an administration of naive kids like Sullivan, or absent minded fools like Biden.
IMHO, this war was the result of a perfect constellation of the wrong people, in the wrong positions, at the wrong time.
This should have never happened, not the way it did: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/
It is not at all speculation. Putin and his KGB pals made clear what they intended from the jump: a resurrection of the Soviet Union, including her former sphere of influence in Europe. That is why former Warsaw Pact member Poland is arming up. Every few months, Russia makes threats against Poland.
Bush H and his CIA pals, Bush W and his oil pals... not an argument.
Every nation has a sphere of influence, and ours is the largest of them all, with many of the nations under our control or partially under our control being coerced, i.e. Iraq, Syria, Libya, Solomon Islands... Historically, we claim entire continents as ours, Monroe Doctrine; today while not an official public doctrine, we see the entire Pacific Rim as ours... Not sure if I would use the “sphere of influence” argument against Russia if I were you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine
Poland, hides behind us and NATO. They are the proverbial Chihuahua that barks a lot and wants to bite everything. We let them go because their fervent anti-Russian position is to our benefit in NATO and Europe. “Old Europe” cutting defense spending below 2% of the contractual minimum, their entire lack of a threat picture, and unwillingness to transform NATO into our personal foreign legion, is NOT to our benefit.
To this day, 8 NATO members are not even paying up their minimum 2% GDP on defense: https://www.statista.com/statistics/584088/defense-expenditures-of-nato-countries/#:~:text=Defense%20expenditures%20of%20NATO%20countries%20as%20a%20percentage%20of%20GDP%202024,-Published%20by%20Statista&text=In%202024%2C%20Poland. Nations like Germany barely pay the minimum and only slowly raised to to that level post 2022. Why? No one believes in your Russian threat picture. No one. Not even us.
Specific to Ukraine:
This caused a war: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/
There was no national security need for us.
It was our choice, we had control over this decision.
We knew it was a gamble.
We had time to backpedal (two months) but decided to force the issue.
We put Russia in a position where they can articulate a national security argument. A large military force on their border, a threat that would tip the nuclear balance.
Once the war began, we kept it going, even after the last hope of any Ukrainian victory vaporized in their failed 2023 counter offensive.
This is a stupid war that was ENTIRELY avoidable.
When the Soviets threatened invasion, the communist Polish military government warned that the result would be a revolt by the populace with guerrilla attacks that would sever the railroad lines into Germany and make the Soviet army there insupportable. The example of Poland then electing a post-communist government set into motion the process of dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and then the USSR.
Again, the reason for the Russian attacks on and invasion of Ukraine was Putin's long-known desire to recover the power and influence of the USSR. Now, even with Russia firing off new model missiles and pressing for gains on the ground, the Russian economy is beginning to tank. As Putin knows, instead of Trump offering favorable terms at Ukraine's expense, he could well put the screws to Russia and notch up a foreign policy win.
Finally, the difference between the US alliance system and that of Russia is that normal countries want to align with the US but not with Russia. Given a chance, almost all countries avoid Russia's embrace. After all, who really wants to be raped?
Iraq is occupied by us, 21 years now, with 5 of it's leaders (all of them) formally asking us to leave, and roughly 97% of it's population (outside the Kurdish areas) wanting us to leave.
And in Ukraine, we overthrew the democratically elected (there were foreign observers to include the EU that verified the elections were legit) government there in 2014, installed our own, and then they do as we tell them, to include asking for NATO membership. Having a marionette do as he's told, is hardly the nations free will. Why do you think we're OK with the elections in Ukraine being canceled? Do you think that's because Mr. Z (Person of the year) is so popular in Ukraine today? Because we support democracy?
Want more examples?
Back to Ukraine:
—Ukraine is a classic example of where you already won and got ALMOST everything you can dream of. But because you want it all, you keep gambling and end up losing some of what you had. Now it's just a question of how much we're going to lose.
—Again, the sad part of this story is that one day, in many years to come, Ukraine may even be in NATO. But that is when we address Russia's security concerns, which are legit. Trying to force the issue and get what we want, in complete disregard of Russia's concerns was not smart nor moral (like we try to pretend to be). It was stupid.
The Ukraine war was caused by a US policy failure, NATO East expansion into Ukraine.
Not every girl that alleges rape is being honest.
Then there is the politics that the Germans call “Realpolitik.” It is the practical politics as defined by the real world constraints.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik
Putin is actually a very predictable, rational/calculated, mind. His decisions are along the lines of Realpolitik.
Putin comes from humble origins and if you actually look at his life, big picture, you're dealing with a self made man that is very intelligent. All this talk about him having a mental disease (ironic once again, while Biden mumbles and stumbles around), not really having earned an actual academic doctorate degree (while our leaders all receive “honorable” doctorate degrees), is not worth the time it takes to read. These are just vapid attacks on a person which are wild speculations but because we don't like the guy we want to believe them.
Just like we have an official bio for all our leaders posted, so does Putin: http://en.putin.kremlin.ru/bio/page-0 Maybe try reading about the guy before you simply regurgitate something you hear which sounds good to you.
Here's the problem with your constant fixation on Putin. The Ukraine war isn't about Putin! If any other leader were in charge, if YOU were in charge, you'd have the same result. If Putin were to die of a massive heart attack tomorrow, his replacement would with a high probability keep the same course. Why? Because it's us that put Russia into a bad national security predicament and that stays the same regardless of who is in charge.
This isn't about some rebuilding of an empire (the reciprocal argument) but rather Russia being put in a position where they are threatened: NATO, the worlds most powerful military organization on their border, missile defense and 6 minutes time of flight to Moscow (tips the entire nuclear deterrence model), us building a huge Ukrainian military force on their border which we can use against them if there is ever a crisis elsewhere, us building 12 secret CIA bases and conducting operations against Russia from there...
Russia isn't looking for Ukraine to be their satellite, Ukraine was already ours, they are looking for Ukraine to be “neutral ground” militarily. To this end, Russia agreed to Minsk and they attempted to follow it initially. It is “us” that never played by any of those rules which were all intended to de-militarize Ukraine, and that alone should tell you who the actual “belligerent” is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
As always, Putin's supporters insist that such measures were necessary to counter external threats by NATO and the West. Yet the truth of the matter was that after the end of the Cold War, the US and NATO had cut back their militaries drastically in favor of social spending. It was Russia's aggression and Putin's goal to recover Soviet era influence that inspired alarm in the US and other NATO countries. Most Russians know this but pretend not to.
Putin is of course rational in his means but is nevertheless an idiot as to his goals. With vast natural resources, an educated populace, and a unique culture that has looked west since the era of Peter the Great, Russia would have easily prospered and developed into a normal nation.
Putin though is a thug who has stolen billions and cemented himself into power. He falsely claims that there are foreign security threats to justify his lifetime rule, massive military spending, and aggression against Russia's neighbors. That is why Putin matters. His political opponents -- many now killed by his assassins -- had urged peace and good relations with the West.
A clever gangster but a dope as to military strategy, Putin cooked up his Ukraine invasion plan with a close set of compliant advisers. Experienced Russian military men were excluded. The result was a fiasco of an invasion that failed, with over half a million Russian casualties, and NATO rearming with two new members close to Russia.
Putin's continuing war on Ukraine now endangers his hold on power and Russia's economic stability. In strategic terms, Russia has lost because NATO has been revitalized and Russia lacks the military and economic capacity to occupy and subdue Ukraine in a successful and profitable way.
If Trump puts the screws to Russia with enhanced sanctions, Russia's economy will collapse and Putin will be ousted or killed. Will the fearful and ever greedy Putin instead take a deal? We shall see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.