Posted on 05/18/2022 8:11:36 AM PDT by marcusmaximus
we had an agreement with them.
conservatives hold up agreements when people are getting slaughtered and attacked.
russians suck at ‘special military operations’ and argumentation. who knew?
Russia has threatened ukraine, moldova, poland, finland and sweden.
You’re the only one trying to build an empire.
Take your russian bullshit elsewhere, you’re positions are not conservative.
It’s far more likely Russia would invade Turkey than Turkey would invade Russia. That’s why I drew the conclusion I did.
And you are still buying that dreck? All he cares about is stealing Ukrainian natural resources, to recreate glorious Tsarist Empires of a hundred and more years ago. IOW Pooty Toot® is like a common burglar who breaks into your house when your wife and children are at home, and should be shot.
Pooty is delusional, diseased, depressed and living in the past of a 150 years ago. Croak soon Pooty!
Must fatten the pockets of corrupt politicians. Ukraine is one of the most corrupt places on earth. I’ve spent time there, it’s a shit show.
“Just a guess but it would interesting to know how well our weapons systems go up against genuine Russian forces.
In Russian client states we fought we were told the russkies we’re holding back their good stuff and weren’t proper Soviet soldiers.”
1—Russia is not prepared for a prolonged war—a lengthy war favours Ukraine.
Russia’s economy is intact. Approximately 70-90% of the Ukrainian economy has collapsed, with the major industrial centre of Mariupol, necessary for the military-industrial complex, in Russian hands. Ukraine is unable to collect taxes and finance its government and military. Russia has mobilized barely a single-digits percentage of its economy for this war; Ukraine has very little of an economy left to mobilize. Russia is slated to produce its largest harvest to date; Ukraine is exporting its entire remaining stock of grain, and has mined its fields to such an extent that the agricultural production on large swaths of arable land is impossible. Russia continues, daily, to produce the missiles it uses to strike Ukrainian military and infrastructure targets; Ukraine’s Tochka-U repair and manufacturing assets have been taken out of commission, putting a cap on the number of missiles it can deploy, and the launchers are slowly being decimated. Russia has deployed only a portion of its military, and, perhaps, not even the strongest part of its contract force (possibly in anticipation of having to repel NATO aggression, but this is only speculation); most of Ukraine’s fighting brigades are now at 40-60% staff ratio.
Russia is largely self-sufficient, is able to redirect the flow of its goods and resources to the East, and continues to reap the premium for gas and oil created by the Western sanctions; Ukraine survives at the pleasure of the West, which is unwilling even to hand over, wholesale, the frozen Russian Central Bank reserves, let alone spend enough to finance Ukraine through this war, and where public attention is flagging as economies experience inflation and a downturn and the success of Ukrainian propaganda that Russia has already lost plays against those who disseminate it. Wars are won through economic prowess, and the West is neither willing, nor able to put its money where its mouth is—and, even if it were, what’s there to spend on, a decimated Ukrainian military, increasingly composed of untrained conscripts?
2—Russia has suffered major casualties—Putin has to mobilize additional troops to continue the war.
Russia is still using essentially the same military grouping that it used in the beginning, reinforced with a few additional battlegroups to take on Ukraine’ toughest positions in Donbass. Ukraine is on the 4th wave of mobilization, with rampant enforced conscription, and untrained volkssturm and territorial defence battalions—which expected to sit the war out in Galicia, but are now increasingly thrown to the front—being deployed into the meat grinder in the Izyum theatre, where some of the most seasoned Allied troops are breaking through the Ukrainian ranks. Despite protestations of the Western experts that Russia was about to declare general mobilization, not even a partial one was announced, and Putin explicitly refused the idea. Even the covert mobilization of volunteers is ongoing primarily (if not only) through the organizing channels in Chechnya (where volunteers from all over Russia and the post-Soviet space are gathering). The city of Mariupol was assaulted and taken (not including the forces on the perimeter, enforcing the city’s encirclement) with initially fewer troops than the Ukrainian defenders had. Ukraine was unable to even conceive of attempting to deblockade its units—because Russia had pinned the Ukrainian forces throughout the north, in Kharkov, Sumy, Chernigov, and Kiev.
4.6Kviewsedited
16:17
Slavyangrad - Gleb Bazov
By the time the forces doing the pinning were redeployed, the Mariupol saga was essentially over. In redeploying the North Front units, Russia was able to let them rest, but they did not take too long before being thrown back into warfare—indicating that there was no appreciable need for replenishment of personnel (confirming the relatively low casualties even in the North Front engagement—the major casualties for Russia were always going to come from the Donbass engagement). Ukraine is unable even to rotate its brigades for rest: The Ukrainian units are stuck at the front and have no option but to fight without stop (the flood of relatives increasingly pleading with the Ukrainian authorities to allow their men to rest and rotate out of hot zones is becoming very pronounced).
The POW numbers tell their own story. It has been weeks (literally) since we last saw any video of Russian POWs in Ukrainian hands. Videos of Ukrainians surrendering to Russian forces are, on the other hand, a daily phenomenon. They surrender individually, in groups, and en masse. Some have even joined the DNR and LNR forces to fight against the Ukrainian army. Other have decided to stay in Donbass for good. Some help in Allied military and Donbass civilian hospitals. Still others eat, rest, smoke—perfectly safe in Russian captivity. I estimate in excess of 6,000 Ukrainian POWs, and possibly as high as 8,000 in Russian hands. This speaks volumes, considering the Russian MoD report that, once encircled, the Mariupol Ukrainian contingent numbered about 8,500 troops, and Russia assaulted it with about the same number. Whatever the number of Russian casualties, the number of Ukrainian POWs is likely higher than the entire group of those Russian soldiers who died.
3—Russia has lost so much armour and equipment that it has to source new tanks from Iraq—Ukraine, by contrast, has been capturing Russian armoured vehicles in such numbers that it has more now than it had before the conflict. Even farmers plow fields using Russian tanks.
Even the Ukrainian Goebbels Arestovich said, on April 26: “We do not have any heavy weaponry. We need it. The West will help us, and we will go on the offensive.” The fairy tales of Ukrainian farmers towing Russian tanks and Ukrainian forces massively taking abandoned Russian equipment were always just that—fairy tales of the worst kind, the ones that have no truth, moral, or purpose, except to perpetuate a lie. The Russian army has been completely undeterred by any losses of any equipment—armoured vehicles, specialized vehicles, MLRS, aircraft, helicopters, and so on—that it may have suffered. On the contrary, its movements and redeployments continue being rapid, the pace of the offensive—considering the vast territory and the enormous length of the front—remains exemplary. All this indicates that all the Western and Ukrainian reporting on the topic of Russian losses of any kind has been one Big Lie, die große Lüge.
7.2Kviewsedited
16:17
Slavyangrad - Gleb Bazov
4—Ukraine forced the Russian troops from the areas near Kiev, Chernigov, Sumy, Kharkov—but Ukraine withdrew, in an organized fashion, from Severodonetsk, Popasnaya, and Izyum.
This one is complete gobbledygook and gibberish. Let’s deal with the Ukrainians first. The Ukrainian forces have not—to date—conducted an organized retreat from any place, with the exception, possibly of the withdrawal of a brigade from Lisichansk. This could be considered organized retreat, but only if one ignores that the city was near to falling into a cauldron, and their desperate comrades, across the Seversky Donets river, in Severodonetsk, were abandoned and left to die by the Ukrainian General Staff. Popasnaya was a monumental defeat, and the Ukrainian 24th Brigade may cease to exist as a result, as it suffered major losses even in withdrawal. Finally, Izyum, actually, is an example of the resilience and perseverance of Ukrainian troops, which managed, for nearly a month—if my memory serves me correctly—to defend in the southern peninsula-like district of the city, across the Seversky Donets river from the advancing Russian forces. They did not withdraw from there either, but died there.
As for Russians—where is the evidence, photographic or otherwise, that the Ukrainians are so fond of, of them forcing Russians from Kiev, Chernigov, Sumy, and Kharkov? These were not fights or battles. The best Ukraine could hope for was shell with artillery and MLRS from within these cities the Russian positions all around them. In Kiev, Chernigov, and Sumy, it was only on 2nd or 3rd day after the Russian armies left in an organized fashion, for redeployment to Donbass, that Ukrainians dared to poke their nose into the settlements around the previously-blockaded urban centres. In Kharkov, the pattern of organized Russian movement repeats—the Allied forces withdrew in the face of the threat of operational encirclement, and Ukrainians moved in to take the empty settlements. The only examples of actual fighting—an attempted assault on Kazachya Lopan, for instance—cost the Ukrainians two villages and a complete failure, and, perhaps, only Rubezhnoye stands as an example of a pitched battle, but I do not have any further information about what happened there. The fighting for Liptsy continues, as far as I can tell. In other words, we are dealing with the Allied armies doing what they want, and the Ukrainians—what the Russian forces allow them to do. Why are the Ukrainians allowed to take back land—that’s a question of politics, tactics, and strategy not suitable for this discussion, and better answered elsewhere.
Time and again, we see Russia implementing a strategy—pinning Ukrainians in the north, then withdrawing, once that mission had run its course, to be redeployed to the second phase of the operation in Donbass. Pinning the Ukrainians in Kharkov, while the new battlegroups rip down the eastern bank of the Oskol river and the Northern command of the Russian forces takes Izyum and spreads the tentacles of its units to Velikaya Kamyshevakha (onwards to Lozovaya, and, possibly, Pavlograd, with time), Barvenkovo, and Slavyansk. Breaking through the defences around Rubezhnoye and piercing toward Yampol and Lyman. Taking Shandrigolovo and Novoselovka to split the Ukrainian side. Grinding down Popasnaya and then splitting the offensive west and north to Artyomovsk and Kamyshevakha. Ukrainians are reacting to this strategy, on the defensive, and largely dancing to the Russian fiddle (the modest attempts at Zmeiny island and around Kharkov notwithstanding, though, allowed to be emboldened, the Ukrainian forces may take these germs of strategy to the next level).
Flip the narrative and the picture becomes clear.
8.5Kviewsedited
16:38
Slavyangrad - Gleb Bazov
Damn, I missed an entire paragraph of this section when I accidentally posted the original prematurely. Here it is.
3—Russia has lost so much armour and equipment, that it has to source new tanks from Iraq—Ukraine, by contrast, has been capturing Russian armoured vehicles in such numbers, that it has more now than it had before the conflict. Even farmers plow fields using Russian tanks.
Even the Ukrainian Goebbels Arestovich said, on April 26: “We do not have any heavy weaponry. We need it. The West will help us, and we will go on the offensive.” The fairy tales of Ukrainian farmers towing Russian tanks and Ukrainian forces massively taking abandoned Russian equipment were always just that—fairy tales of the worst kind, the ones that have no truth, moral, or purpose, except to perpetuate a lie. The Russian army has been completely undeterred by any losses of any equipment—armoured vehicles, specialized vehicles, MLRS, aircraft, helicopters, and so on—that it may have suffered. On the contrary, its movements and redeployments continue being rapid, the pace of the offensive—considering the vast territory and the enormous length of the front—remain exemplary. All this indicates that all the Western and Ukrainian reporting on the topic of Russian losses of any kind has been one Big Lie, die große Lüge.
The Ukrainian side, by contrast, finds itself in the most pitiful state—barely scraping any sort of equipment together, precisely because it has lost so much. Begging for armour and aircraft from the West—because it has none. Sending its soldiers into battle without heavy vehicle support. Even the terrorist Tochka-U launches are becoming a rarity (just today two were shot down by the Russian air defences over Kharkov’s northern outskirts—they were clearly aiming for the Russian territory—but there used to be days when Ukraine would launch nearly a dozen in one night). The Ukrainian servicemen are left to lug around the often-failing NLAW (a disposable one-shot ATGM cannon), the Javelins (which the Ukrainian treat as equally disposable), and a cornucopia, a cabbage patch of ATGMs from a variety of other countries. These often misfire, break down, explode in the soldiers’ hands. The Javelin’s batteries are reported to be often kaput, so Ukrainians jerry-rig powerbanks to feed the devices. You do not hear this from the Russians using their own ATGMs. At the same time, every day I see (and have been seeing for many weeks) reports of the Allied forced capturing this or that Ukrainian armoured or other vehicle as a trophy, taking stores of guns and ATGMs, and generally militarily profiting from Ukraine’s weapon stockpiles. The reason Ukraine is so desperate for the arms deliveries from the West is because it has lost so much—the claim of Russian losses, on the other hand, has been another große Lüge.
4.5Kviewsedited
16:59
“in fake stream news”
Oh, so the Chechen warlord that is actually leading troops for Putin in the fighting is now “fake stream news”???
“You do realize that Mariupol fell a few days ago...”
Oh yeah. 12 weeks to capture a small city. That’s surely confirms to the world that Russia is still a “superpower” to be feared.
Bad quote on your part. Here is what I actually said:
“No one has said that he personally lives it, and we all know Putin is corrupt as well. But in a major speech he have he said liberalism, Fasvism, Communism are all failures and a return to Traditionalism is called for, so he at least wants that for society.”
And he may not live what his speech was about but Russia is far more traditional than Zelenskky is.
Zelenskky plays a piano with his pecker, dressed in latex and high heels and wrothed in stsge.
But you deflect from the degeneracy he promotes. Sure, Putin is a thug but he wants Russia Traditional. Zelensky is also a corrupt Autocrat who shut down all media, all elections and worse and promotes degeneracy in Ukraine, but many here at FR seem to like that. Do you?
I wonder...
“it is experience being gained the US does not have”
LMAO! We’re the ones doing it to them. Do you think we don’t use the same tactics in our internal exercises?
Secondly, again:
But people are tired of Iraq wars, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Bush Leaguers and McCainiacs supporting coups overseas that means more wars, more $$$ going overseas to countries corrupt like Ukraine.
We’re 30 trillion in debt, sending 40 billion to that slush fund Ukraine, we protecr their borders not ours, we have stagflation, no baby formula, etc.
And you want to warmonger more?
We were lied to by people hrre Putin was going to roll over Europe at the start of tjis, and he won’t attack a NATO member.
What, you want to protect Ukraine lihe a big brother? Not our job. They aren’t a NATO member and Europe is more than capable.
But it’s not faaaair? Yeah, life isn’t fair and we aren’t world cops.
If you still want military interventionism then you are definitely an interventionist neocon.
Go to DU.
In fairness, I just checked your posting history.
All you ever post on is threads about Russia, Ukraine and NATO.
Are you posting from Russia?
Kazan is the capital and largest city of the Republic of Tatarstan in Russia.
Ukrainians didn’t get the memo about surrendering as soon as the Chechen’s show up ?
“But in a major speech he have he said liberalism, Fasvism, Communism are all failures and a return to Traditionalism is called for, so he at least wants that for society.”
Yet he still rules his country as a fascist dictator. And you believe his words instead of his actions, because you are gullible.
This is interesting reading. Don’t know which sides propaganda to believe but the fact that Russian boots are on Ukrainian soil speaks for itself. It all depends on who wants the land more and who has the treasure and blood to expend in defending it.
Time will tell.
No, I have said it like it is. He is an autocrat but so is Zelenskyy too.
Since he is an autocrat and since Zelensky is an autocrat who shut down all media critical of him in Ukraine painting them all with abroad brush, stifling freedom of speech, shutting down elections, etc, then if you support Zelensky you support autocracy.
So we must support neither Zelensky or Putin and stay out of this.
And you use libtard Emotional Appeals because you lean to the left as neocons also do wanting to get involved militarily
Both are corrupt persibslly, Russia as a country is more Traditional than Ukraine is, Putin doesn’t play piano with his pecker, Zelensky is perhaps bisexual, so you can’t support either of them.
So since we can’t go around being like Bush or Obama getting involved in war after war, and we are 30 trillion in debt, they aren’t a NATO member, and your emotional appeals are what the left uses, we must stay out of this.
Don’t be a neocon!
For people who keep making reference to “Russian boots are on Ukrainian soil” the following article from an actual unbiased expert is edifying.
And this is another informative read that I have posted before; but the indoctrinated continue to ignore...:-)
Arnaud Bertrand@RnaudBertrand
Fascinating interview by @gregtabibian
of Alain Juillet, former head of France’s intelligence services DGSE (French CIA equivalent) under Chirac: https://youtube.com/watch?v=AQhGxsprH8A
I’ll translate and summarize what he says about Ukraine, and notably on the origins of the war.
He says everyone saw the Ukraine war coming, that “only those who know nothing about this matter can say it was a surprise”.
To him, the main reason is because the West “refused since 2014 to tell the Ukrainians to respect the Minsk agreements”
He says “the French, the Germans, the Russians and the Ukrainians signed the Minsk agreements in 2014 but the Ukrainians didn’t respect the agreement during the entire period since. And the Russians were telling us all the time to get them to respect the agreement but we didn’t.”
He says it’s unacceptable to invade a country but he also says that “we are co-responsible for it.”
The host notes that “former foreign ministers of France like De Villepin or Védrine are accusing the Americans of being responsible”.
He replies: “yes, that’s what I am saying.”
On the promise made to Russia in the early 1990s not to expand NATO he says that former french Foreign Minister Roland Dumas, who was in the negotiations, is adamant that everyone at the time (including Baker and Kohl) agreed that NATO would not expand East of reunified Germany.
He said the Americans weren’t true to their word and pushed for the eastern expansion of NATO “in total contradiction with what was said [to Russia]”.
He says the long-term origin of the divide in Ukraine dates back from the opposition between the Austro-Hungarian empire and the Russian tsarist empire.
He adds that since then there’s been a divide in Ukraine between those two sides.
He reminds that during WW2 the “Austro-Hungarian side” fought alongside the nazis while the Russian side fought against them.
To him today is “clearly a continuation of this, it’s being going on for 300 years.”
The host asks him if the Maidan revolution in 2014 was organized by the Americans.
He replies: “One thing that particularly caught my attention is Victoria Nuland, who is currently the U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, saying that...”
...it cost the U.S. $5bio to get into Ukraine and that they weren’t going to leave now after that. What does that mean, Madame Nuland? She is by the way the same one who, when told the Europeans weren’t happy, said ‘f*ck the EU’. So it’s pretty clear...”
He adds that what happened before the Maidan revolution was Ukraine forbidding the Russian language:
“You have 40% of the population that speaks Russian.
So you forbid a language that large percentage of the population uses under the pretext that you don’t like the Russians.”
He states that it’s “not serious, it’s not possible. That was already a very bad start.”
What happened after is that “they took the Azov battalion and the others and told them to go to Donbass to hit pro-Russian Ukrainians on the head.”
“What they also did was cut the water supply in Crimea. That was before Putin took it back.
So there was a terrible anti-Russophone/anti-Russian population policy in Ukraine. That’s what people don’t realize in the West.
It’s no wonder the Russian side reacted.”
“Putin, seeing that, he isn’t stupid. He sees people who are on his side getting oppressed, he’s not going to go against them...”
The host asks him why the Americans train and maintain close relations with extreme right groups like the Azov.
He replies that “those militia, given their ideology, we could be very confident that they were going to fight against the people in Donbass.”
“They were the perfect representation of the Western side of Ukraine and of course they hated the Russians.”
To him it’s wrong to think there are no nazis in Ukraine. “When Hitler invaded Ukraine, Stepan Bandera, who was a Ukrainian nationalist, saw it as an opportunity to be...
...freed from the Russians by siding with the nazis.”
He adds that “the Das Reich nazi division that committed the Oradour-sur-Glane massacre [a famous massacre in France committed by the nazis during WW2], they were all Ukrainians, 95% of them were Ukrainians.”
He continues: “When they say today ‘there are no nazis in Ukraine’, I say ‘who are you kidding?’.”
He adds: “It’s obvious in Ukraine there is a divide between those with pro-Nazi tendencies - not all of them of course, there are also decent people who are neither nazis nor...
...Russians but simply Ukrainians - but you do have strong tendencies on both sides as well. [...]
He adds that “unfortunately these are things we can’t say on mainstream media because if you say something like this on official TV they cut you and never invite you again.”
On the interdiction of Russian media like RT in France he says: “I thought we were not at war? If we are at war, it’s normal to forbid the enemy’s media on our territory but if we’re not at war, what allows us to ban some media just because we disagree with their views?”
“This is called a thought crime. That’s very serious. In the country of liberty it raises a certain number of issues... I’m not defending RT at all, that’s not the issue, it’s a question of principle.”
That’s the gist of it.
Alain Juillet is an old time “Gaulliste”, which in foreign policy means he is very attached to an unaligned and independent France, i.e. not blindly following the Americans on their crusades like France has done with our latest presidents since Sarkozy.
His uncle Pierre Juillet was Jacques Chirac’s mentor (the last French president faithful to Gaulliste principles in foreign policy, famously refusing the Irak war) and his grandfather was De Gaulle’s classmate so you can hardly find anyone more Gaulliste than him!
His views on the origins of the conflict largely correspond with what the immense majority of top strategic thinkers believe ⬇️
How long can this disconnect between what those “in the know” believe and what the public at large is told continue?
_____________________
February 28, 2022
How Western Strategic Thinkers Warned US-NATO over Ukrainian Conflict
By Prnigeria -March 5, 2022
Russia-Ukraine
How Western Strategic Thinkers Warned US-NATO over Ukrainian Conflict
By Rnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand)
*1. George Kennan,* America’s foreign policy strategist, the architect of the U.S. cold war strategy. As early as 1998 he warned that NATO expansion was a “tragic mistake” that ought to ultimately provoke a “bad reaction from Russia”.
*2. Kissinger, in 2014*. He warned that “to Russia, Ukraine can never be just a foreign country” and that the West therefore needs a policy that is aimed at “reconciliation”.
He was also adamant that “Ukraine should not join NATO”
*3. John Mearsheimer -* arguably the leading geopolitical scholar in the US today – in 2015: “The West is leading Ukraine down the primrose path and the end result is that Ukraine is going to get wrecked […] What we’re doing is in fact encouraging that outcome.”
*4. Jack F. Matlock Jr., US Ambassador* to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991, warning in 1997 that NATO expansion was “the most profound strategic blunder, [encouraging] a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat […] since the Soviet Union collapsed”
*5. Clinton’s defense secretary William Perry* explained, in his memoir, that to him NATO enlargement is the cause of “the rupture in relations with Russia” and that in 1996 he was so opposed to it that “in the strength of my conviction, I considered resigning”.
*6. Stephen Cohen,* a famed scholar of Russian studies, warning in 2014 that “if we move NATO forces toward Russia’s borders […] it’s obviously gonna militarize the situation [and] Russia will not back off, this is existential”
*7. CIA director Bill Burns* in 2008: “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for [Russia]” and “I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests”. (He was then Ambassador to Moscow in 2008 when he wrote this memo). He is now director of the CIA. ‘08 memo ‘Nyet Means Nyet: Russia’s NATO Enlargement Redlines’
*8. Russian-American journalist Vladimir Pozner*, in 2018, stated that: NATO expansion in Ukraine is unacceptable to the Russian, that there has to be a compromise where “Ukraine, guaranteed, will not become a member of NATO.”
*9. Malcolm Fraser, 22nd prime minister of Australia,* warned in 2014 that “the move east [by NATO is] provocative, unwise and a very clear signal to Russia”. He adds that this leads to a “difficult and extraordinarily dangerous problem”.
*10. Paul Keating,* former Australian PM, in 1997: expanding NATO is “an error which may rank in the end with the strategic miscalculations which prevented Germany from taking its full place in the international system [in early 20th]”
*11. Former US defense secretary Bob Gates* in his 2015 memoirs: “Moving so quickly [to expand NATO] was a mistake. […] Trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching [and] an especially monumental provocation”
*12. Pat Buchanan*, in his 1999 book A Republic, Not an Empire: “By moving NATO onto Russia’s front porch, we have scheduled a twenty-first-century confrontation.”
*13. In 1997, a group of individuals including Robert McNamara, Bill Bradley & Gary Hart* wrote a letter to Bill Clinton warning the “US led effort to expand NATO is a policy error of historic proportions” and would “foster instability” in Europe. Today it’s fringe, traitorous position.
*14. Pat Buchanan,* in his 1999 book A Republic, Not an Empire: “By moving NATO onto Russia’s front porch, we have scheduled a twenty-first-century confrontation.”
*15. Dmitriy Trenin* expressed concern that Ukraine was, in the LT, the most potentially destabilizing factor in US-Russian relations, given the level of emotion & neuralgia triggered by its quest for NATO membership.
*16. Sir Roderic Lyne,* former British ambassador to Russia, warned a year ago that “[pushing] Ukraine into NATO […] is stupid on every level.” He adds “if you want to start a war with Russia, that’s the best way of doing it.”
*17. Even last year, famous economist Jeffrey Sachs*, writing a column in the FT warning that “NATO enlargement is utterly misguided and risky. True friends of Ukraine, and of global peace, should be calling for a US and NATO compromise with Russia.”
*18. Fiona Hill* :”We warned [George Bush] that Mr. Putin would view steps to bring Ukraine and Georgia closer to NATO as a provocative move that would likely provoke pre-emptive Russian military action. But ultimately, our warnings weren’t heeded.”
*19. Aleksandr Dugin*, in 1997, had predicted everything that Putin has done, in his book “Foundation of Geopolitics.”
Everybody knew that trying to rope Ukraine into NATO was crossing Russia’s red line, but now people would like to hold up Russia as a villain. After having done everything to teeter on the redline. And this happened only AFTER Biden came to power.
So go be a toughguy and parachute in and protect them if you’re so gung ho.
I happen to know there is no training at senior military schools like Air War college and Army equivalents for field grade officers addressing the realities of satellite recon.
There is no huge advantage in keeping tanks moving between low earth orbit satellite passes. The US still trains for taking positions with armor and massing on high ground.
No, this is new material we’re seeing, and the discussions and decisions being made in theater aren’t happening at West Point, Quantico or Maxwell.
“It all depends on who wants the land more and who has the treasure and blood to expend in defending it.
Time will tell.”
Valerii Fedorovych Zaluzhnyi is a Ukrainian four-star general who serves as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine since July 27, 2021. He is a member of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine since July 28, 2021.
Resident (Ukraine supporter)
⚡️⚡️⚡️#Inside Our source in the OP said that Zelensky did not give permission for the withdrawal of troops from Severodonetsk, any retreat will be perceived as a victory for the enemy and may affect future battles for Donbass.
Resident (Ukraine supporter)
#Inside Our source in the OP said that the General Staff again asked Zelensky for permission to withdraw troops from Severodonetsk, which could repeat the fate of Mariupol. In the coming days, Russian troops can take the city into an operational encirclement, at the moment there are almost four thousand soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
legitimate (Ukraine supporter)
forwarded from
Resident
⚡️⚡️⚡️#Inside Our source in the OP said that the conflict around the defense of Severodonetsk continues to grow on Bankovaya, which, according to the technologists of the Office of the President, is a new symbol of resistance to Russian aggression. The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine insists on the fact that it is necessary to withdraw troops to Slavyansk and Kramotorsk in order not to repeat the situation with Mariupol, where a 25,000-strong group of Ukrainian troops was encircled, which was crushed by Russian troops. Valery Zaluzhny is sure that it makes no sense to lose the most combat-ready units because of one city, but the political leadership does not support his position.
https://t.me/resident_ua/12197
Telegram
Resident
⚡️⚡️⚡️#Inside Our source in the OP said that there was a conflict between the Office of the President and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, because of the situation in Severodonetsk. Valery Zaluzhny insists on the withdrawal of troops from the city so that our group does not get surrounded, but on ...
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.